Print Story A Day in the Life
No, nein, non, nei, niet, नहीं, нет, いいえ...

September 29:

We are in the process of upgrading the Hardware and Software Environment for the Windows operating system, not $YourBigApp.
Well that sounds easy enough. Everything you need to know is in the Supported Systems guide. And you're too fucking lazy to look at it or your grasp of English and ability to look at simple tables is so tenuous you need your hand held. But dammit, when I give you the answer, quit asking me the same fucking question!

x-posted to da brog.

Update: Either the Chinese or Korean word for "No" borked the intro. Chinese and Korean removed from title.



So heres what we want to be doing:

Current Setup:
Windows 2000 Advance Server SP4
SQL Server 2000 SP3
IIS5

Proposed Setup:
Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (32-Bit)
SQL Server 2000 SP4
IIS6

I do have reviewed the Supported Systems guide but I could not specifically find out the proposed setup? I am getting the following error during installation: "This setup can only be run on windows".

September 29:
Sure, Champ. Windows 2003 ain’t supported. The Supported Systems guide only lists what we support. We don’t list everything that we don’t support or we’d have to add a few hundred pieces of software a day.

September 29:
Three notes that the customer called to talk to me. He’s an Indian, in India. No fucking way. Been there, done that.

September 29 (still):

Thanks for your update. Could you please refer to Ticket A42-331B which I have created earlier? It’s mentioned that 7.5.3 is supported with Windows 2003 Server.

Uh-oh. A n00b had answered the ticket and apparently gave him bad information. I fired a note off to her, doing my best to maintain my calm and not get upper management’s attention.

On Monday I had her response: “In that ticket he wanted to know what OS can their Database Server can run on.” I had a look. Sure enough, that’s what she wrote. I sent her back a quick note letting her know she has to make such distinctions painfully clear to customers asking dumb questions about crap already in the Supported Systems guide.

October 02:

Raj,
The ticket you mentioned was specifically about your database platform. We don’t care about that so long as the vendor supports it, but $OurBigApp woun’t run on Windows 2003.

Windows 2003 isn't supported prior to version 3.L. It may work in compatibility mode, but we don’t support it. All our documentation is clear about this.

October 04:
Thanks for your update. Below is the configuration information which we planned to upgrade from

Current Setup:
Windows 2000 Advance Server SP4
SQL Server 2000 SP3
IIS5

to

Proposed Setup:

Web Server:
Win 2003 Srvr SP1
IIS 6
$YourBigApp components

Application Servers:
Win 2003 Srvr SP1
$YourBigApp
MDAC 2.8
Microsoft Office 2000
SQL Server 2005 Client Tools 32 bit

Database Server:
Win 2003 Srvr Standard/Enterprise Edition (32-bit or 64-bit)
SQL Server 2005 32-bit and 64-bit with full compatibility mode

Could you please let me know you suggestion if any of those incompatible?


I’ve written twice already that Windows 2003 ain’t supported for $OurBigApp and that it is supported for MS SQL Server. I wrote back and told him a third time. Unhappy with the answer he then looked up the requirements for version 3.L.x since Windows 2003 is unsupported for version 3.C. He sent the same massive spec list again on Thursday, asking for confirmation and adding a lot of questions about third-party products, none of which we support.

The following Monday (10OCT) I wrote the same damned answers again.

October 10:

REC, Thanks for your update.

I have a question related to the Ticket AE4-1RR3. Just want to get a confirmation. It mentioned as for the “64-bit platform, it's only supported as of version 3.L”.

Below the configuration for SQL Server {removed – seen it already}:

Q1. You have mentioned as it’s supported. Just want to get confirmation if $YourBigApp is compatible with the above configuration?

Q2. If not, could you please confirm below configuration {also removed} for SQL Server.  I did not find any related information in Chapter F

I arrived Tuesday morning to find three more messages about his attempts to call again. I wrote back:

October 11:

Raj,

Q1: It clearly states this is SUPPORTED in the Supported System guide, version 3.K, Rev. 12, Table 3, page C-12: "Microsoft SQL Server 2000, Enterprise Edition (64-bit)"

It LIKEWISE states that “SQL Server 2005” is supported "on all Windows platforms" in the same table. ALL versions of SQL Server 2005 are supported on ALL Windows versions which Microsoft support.

