Re: DSC phone line technical support is terrible

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

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 not
> > > > minutes. While I realize that a lot of questions are from installer=
s
> > > > 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 companies, w=
e
> > > > suffer the same thing, with questions from end users who can find t=
he
> > > > answer on page one of their user manual; however, that is not an
> > > > excuse. Suck it up as we do, and continue to provide proper support=
 !
>
> > > > 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 f=
ew that I've continued to service. The first thing I notice about their equ=
ipment is that it is "flimsey" Thin metal, soft plastic, "cardboard" PCB's,=
 components "look" cheap, etc, which translate to me as .... well ....."che=
ap". It's not that their products don't work .... it's just ..... cheap.
>
> > > Awhile ago, someone asked me to evaluate their cellular radio. Gettin=
g through to technical support and waiting were a problem but getting their=
 technical support people to give me answers to directly asked questions wa=
s even a problem. Me, having a very questioning mind, there were things tha=
t 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 answe=
rs that I needed, out of them. That is .... the answers could have been giv=
en to me at any time during our conversations but I guess that it may have =
seemed better to the people I was talking with, to not open up the can of w=
orms 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 with kn=
ew what the ultimate answers were that I was looking for but rather then TH=
EM taking the time to give them to me, they knew that I was going to have t=
o 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 questions=
 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 tha=
t had little more than hookup instructions in it. They utimately had a reca=
ll of the unit because it was doing periodic checkin's even though it wasn'=
t able to transmit during an alarm. NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
>
> > > There are other products from manufacturers that are out there that I=
 don't use, simply because I'm satisfied with what I'm using. But I don't u=
se DSC on purpose.
>
> > RHC: Well.....I can totally agree with you on their tech support. Most
> > of the time, and generally speaking, I know as much as, or more than
> > their technical support phone staff. When I call Paradox tech support
> > though, those guys are right on the ball, and have the answer in most
> > 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 other
> > panels I deal with. If you compare to older makes of panels, perhaps
> > 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 calling DS=
C
> > tech support for assistance....:((
>
> As I say, I don't use anything but Napco, and only occasionally come acro=
ss other mfg's ( mostly Honeywell, in my area). so that's mainly what I'm c=
omparing it to. Napco's thicker metal boxes, sturdier PCB's made of fibergl=
ass. The components look "better" than those that I see on DSC. I know look=
s don't count with reliability but very seldom do I get a bad product from =
Napco. I can scratch the plastic on DSC wireless transmitters with my finge=
rnail. And Napco just last for decades. I don't know about DSC as far as re=
liability but .... as I say ..... it just looks and feels cheap.
>
> Maybe I should look at their products like a Timex watch. Costs and looks=
 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....