Dell just closed the support incident for our server.
2007-02-01 03200, 2007
ruaok
without ANY resolution.
2007-02-01 03204, 2007
ruaok
those fuckers!
2007-02-01 03233, 2007
Kerensky97
You have a contract that says you get support right?
2007-02-01 03247, 2007
ruaok
4 hour support.
2007-02-01 03218, 2007
Kerensky97
Sounds like they owe you a functioning server.
2007-02-01 03239, 2007
Knio1 joined the channel
2007-02-01 03256, 2007
ruaok
I would agree!
2007-02-01 03242, 2007
Kerensky97
I also think a friendly blog post to remind users why we're still using a backup and not a fixed Dell server would help users stay upto date on the situation. Obviously it may have been an accidential closure on Dell's behalf, so I don't think they're totally at fault (yet), but people might want to know it may take longer because they closed the support case without fixing things.
2007-02-01 03212, 2007
ruaok
yes, agreed.
2007-02-01 03229, 2007
ruaok
I'm hoping dell will make more of an effort on this case.
2007-02-01 03247, 2007
ruaok
if they continue stonewalling, I will take the issue to the blog and get dell more negative press.
2007-02-01 03213, 2007
catgroove
good night!
2007-02-01 03217, 2007
catgroove
catgroove is now known as nightgroove
2007-02-01 03259, 2007
Knio has quit
2007-02-01 03248, 2007
ruaok
cool!
2007-02-01 03203, 2007
ruaok
I managed to convince them to send a new mobo and ram. yay!
2007-02-01 03239, 2007
Kerensky97
Nice. It's the motherboard that's suspect isn't it?
2007-02-01 03238, 2007
ruaok
and/or the ram.
2007-02-01 03241, 2007
ruaok
its hard to tell.
2007-02-01 03202, 2007
ruaok
problem is the support contract covers 2GB RAM and we have upgraded to 4GB in this box.
2007-02-01 03206, 2007
Knio1
Knio1 is now known as Knio
2007-02-01 03217, 2007
ruaok
and none of their RAM is in this box. its all in dexter, who is still using it.
2007-02-01 03237, 2007
ruaok
not sure what to do about that.
2007-02-01 03249, 2007
ruaok
I guess I will go and test the existing ram sticks on another box.
2007-02-01 03237, 2007
srotta
I've started harassing people about the way they add PUIDs.
2007-02-01 03244, 2007
srotta
So far I've received about zero replys.
2007-02-01 03245, 2007
srotta
:P
2007-02-01 03217, 2007
Kerensky97
??? As in associating them to the wrong tracks?
2007-02-01 03210, 2007
srotta
As in associating them to all the versions of a particular album, or all the versions of a particular track.
2007-02-01 03230, 2007
srotta
My favorite is still Rammstein's Sonne, which has the same PUID in both regular and instrumental version.
2007-02-01 03253, 2007
srotta
I've asked now two people who've submitted the instrumental PUID if they actually have the instrumental version. No answer.
2007-02-01 03219, 2007
srotta
There's something strange going if they do have the instrumental, and it gives the same PUID as regular version.
2007-02-01 03203, 2007
Kerensky97
I've noticed two identical songs with different singers came up with the same PUID. But they sound almost the same to the human ear.
2007-02-01 03219, 2007
srotta
Or now someone's been adding PUIDs to Beatles tracks. The problem is, those PUIDs are created by Anthology 1 versions of the tracks, and they get added to compilations and so forth.
2007-02-01 03231, 2007
srotta
Considering Anthologies are alternative versions parsed from demos etc, and they actually sound different from the regular, published versions, I've been asking if they actually have those albums they are adding the PUIDs to :P
