Dell guilty of fraud

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente..._of_fraud.html

quote

The Albany County Supreme Court found that Dell deprived customers of
technical support that they bought or were eligible for under warranty
in several ways, including by requiring people to wait for very long
times on the phone, repeatedly transferring their calls and frequently
disconnecting their calls.

Dell also often failed to provide onsite repairs for customers who
bought contracts for such support and often blamed software when
hardware was actually the problem, the court found. The company also
sometimes refused to offer support when a support contract ended, even
though the user had first complained about a problem before the end of
the contract. Subscribers to a "next-day" repair service sometimes
waited as long as a year for support, the court found.

/quote

It's about time. They've been doing it for at least ten years.
That's how long ago I ran into the Dell no-service buzz-saw.

Robert.

DonLogan wrote:

glad I never got a dell - he always look slippery

You don't make yourself a billionaire by being a nice guy.

On Jun 3, 9:53 am, chrisv wrote:
DonLogan wrote:
glad I never got a dell - he always look slippery

You don't make yourself a billionaire by being a nice guy.

This group has become so uplifting.

Before the commoditization of everything, quality and service were
what mattered, not to mention everyday fair dealing.

Robert.

Robert Myers wrote in
:


http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...t_finds_dell_g
uilty_of_fraud.html

quote

The Albany County Supreme Court found that Dell deprived customers of
technical support that they bought or were eligible for under warranty
in several ways, including by requiring people to wait for very long
times on the phone, repeatedly transferring their calls and frequently
disconnecting their calls.

Dell also often failed to provide onsite repairs for customers who
bought contracts for such support and often blamed software when
hardware was actually the problem, the court found. The company also
sometimes refused to offer support when a support contract ended, even
though the user had first complained about a problem before the end of
the contract. Subscribers to a "next-day" repair service sometimes
waited as long as a year for support, the court found.

/quote

It's about time. They've been doing it for at least ten years.
That's how long ago I ran into the Dell no-service buzz-saw.

Robert.


Wow! Dell sure has gone to the ****s. My first PC was a Dell Dimension
486 and back then they had really good support and didn't even charge for
one year of next day onsite service. Twice they came to my house to
replace a bad PSU and bad floppy drive and both times they came to my
home the very next day after I phoned them. Shame on you Dell!

chrisv wrote in
:

You don't make yourself a billionaire by being a nice guy.



Well, that's exactly how he got started. Dell used to have No.1 support in
the world at one time and that is how they originally got such a good name
for themselves and made their millions. See my other post about it.

On Jun 5, 7:25 am, House Of The White Rose wrote:
chrisv wrote :

You don't make yourself a billionaire by being a nice guy.

Well, that's exactly how he got started. Dell used to have No.1 support in
the world at one time and that is how they originally got such a good name
for themselves and made their millions. See my other post about it.

You could also think about Intel only deal that pumped millions into
Dell as well, I find it kind of funny when Dell finally went neutral
they started loosing money. It makes one wonder just how much they
needed Intel's help to booster up profits. Too bad AMD hasn't really
been able to compete so far with the C2D family, it would be nice to
see a better situation. I only bought a Dell once and that was
enough, it was a P-M laptop and had major problems. They lost me when
the PSU were not compatible with the standards.

Rthoreau

On Jun 8, 12:47 pm, Rthoreau wrote:


You could also think about Intel only deal that pumped millions into
Dell as well, I find it kind of funny when Dell finally went neutral
they started loosing money. It makes one wonder just how much they
needed Intel's help to booster up profits.

An interesting thought, but the story might be a tad more
complicated. Like Wal-Mart, Dell didn't care so much how much it paid
for its purchases, just so long as it was the customer paying the
lowest price. Intel was happy to arrange that for Dell in a mutually
beneficial agreement that allowed Intel to advertise itself and Dell
at the same time while picking up the tab for much of Dell's
advertising.

That was just fine, so long as there was no compelling to reason for
customers to be annoyed by not being able to buy AMD instead of
Intel. Opteron made it more than just annoying, and Dell had to
decamp from its profitable arrangement. That decision made sense only
as long as there was a compelling reason to buy AMD, and there isn't
any more. Dell wound up paying the price that potential AMD customers
have always feared: that AMD wouldn't be able to deliver.

Robert.

Originally Posted by Robert Myers

On Jun 8, 12:47 pm, Rthoreau wrote:


You could also think about Intel only deal that pumped millions into
Dell as well, I find it kind of funny when Dell finally went neutral
they started loosing money. It makes one wonder just how much they
needed Intel's help to booster up profits.

An interesting thought, but the story might be a tad more
complicated. Like Wal-Mart, Dell didn't care so much how much it paid
for its purchases, just so long as it was the customer paying the
lowest price. Intel was happy to arrange that for Dell in a mutually
beneficial agreement that allowed Intel to advertise itself and Dell
at the same time while picking up the tab for much of Dell's
advertising.

That was just fine, so long as there was no compelling to reason for
customers to be annoyed by not being able to buy AMD instead of
Intel. Opteron made it more than just annoying, and Dell had to
decamp from its profitable arrangement. That decision made sense only
as long as there was a compelling reason to buy AMD, and there isn't
any more. Dell wound up paying the price that potential AMD customers
have always feared: that AMD wouldn't be able to deliver.

Robert.

it is too complikated...........