From: ijp@doc.ic.ac.uk (Ian Palmer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.acorn
Subject: Re: Warning: Risc Developments
Date: 13 Oct 1992 10:28:12 +0100
Organization: Department of Computing, Imperial College, University of London, UK.
NNTP-Posting-Host: oak5.doc.ic.ac.uk

In article <1992Oct12.134247.17122@cs.nott.ac.uk> smb@cs.nott.ac.uk (Simon Burrows) writes:
>In article <1bbjkmINN6u4@oak6.doc.ic.ac.uk> ijp@doc.ic.ac.uk (Ian Palmer) writes:
>>
>>Personally I'd tell them where they could stick their #170 charge for
>>returning the unit. My plan of action (but then I'm like that) based
>>solely on what information about their drives I've seen on this group,
>>would be :
>[lots of suggested threats, courses of action etc]
>
>I would advise you not to be confrontational. Also be aware that the 
>organisation is split into several distinct parts, each of which is not
>responsible for the actions of the others.
>

I was basing my posting on an assumption that the non-confrontational
approach had been tried, and failed - this I based on the fact that an
unresonable return cost of #170 had been stated by RD. My stated 'plan
of action' was a follow up to the non-confrontational method. It has
always been my point of view that after (just) two polite letters I go
for the 'jump down their throat' letter - which in the past has served
me very well (let's just say, I've never yet had to resort to a 4th
letter :-) )

>                                                  Don't try to be aggressive,
>rude or nasty - it will just put their backs up. They are a big enough
>organisation to not care in the slightest about any threats which you
>may make, so long as they feel that they are on legally firm ground.

Exactly why I suggested quoting (correct) legal terms at them. Once
you start to sound serious, they are more likely to take note.

> This
>is especially true if the problems are caused in any way by the upgrade to
>RISC OS 3.10.

But this was not the case given in the posting. It was stated that the
drive (or firmware) was faulty even under Risc-OS 2. Thus, it would be
my guess, that the drive (with bundled firmware) was not fit for the
purpose for which it was supplied. Even if it is a problem with
Risc-OS 2 and 3 (a bug), RD sold the product (I assume) for connecting
to an Archimedes (a REAL one, not some super imaginary one running a
bug free version of Risc-OS).

>
>The people at Beebug are fairly reasonable, providing you are not being
>unreasonable to them. Set out the facts in a polite manner, and you are far
>more likely to get action than by threats, firebombs etc.
>

The threats and firebombs were not supposed to be taken seriously. But
I guess you worked that one out.

Ian

P.S. In my article about AW - I know there were spelling mistakes in
it (although they were actually typos, I'm not really that bad at
spelling, just that bad at typing :-). My point, though, was about
magazines - not Usenet. I know we've had this argument before, so I
don't want to start it again, but although I do proof read my articles
to check they don't contain complete gibberish, I don't bother spell
checking them because it would take too long. However *if* I were
writing for a magazine (etc.) I would take the time.

-- 
                            E-mail : ijp@doc.ic.ac.uk
 ___           __       Snail mail : Department of Computing, Huxley Building,
  /  _   _    /_/ _   / _ _   _  _   Imperial College, 180 Queens Gate,
_/_ (_|_| )  /   (_|_(_| ) )_|/_)    London. SW7 2BZ. England.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.acorn