Re: QuickCam for Windows availability

Aaron M. Gold (amgold@ix.netcom.com)
Tue, 22 Aug 1995 15:27:11 +0000


> At 6:28 8/21/95, Tim Belcher wrote a flame-a-thon that gives credence to
> his last name.

That was childish. Were I Tim, I'd expect an apology.

In any case, what Tim said has merit. This person from Connectix
has not answered very many questions that were asked. His info about
which version of CUSM to work with QC/Win was wrong. I asked a
couple of questions, and he skipped over most of them.

> The lead time for magazines is as much as three months as well.

I used to work for a magazine. Connectix could easily have called
before the mag went to press to say "Please add "due to ship in
September." But that's beside the point. They invited us to email
to info@connectix.com, which does not work. This was downright
stupid. Think of all the potential lost business! If I was going to
advertise a mailing service, I'd sure as hell made sure it was
working before the ad ran. And if they had a three month lead
time...well, that's a lot of time to fix a mailbot. Or to arrange
for another one via another service.

I usually don't poke my head into things like this, 'cuz they tend
to go nowhere, but I thought your reply to Tim was uncalled for,
unappropriate, and way to strong. Were I an executive at Connectix
and I read that letter, I'd print it out and pin it to my wall to use
as a guideline. Whether Connectix is wrong or right is not the
issue; what the customer percieves is what is important. I happened
to agree with Tim, havnig shared some of his experiences. Were there
another low-cost alternative to the QuickCam, I might well avoid
Connectix. If they don't have the coordination between their
marketing staff and the people running their mailbot, do I really
want to buy one of their products?

Just my $0.02...please flame in E-mail. :)

Soapbox mode: off.

--
Aaron Gold - amgold@ix.netcom.com
Watch this space!