Re: DSC phone line technical support is terrible

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On May 13, 7:32=A0pm, mleuck <m.le...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Saturday, May 12, 2012 8:11:24 AM UTC-5, tourman wrote:
> > RHC: Older products and makes that appear to have sturdier boards
> > probably do. But it also means their production lines are antiquated
> > and not up to modern standards. Unfortunately, modern standards call
> > for "cheaper" components and thinner boards. That doesn't necessarily
> > mean they are less reliable, only less costly to build. Such is life
> > on every production line in every manufacturing company.
>
> > I think the determining factor here is how reliable and saleable
> > products are, not so much how whether they use thicker boards and
> > heftier components etc. In my experience, DSC alarm boards are at
> > least as reliable as others of my experience...Paradox, Ademco,
> > Caddyx, FBI etc. If they can build them more cheaply, and still
> > maintain quality, everyone benefits through less expensive prices. Or
> > so the theory goes....
>
> I used to work with the circuit board industry around the Dallas area, to=
day's circuit boards are far better quality, produce less heat, use less po=
wer and are more reliable than what was around even 10 years ago. As I said=
 earlier when you see a board that is filled with resistors, capacitors, di=
odes and heatsinks that is all added by a human whereas things like current=
 processors and other surface components are done by machine. You can see h=
ow boards from Ademco, Caddx, DSC and GE have evolved with less discrete co=
mponents
>
> I don't quite know what Jim means by cheap, maybe you can flex the board =
on a DSC more than he normally uses but even being able to do that without =
breaking traces
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Saturday, May 12, 2012 8:11:24 AM UTC-5, tourman wrote:
> > On May 12, 1:48=A0am, Jim <alarmi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Thursday, May 10, 2012 5:19:09 PM UTC-4, tourman wrote:
> > > > On May 10, 2:28=A0pm, Jim <alarmi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, May 10, 2012 9:05:33 AM UTC-4, tourman wrote:
> > > > > > I hope DSC is listening and getting this message ! Their phone =
line
> > > > > > support is not adequately manned, with wait times up to hours n=
ot
> > > > > > minutes. While I realize that a lot of questions are from insta=
llers
> > > > > > asking questions they should know if they were trained properly=
, or if
> > > > > > they would take the time to read the install manuals, that does=
 not
> > > > > > excuse this terrible level of support. As installation companie=
s, we
> > > > > > suffer the same thing, with questions from end users who can fi=
nd the
> > > > > > answer on page one of their user manual; however, that is not a=
n
> > > > > > excuse. Suck it up as we do, and continue to provide proper sup=
port !
>
> > > > > > Please fix the problem or you are going to find a lot of people
> > > > > > switching alarm suppliers to manufacturers who do support their
> > > > > > customers
>
> > > > > I have never used DSC all through the years. Occasionally, when I=
 run across their equipment I usually pull it out and replace but I do have=
 a few that I've continued to service. The first thing I notice about their=
 equipment is that it is "flimsey" Thin metal, soft plastic, "cardboard" PC=
B's, components "look" cheap, etc, which translate to me as .... well .....=
"cheap". It's not that their products don't work .... it's just ..... cheap=
.
>
> > > > > Awhile ago, someone asked me to evaluate their cellular radio. Ge=
tting through to technical support and waiting were a problem but getting t=
heir technical support people to give me answers to directly asked question=
s was even a problem. Me, having a very questioning mind, there were things=
 that didn't make sense to me about the fucntioning of the device. I'd say =
that, .... I had to call as many as twenty times and gradually "PULL" the a=
nswers that I needed, out of them. That is .... the answers could have been=
 given to me at any time during our conversations but I guess that it may h=
ave seemed better to the people I was talking with, to not open up the can =
of worms of providing me a reason to ask more questions ..... of THEM.
>
> > > > > At the end of it all, my opinion was that each person I spoke wit=
h knew what the ultimate answers were that I was looking for but rather the=
n THEM taking the time to give them to me, they knew that I was going to ha=
