A certain very large very prominent copier manufacturer, has recently pushed out a technician only firmware upgrade, On that one-year-old product that was launched with far too many bugs to begin with! That firmware upgrade, broke scanning PDF, required a system wipe to install, and was pulled 3 days after launch. Anyone else get annoyed when manufacturers do this kind of thing?
Beta testing firmware on technicians!
Collapse
X
-
[Annoying] Beta testing firmware on technicians!
I'd be happy to come out and wipe off your dirty glass. One question however, do you also pay someone to come out and wipe your dirty ...Tags: None -
Re: Beta testing firmware on technicians!
It's a general statement about manufacturers, doing things like this to technicians. It's also a rant, not meant to be informational.I'd be happy to come out and wipe off your dirty glass. One question however, do you also pay someone to come out and wipe your dirty ...Comment
-
Re: Beta testing firmware on technicians!
It's only informational if it applies to a specific manufacturer, product, or model.
I know of similar situations myself, but without the details, it's just baseless whining. Ok, so let's hear the rest.
=^..^=If you'd like a serious answer to your request:
1) demonstrate that you've read the manual
2) demonstrate that you made some attempt to fix it.
3) if you're going to ask about jams include the jam code.
4) if you're going to ask about an error code include the error code.
5) You are the person onsite. Only you can make observations.
blackcat: Master Of The Obvious =^..^=Comment
-
Re: Beta testing firmware on technicians!
If it's technician only, you shouldn't load that firmware on customers' machines. Kyocera also has firmware "for KM Internal Use". This firmware is for testing purposes and is not intended for use with customers'machines.Comment
-
Re: Beta testing firmware on technicians!
It was intended only to be used for customers who have a specific subset of problems. However it created other problems once installed.I'd be happy to come out and wipe off your dirty glass. One question however, do you also pay someone to come out and wipe your dirty ...Comment
-
Re: Beta testing firmware on technicians!
Rant verb \ˈrant\
: to talk loudly and in a way that shows anger : to complain in a way that is unreasonable
Whining is simply another word for ranting, so by definition I'm doing exactly what this particular section of the forum is intended for. I'm not trying to throw this manufacture under the bus, specifically because I enjoy employment. But they aren't the only culprits.I'd be happy to come out and wipe off your dirty glass. One question however, do you also pay someone to come out and wipe your dirty ...Comment
-
Re: Beta testing firmware on technicians!
Had something kinda like that a few years back. Customer had a Ricoh 2045 that "jammed all the time". They ran 1 particular job several times a day where they copied on to paper from the bypass using the adf. After verifing it and trying to resolve it, I called the regional TSM. He had heard of , new about frimwar for it but I couldn't get from Ricoh myself. The TSM had to get the frimwar and send it to me. what BS....Mystic Crystal RevelationsComment
-
Re: Beta testing firmware on technicians!
I had to have custom firmware from Sharp done up to bring SSL support to the MX3501/4501, oddly enough they put it in standard firmware for the MX2300/2700 but not its big sister series.
Tested it on 3 in my shop before going out to customer, not sure what the problem is - if it's for internal use or technician use only, don't put it on a customer's machine until you know it works. Problem solved?Cthulhu for president! Why settle for the lesser evil?Comment
-
Re: Beta testing firmware on technicians!
In my experience, any firmware is a 50/50 proposition. Will it fix a bug? Will it create a bug? One of each? Will the created bug be worse than the fixed bug?
Each situation is unique. For example I had a print driver for a Copystar CS-C4035E with a truly obscure bug. When printing from Microsoft Publisher 2003, using booklet mode, the output printed pages were in the wrong order. Only one enduser ever noticed, in which I downgraded the driver. Though I could reproduce the bug at will, it rarely came up, and I had no problem using this driver.
Here's my opinion: no firmware or software is totally bug free, so I'm happy when there are no glaring faults. =^..^=If you'd like a serious answer to your request:
1) demonstrate that you've read the manual
2) demonstrate that you made some attempt to fix it.
3) if you're going to ask about jams include the jam code.
4) if you're going to ask about an error code include the error code.
5) You are the person onsite. Only you can make observations.
blackcat: Master Of The Obvious =^..^=Comment
-
Re: Beta testing firmware on technicians!
In my experience, any firmware is a 50/50 proposition. Will it fix a bug? Will it create a bug? One of each? Will the created bug be worse than the fixed bug?
Each situation is unique. For example I had a print driver for a Copystar CS-C4035E with a truly obscure bug. When printing from Microsoft Publisher 2003, using booklet mode, the output printed pages were in the wrong order. Only one enduser ever noticed, in which I downgraded the driver. Though I could reproduce the bug at will, it rarely came up, and I had no problem using this driver.
Here's my opinion: no firmware or software is totally bug free, so I'm happy when there are no glaring faults. =^..^=Comment
Comment