Broken Vendor promises-Cisco

I have used lots of Cisco equipment in my previous jobs. They have been a mixed bag. Some things lasted a long time, and others were useless the day they were installed and didn’t change. This is one of those times.

A company I worked with had spent tens of thousands of dollars on Cisco equipment in an effort to improve their infrastructure. Cisco promised them that it would work with the addition of some software. Great. The company after buying and installing the product then found out that the software was in beta. Oops! It took months for it to come out of beta status. Then the software of the product they bought was “experimental” and not supported. So they upgraded their software hoping it would work. Guess what? It did not work.

So when you have broken vendor promises at the start of any project, then is the time to cancel the project. When someone can break a promise, they will do it again, as Cisco continued to do. Just do this and it will work-nope. It is better to recognize your mistake and back out, then try to make a bad situation work.

Now for the company, myself and everyone involved Cisco has a black eye, and I felt compelled to write this to share and warn you as well. When a company has bad service there are real consequences and I have no problem showing the company those consequences. If I had owned the company that equipment would have been returned the moment they first admitted a problem.

So what can you do if you are stuck and you can’t return equipment? You just tell the vendor and whomever you bought it again that you won’t do business with them again. I know I won’t, and eventually karma does catch up.

StumbleUpon having problems

I read an article that stated that StumbleUpon was having problems. They lose staff, having technical issues with the service, and lots of other issues. I wonder if this is the beginning of the end for them?

As long-time readers have noticed I have often used StumbleUpon to learn many new things. I find it more interesting than randomly surfing Wikipedia. Wikipedia always seems to have a bias in the articles I read. It’s disappointing for something that is supposed to be neutral. It is also a question of readership. Why waste my time on something that most people don’t find helpful? I have noticed that my highest rated content are things I originally write. So give the people what they want right?

It seems to me that StumbleUpon’s issues are typical of many companies that don’t have a clear profit strategy. I always wondered how they paid they bills, even though they offer paid stumbling content. It wasn’t clear that people would see the value of an audience that had to spend time to find their message. I think as well that in my use of SU it has become clogged with tons of garbage. There is always garbage in life, but it makes it demotivating to use the system.

For example, I have probably viewed over 100,000 pages and liked about 4,000 of them. For me, I am starting to question if liking something 4% is a good use of my time. It is easy to use and I have found some great gems, but on the whole I don’t think SU is in my future. Perhaps others also feel the same. I have looked for a SU alternative but haven’t found a good option. If you have one, please email me in the About me and let me know and I’ll write a post about it.