On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Richey wrote:
I just swapped out a 916 that had a bad flash. Adtran support sent an advanced replacement in a few days. I've used the TA900s and found Adtran's support was much better(free). It's almost impossible to get any real help on the Cisco boxes without a Smartnet contract.
I can also state that adtran support is some of the best out there. Sure, sometimes you get a dud unit but they more then make up for it in other areas. And those dud units are such a tiny percentage of their gear we use I cannot state it is a major problem. matt
Richey
-----Original Message----- From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Paul Timmins Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 8:35 PM To: owen at impulse.net Cc: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Problems with defective Adtran TA900s
Have had a small rash of flash chip failures but beyond that with hundreds in the field I can count the number of DSP failures on one hand.
Owen Roth wrote:
Hello,
We deploy the total range of Adtran TA900s as CPE feature-rich boxes, and in general like the product. However, of the last 25 Adtran TA 900s we've deployed, we've had 6 with confirmed hardware defects where the symptoms range from the obvious hardware crashes, to much trickier and costly bugs to find, such as bad DSPs, and one that had a bad clocking chip. Adtran claims I'm alone in this, and it's gotten to the point where I'm seriously considering building a quality control TA900 tester in the lab to torture all prospective field boxes. Anyone notice anything like this percentage of defects?
Regards,
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops