Re: Major shortcoming in Paradox new panel lineup

["Doug" <not@xxxxxxxx>]

This is something that probably bothers you a lot more than it will bother
your customers.

Doug

--

"tourman" <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1183665265.743599.106740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Ok, let me see if I have this straight Reg. Paradox has now confirmed
> they have discontinued a perfectly good line of products before they
> even have the replacements in place so when dealers are out of stock
> of the 1738 and 1759's, we will have to replace a defective board with
> a board AND keypad with a panel line that isn't even available yet.
> And they've also gone against even conventional standards used by
> others to set a new backward standard of their own..And they
> backhandedly admit they didn't talk to their customers before going
> ahead with these design changes.
>
> Brilliant !! This has got to be up right up there (exceeding even
> DSC's wireless move)  for nomination for the " Stupidest Engineering
> Move of 2007".
>
> Don't these companies ever REALLY talk to their customers ????
>
> RHC
>
> On Jul 5, 3:10 pm, Tower Security <regsiem...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I just received a return phone call from the senior Paradox tech and
>> they confirmed that they have received similar feedback from many
>> dealers and the addition of simple 4-digit code arming and disarming
>> is on their list of "future enhancements" but it will not happen in
>> the short-term (not even the next release) and there is no possibility
>> of the 1759 and 1738 remaining in production until that change.
>>
>> This same senior tech also added that while arming or disarming
>> requires an additional key i.e. Arm 1234 or Off 1234, the system can
>> be configured such that disarming during an entry delay warning can be
>> accomplished by simply entering the code.  This might address the most
>> urgent customer service implications in that you won't be dealing with
>> the panic striken casual user that can't figure out how to disarm
>> things.  Despite this consolation, the inability to arm with a simple
>> code entry will result in a lot of casual users being unable to
>> reliably arm the system.
>>
>> With nearly 20 years of installed hardware out there that operates
>> simply and easily by entering a code, installing something that goes
>> against that standard is not something that we will enter into without
>> evaluating the consequences.  So it appears that our decision will
>> have to be to go with DSC in the interim.
>>
>> BTW what makes matters worse...why go against the unintuitive standard
>> (used by Ademco, etc.) of entering the code followed by the desired
>> action i.e. 1234 On or 1234 Off?  Instead they've got it configured so
>> that the command precedes the code i.e. Arm 1234 or Off 1234.
>>
>> Reg Siemens
>> Tower Security Systems Inc.
>
> a
>