PDA

View Full Version : Failed Squeezebox?



mgraves
2006-03-11, 14:01
Hi,

My Squeezebox just simply died two weeks ago. I sent an email to support@slimdevices.com but it went unanswered. Then a few days later I called and spoke to a support tech. After a few questions he agreed that the unit was really dead and needed repair. he promised that I'd receive an RMA by email. That was a week ago and no such RMA appears forthcoming. I again emailed hoping for a response.

For such a great device the support seems to leave a lot to be desired. Has anyone else been able to get one repaired or replaced?

Michael

mherger
2006-03-11, 15:27
> My Squeezebox just simply died two weeks ago. I sent an email to
> support (AT) slimdevices (DOT) com but it went unanswered.

If you have a spam filter of some kind, whitelist slimdevices.com: the
support's mails are said to be blocked by spam filters quite regularly.

--

Michael

-----------------------------------------------------------
Help translate SlimServer by using the
StringEditor Plugin (http://www.herger.net/slim/)

mgraves
2006-03-11, 16:19
On the email account in question I have no such spam filtering.

Michael

dean
2006-03-11, 16:23
Michael,

Check your spam filter/junk folder.

The support team is very good about getting back to customers and if
they said they were going to send you RMA information, they almost
certainly tried to.

If you still don't find the appropriate email, please do call again
and we'll sort it out.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

-dean


On Mar 11, 2006, at 1:01 PM, mgraves wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> My Squeezebox just simply died two weeks ago. I sent an email to
> support (AT) slimdevices (DOT) com but it went unanswered. Then a few days
> later I
> called and spoke to a support tech. After a few questions he agreed
> that
> the unit was really dead and needed repair. he promised that I'd
> receive
> an RMA by email. That was a week ago and no such RMA appears
> forthcoming. I again emailed hoping for a response.
>
> For such a great device the support seems to leave a lot to be
> desired.
> Has anyone else been able to get one repaired or replaced?
>
> Michael
>
>
> --
> mgraves
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> mgraves's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?
> userid=4078
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=21998
>
>

Mark Lanctot
2006-03-11, 17:51
On the email account in question I have no such spam filtering.

Michael

...but does your ISP?

danco
2006-03-12, 00:09
If you have a spam filter of some kind, whitelist slimdevices.com: the
support's mails are said to be blocked by spam filters quite regularly.



If it's actually true (I have had no correspondence with them) that support's mails are blocked by spam filters "quite regularly", I think Slim Devices need to find out why, to report to us, and to do something about it.

Whitelisting by users is not enough, as (apart from it requiring a user to think that it might be needed) the ISP may filter before users can see anything.

snarlydwarf
2006-03-12, 00:23
Well, remember that the viewpoint here is a bit biased as a random sample.

People are here either because they are addicted/bored, or because they have a problem.

The "yeah, it works, leave me alone" people aren't posters here.

As for spam filters... I run spam filters for an ISP: many many customers want "more agressive" filters and don't seem to understand that we are very careful to err so that real mail doesn't get lost. Not all ISP's care about what remains of email.

'support' addresses are often blocked in a misguided attempt to block phishing and worms.

Email, sadly, is becoming less and less useful thanks to misguided spam filters. (And, yes, some do insist mine are misguided... at least those on our blacklist for things like refusing mail from <>.)

jonheal
2006-03-12, 05:27
Someone at Slim, or someone that knows the IP address of their SMTP server could plug it into this search engine to check it against 147 DNS-based blacklists:

http://www.mxtoolbox.com/blacklists.aspx

ISPs often buy 3rd-party software to do their blocking.

jonheal
2006-03-12, 06:13
Someone at Slim, or someone that knows the IP address of their SMTP server could plug it into this search engine to check it against 147 DNS-based blacklists:

http://www.mxtoolbox.com/blacklists.aspx

ISPs often buy 3rd-party software to do their blocking.
I just noticed a link for doing an MX lookup on the page I referenced above.

According to MX Toolbox, Slimdevices' SMTP server DOES appear on two DNS-based blacklists:

http://www.blars.org/errors/block.html
http://www.spews.org/

rudholm
2006-03-12, 08:33
I just noticed a link for doing an MX lookup on the page I referenced above.

According to MX Toolbox, Slimdevices' SMTP server DOES appear on two DNS-based blacklists:

http://www.blars.org/errors/block.html
http://www.spews.org/

That's assuming, of course, that Slim Devices sends email from the same IP address where they receive it.

In Slim Devices' case it happens to be true (at least it was for the one email I've ever received from Support) but it's not really a safe assumption in general. I would hope that any tool that helped you look up an MX record for the purposes of determining if an organization's *sent* email would be subject to blacklisting would mention this caveat.

These days spam is far more likely to come from one of zillions of compromised PCs on broadband links than from accidentally mis-configured corporate mail gateways. Given that, the whole idea of blacklisting spam emitters is questionable since it no longer serves as leverage to get the person responsible for the host to close the hole. Now blacklists serve only as directories of potentially available relays for spam senders. (Yes, spammers do use these blacklists this way)

Of course, the operators of these lists are now quite invested in them and aren't really open to the idea that they may be anachronistic and doing more harm than good.

mgraves
2006-03-12, 14:40
Getting back to my initial point. I have a reasonably good idea of that the ISP is providing...nothing...as they don't host email for my domain. That I do through another company who I know does not use a spam filter.

However, it seems very likely that Slim Devices did no receive my first email...which implies some filtering inbound at their end. To my third email I received an auto-response, at least acknowledging the message.

Michael

mgraves
2006-03-18, 08:30
To bring this incedent to a close; the replacement squeezebox arrived yesterday, three weeks after the failure was initially reported. The manufacturer was most appologetic, saying that my emails were inadvertently caught in an AppleMail spam filter.

To make up for the mistake they cross-shipped a unit rather than simply repairing the one I returned. They made good and I heartily recommend the company and the product to anyone who will listen.

Michael

Michaelwagner
2006-03-19, 09:24
That's good to hear.

My experiences have also been good. I had a display go bad a year ago and got a replacement quite quickly, with instructions.

The instructions didn't match exactly my situation, so I wrote. I got an answer in hours, with the revised version of the instructions.

It even came with the right (torx) key for undoing the screws (so I didn't have to go to work and get one from there).

Later, I got one of the first SB3s, and the first run had a problem with the face plate. I mentioned it here and new face plates arrived within days, crossing borders and all.

So my experiences are of a highly responsive company that takes responsibility when things go wrong.