Dear Ms. WXXX:

I am writing this letter to inform you of what has taken place and to the reason as to why I could not accept the motherboard brought to my home by your service provider.

Summary of Events ·

• May 1996, when shopping for a computer. Purchased a Packard Bell Platinum I, of which the supporting materials, of this purchace, were Faxed to your office on April 23, 1997 at 17:41.
• In March I purchased the appropriate video ram to upgrade my system to take advantage of all the resolutions listed on pages E3-E5 of my Pentium User’s Guide. · In testing the system I performed a variety of tests to determine if the system was functioning properly. Unfortunately I was unable to get the 1280 X 1024 256 Color and the 800 X 600 24 Bit Color that my manual states I should be able to get.
• I then contacted your company by email and received several responses from your Technical Support Representatives (I have Copies if you need them):
• 1. Monte Riding on 3/5/97 - Who provided a generic response.
• 2. James on 3/8/97 - Who said the ChipId program from Cirrus Logic was best program to test if the video memory was working. Which it was working fine according to this program.
• 3. Michael James on 3/11/97 - Who advised me to download the 142346.EXE file from your web site and install. Followed this advice, did not work.
• Then Called Hardware Support at 1-800-733-4411 - Tech advised me to call dealer that sold me video ram and obtain necessary files for chips. I never heard of such a thing, but followed his advice. Spent some time on phone with dealer, they thought I was nuts when I repeated what PB tech told me, but they helped me as best they could.
• Then, frustrated I called back to above number. I was lucky and got the nicest PB tech ever, she told me her name but I now forget. I asked her to look in my file since I have called a number of times. I said my whole video problem story should be in there so I would not have to tell her. She told me PB had no record. I then read her every email I had saved. (I had video problems earlier, which were never resolve completely before this incident which I did not save the correspondence, unfortunately). She then walked me through a series of settings trying to solve the problems. We ended up solving one problem by using the generic windows drivers. After a long time I was frustrated and tired, we still could not get the 800X600 24 bit setting. I ended the call, with the understanding that it was possible, but I just needed the right setting. I told her I would keep trying.
• I did try and try. Until I was reading the alt.sys.pc-clone.packardbell newsgroup on usenet. I saw the following post addressing one of the video problems I had been having. "It is a video chip limitation, I have the same manual you have and when I email Cirrus Logic they told me that PB misrepresented their product and claimed resolutions not supported by current drivers.."
• I then sent e-mail to PB tech support, saying that I needed my computer fixed or admit that the quote was correct. I got no response.
• I then set more email, with the same quote:
• 1. Oliver #1128 - on 4/16/97 told me to call fee bases support ·
• I then sent out more email because I knew you guys were working on this problem and this tech must be misinformed. The responses from the additional email were:
• 2. A generic reply from Scott at PB Canada on 4/16/97, and a generic reply from Dave Paton at PB USA. The other two PB USA emails said to see previous reply. I then recived the following email: "Ray, We got a response back faster than anticipated. Apparently the information provided by Cirrus Logic is correct. The Cirrus Logic CL-5440 video chip is not capable of supporting 800x600/24-bit color. We may be able to exchange the motherboard for one using the S3 Virge chipset, but we will require that the following information be faxed to us before this can be done: Your current address. * Your current telephone number. * A copy of your System Credentials. * A copy of the proof of purchase. Please fax this information to 801-579-1534 to the attention of Judy Wade." Mike 2244.
• I followed his instructions and was assigned the Solution ID #2940887. I had a concern that I would receive a new motherboard that was not an acceptable replacement (which I will go into detail in the next section). To ensure that I got an acceptable replacement I took the following steps:
• 1) I contacted PB and asked what was next. I got the following nice reply Ray, The service has been arranged. You should be hearing from the service provider in the next 3-5 business days to arrange a convenient time to have the service performed. If you need to contact us again concerning this issue, please refer to solution ID #2940887. Thank you for your patience in this matter. Thank you for choosing Packard Bell. Joel(#2009) Technical Support Representative.
• 2) On Sunday night the service provider left a message on my machine stating he was calling about installing a video card on my PB and he was not available that night but would call again tomorrow.
• 3) I then sent another email to PB asking about the specifics of what they would do, this has not yet been answered.
• 4) As promised the Service Provider contacted me promptly, I explained my concerns to him. He had no clue as to the technical specifications of the motherboard and said he would just bring it up and I could see it and decide. He did inform me that it was a PB 680, which I know there are at least two types (one with L2 Cache and one without).
• 5) I wanted to save the tech the trip and my lost time at work by clarifying the details ahead of time in case an unacceptable replacement was set up. So I tried to contact you and got your voice mail, I then called customer support. They confirmed that the 680 had L2 Cache or no L2 Cache, and that it appeared that the CELP socket found on my PB 640 motherboard was not on this model. He could tell me no more information about my specific case.
• 6) I then called PB tech support and talked to John at 6:44 on April 28, 1997 and was asking about the technical specifications of the 680 motherboard. He informed me that L2 Cache was on the motherboard I was getting and that it was part #1818595. He also stated that the 680 was not an MMX compatible motherboard and was like my PB 640 except for the 3.0X multiplier (which appears to be active in some PB 640 motherboards) Unfortunately we were disconnected before the conversation was finished.
• 7) I then contacted the service provider again and asked a few more questions. He informed me that a manual does not come with a new motherboard and that he just used his experience to set the proper jumpers.
• 8) Now believing that the right motherboard was on the way, I called customer support to see if I was being sent a manual, because I will need to know the new jumper settings and locations. Chuck at 7:00 on April 28, 1997 stated that I would be taken care of and he took lots of information from me including my hard drive format number.
• 9) After that I sent an email to PB tech support stating that I need a manual, because Chuck was giving me the feeling that he was not going to do what he said.
• On Tuesday April 29, 1997 the service provider showed up some time after 8:00. Upon looking at my motherboard he agreed that it lacked the CELP socket an it appeared to lack the L2 onboard cache found on some 680 motherboards. He then called William at PB who refused to talk to me. I was give the choice of keep the 640, take the 680 or I could obtain a PB 600 motherboard. All of which I consider to be of a lesser value and will discuss below.