ve to call back again and that I'd probably get someone else who would have=
 to take the time to talk to me. The problem was ..... everyone I spoke to =
did the same thing.
>
> > > > > In addtion to all of this, the reason I had to call and ask quest=
ions in the first place was because the "manual" that came with the product=
 was a crookedly made photo copy of a hand typed and stapled 12 page manual=
 that had little more than hookup instructions in it. They utimately had a =
recall of the unit because it was doing periodic checkin's even though it w=
asn't able to transmit during an alarm. NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
>
> > > > > There are other products from manufacturers that are out there th=
at I don't use, simply because I'm satisfied with what I'm using. But I don=
't use DSC on purpose.
>
> > > > RHC: Well.....I can totally agree with you on their tech support. M=
ost
> > > > of the time, and generally speaking, I know as much as, or more tha=
n
> > > > their technical support phone staff. When I call Paradox tech suppo=
rt
> > > > though, those guys are right on the ball, and have the answer in mo=
st
> > > > cases. When they don't, it's most unusual.
>
> > > > On your comments regarding the cheapness of DSC equipment, I can't =
say
> > > > I really agree with you. They are no better or worse than most othe=
r
> > > > panels I deal with. If you compare to older makes of panels, perhap=
s
> > > > your comment applies, but I don't think it's totally fair otherwise=
.
> > > > Their products are simply the result of modern manufacturing
> > > > techniques and are used by the vast majority of Canadian alarm
> > > > companies.
>
> > > > DSC is not my primary line of panel; it's my secondary one, but
> > > > overall, I would rate the equipment as good. I just put up a new
> > > > partition on an older version 832 and I must say that was a bit of =
a
> > > > challenge, but I got it. =A0Needless to say, I didn't bother callin=
g DSC
> > > > tech support for assistance....:((
>
> > > As I say, I don't use anything but Napco, and only occasionally come =
across other mfg's ( mostly Honeywell, in my area). so that's mainly what I=
'm comparing it to. Napco's thicker metal boxes, sturdier PCB's made of fib=
erglass. The components look "better" than those that I see on DSC. I know =
looks don't count with reliability but very seldom do I get a bad product f=
rom Napco. I can scratch the plastic on DSC wireless transmitters with my f=
ingernail. And Napco just last for decades. I don't know about DSC as far a=
s reliability but .... as I say ..... it just looks and feels cheap.
>
> > > Maybe I should look at their products like a Timex watch. Costs and l=
ooks cheap .... but just keeps on tickin!
>
> > RHC: Older products and makes that appear to have sturdier boards
> > probably do. But it also means their production lines are antiquated
> > and not up to modern standards. Unfortunately, modern standards call
> > for "cheaper" components and thinner boards. That doesn't necessarily
> > mean they are less reliable, only less costly to build. Such is life
> > on every production line in every manufacturing company.
>
> > I think the determining factor here is how reliable and saleable
> > products are, not so much how whether they use thicker boards and
> > heftier components etc. In my experience, DSC alarm boards are at
> > least as reliable as others of my experience...Paradox, Ademco,
> > Caddyx, FBI etc. If they can build them more cheaply, and still
> > maintain quality, everyone benefits through less expensive prices. Or
> > so the theory goes....

RHC: Some years ago, I too had experience with evaluating the then
current board technology for products that we intended to purchase in
large quantities. This left me in a position to have a slightly more
than average informed opinion on two alarm company manufacturers here
in Canada - DSC and Paradox. I toured both plants several times, and
had the opportunity to see first hand the equipment being employed to
manufacture most of their respective product lines. Both were of the
latest manufacture, with Paradox being considerably more modern at the
time, but only because of the younger vintage of that company. But if
I was in a position of having to make the decision to buy from either
firm today, in large quantities at wholesale level, I would not have a
problem with either company.

Such recent processes as hand soldering, lack of wave form soldering,
and human interaction on component insertion - all of these things are
NOT good form today !