Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen
They don't need to be technically adept, as most of VMs customers probably aren't. The technically minded are more than likely a minority in this case.
|
Not all of them do, granted, but it stands to reason that the techie types are going to test the CPE in ways regular customers might not, plus they can articulate their experiences more accurately. If the idea is to get things fixed as quickly as possible then getting the more skilled people involved seems like the most logical choice.
IMO what you've just said is exactly the flawed VM thinking that I've referred to in the past, i.e. not testing properly enough and wondering why people are getting ticked off with unreliable kit. Makes no sense at all... completely illogical, as Spock once said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenK
He has already - #22.
|
I missed that one, but usually in threads like this he says it once or twice anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kymmy
What I'm suggesting is that unless you can ping the exact same site from the exact same location using the two different set-ups (superhub and non-superhub) then the result will be skewed by the differing states of the existing traffic/route for the difference in either time or location.
|
So you're recommending we have 2 CPEs on our account to test from exact same location. Um... you do know that's against the VM terms of service, right?