I said that all the choices were unacceptable, but I would not take the new motherboard for the stated reason.

As you know the PB 640 has the CELP for a 256K COAST module. The L2 Cache found in these COAST module provides a significant increase in the power of the computer. I have data on my and other PB systems that shows this. I have also measured the results of L2 cache and no L2 cache in Norton Utilities System Benchmark. In Norton Utilities I went from a 19 to a 30.8. The benefits of a L2 cache are widely know to people that understand computers. I knew this when I purchase my system and specifically got a PB640PT, because PB pre-sales stated that this model could have L2 cache added on, if it were not for this fact I would not by this motherboard, of course I did not know of the video chip limitation at that time.

Why your choices were unacceptable to me

The PB 600, which William told my service provider, has a CELP socket. But can only go to 133 MHz. Since the PB640 can have higher processors I consider this alternative to be of a lesser value than my current PB 640 and I would settle only for an equal trade.

The PB 640 if I kept it would not solve my video problems. I would also accept a PB 640 with the S3 Virge video chips. This is the ideal situation since it is the most equal value for all. However I do not know if PB makes the 640 with this video chip set.

From what I understand the PB 680 no longer has the CELP socket and a PB 680 without the L2 cache has a significant performance decrease which I would loose if I chose this option. This makes this option a lesser value that I currently have. What I would find acceptable is a motherboard that gives me that same features or better. I would accept a PB 680, 685 or 688 if they had a CELP socket or had the 256K L2 cache installed on board. Because these would be Equal or greater value than my current system. I hope to hear from you soon, please contact me via Email, phone or snail mail.

Sincerely,

RTG

Well they acctually contacted me in person, Cathy called me at work and asked what I wanted. I explained to her but she still did not quite understand. I never did talk to anyone that said L2 Cache was on any version of the 680. Maybe they are not including it. The CELP soccet was the best, if that had been included on the 680 it would be a nice board.

I ended up getting this email a day after talking to Cathy. My comments are in bold.

"Ray,

The previous resolution to your issue was to downgrade the board to one that used a different Cirrus Logic chipset capable of the 800x600/24-bit color resolution. As we also felt this was not an equitable solution, and the PB680 motherboards were now availble, so this was the board we opted to use for your upgrade. The S3 Virge chipset is a 3D chipset with better capabilities than that of the Cirrus Logic 5440. This board also offered CPU upgrades to 200 MHz where the PB640 only has upgradeability to 166 MHz. (That is debateable, just read my page. I know offically it is 166 OK the PBUSER and 6 other people can say otherwise, but thats ok) We do understand your concern regarding the cache CELP socket, but the PB680 board with this option is not available. (What about 680's with the L2 allready installed) We sincerely regret that the PB680 motherboard did not meet your satisfaction (It was not the motherboard your tech, John, said they were bringing). However, this was the best board we have to offer to resolve your issue. As we had made the arrangements to perform this upgrade, and was subsequently refused by you, Packard Bell is considering this issue closed. This was a one time offer that will not be made again."

OH well ... Just don't say your products will do what they can not do and I will not get mad. I like PB computers and would like to see you do buissness a little better, hopefully you will read my page. Your week link is customer support. When you send up a replacement different from what I was told, what do you expect to happen.)

Mike 2244 Technical Support Representative

To sum it all up, the service that I did get from PB was prompt, frendly and came right to my home. It was a contractor from Wang that provided the service, my only dislike was his lack of knowlege about PB's products. He knew about computers in general, but not specifics about different PB motherboards. What should we expect, when half the PB Tech force does not know their own product.

I could have saved PB some money in this whole incident, if they talked to me. I talked to a tech John who said the L2 was on board the new motherboard I was getting. I asked him more questions and we were disconnected before we were done talking. I asked him if the 680 was MMX compatable and he said no. I then said that I read on the internet that the PB680 was MMX compatable and asked if that was not true based on the information he just gave me. The line went dead. Did he really hang up on me, a simple I don't know would have been acceptable. I don't know why it is so hard to get information out of PB about the equipment we own, what is Packard Bell hiding. Being upfront and honest with the consumer is the best way to get repeat customers.

This experience has tought me one thing, PB are good computers, but you can not count on their customer support. PB says this issue is closed, I say it is open and my solution is to buy a different brand of computer next time. I just hope there are some decent companies out there, or I may just build my own computer.

Oh well.........