Q2: That's because Database support is enumerated in Chapter C

October 11:
REC, Thanks for your update.

Could you please let me know which SQL Server edition (SQL Server 2005 32-bit Enterprise Edition or SQL Server 2005 64-bit Enterprise Edition) is compatible with $YourBigApp?

Sorry, I could not find out the specific information in the Specification document.

The my-head-shaped-dent in front of my keyboard grew a little deeper.

October 11:

Raj,

Which part of "ALL PLATFORMS" still isn't clear? The Supported Systems guide states that SQL Server 2005 is supported "on all Windows platforms" in Table 3. "ALL" would necessarily include any 32-bit and 64- bit platform which Microsoft supports for SQL Server 2005.

He made a couple attempts to call again but never updated his ticket until finally:

November 13:

REC, Thanks for your update. You may close the ticket.

And that should’ve been the end of it. But when I checked my queue this morning, up popped something old and stinky, flagged due to its age (over 60 days)
I want to confirm if SQL Server 32-bit Enterprise Edition and SQL Server 2005 64-bit Enterprise Edition is now compatible with $YourBigApp if we run SQL Server and $YourBigApp version 3.C on the same Windows 2003 machine instead of different ones.. The latest Supported Systems guide doesn’t show any new configurations but this should work, right?

He got a one-word response and I re-closed the ticket, desperate for my Root Cause: 17-Fuckwit.
< Happenings in the world of me | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' >
A Day in the Life | 9 comments (9 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Display stopped before the Chinese for me. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #1 Wed Jan 10, 2007 at 05:04:15 AM EST
And rendered the rest of the page in bold, failing to close the tag.

Well, instead of Chinese characters . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #2 Wed Jan 10, 2007 at 06:54:19 AM EST
. . . you can just write it in pinyin (anglicised version of Chinese).

bu shi = no (Mandarin, or Pu Tong Hua)

Curiously, there is no real word for no, as this is literally "not is".

Your russian (I think) "niet" is usually spelled "nyet" in English. Other anglicised versions of "no" - Cantonese (mm si), Korean (ah nee) . . .

Russian is after the (?)Thai. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #3 Wed Jan 10, 2007 at 08:56:33 AM EST
I think that's Dutch before.

[ Parent ]
ah, silly me - I see the cyrillic now . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #4 Wed Jan 10, 2007 at 09:16:07 AM EST
. . . yeah, that's "nyet" alright. I thought Dutch was nein or nei, though . . . I know Danish and Norwegian are also "nei" (like English nigh). Latvian is "ne" (like e in bend, but stretched out sorta . . . help, littlestar!).

[ Parent ]
dear REC by martingale (2.00 / 0) #5 Wed Jan 10, 2007 at 05:53:17 PM EST
I thank you for making sure that the French word is correctly spelled, but I feel it is time to address the vexing issue of the langue de préférence. As you know, the French language is a sort of lingua franca for the EU, now that the eastern block states have joined, and we feel that it makes only sense to put the word non before the corresponding anglo-saxon word, possibly in fact to change the order into French, German, Italian, English, etc., purely in the interest of European harmony and international communicative expediency, as well as following the recent relevant directives from Commissioner Hubert Pommelot of the European Directorate for Precision In Language.
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]
Dearest Commisioner Applelot . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #6 Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 04:46:37 AM EST
. . . it has come to our attention that you have requested several concessions and changes in terms of language of preference in a now unified Europe. I do detest being the "uber kommandant", but at times, I must exercise my power.

You have been relieved of your duties, sir. Arivaderci.

[ Parent ]
Dear martingale, by ReallyEvilCanine (2.00 / 0) #8 Sun Jan 14, 2007 at 04:54:03 AM EST
Perhaps the characteristic French insular behaviour has made it difficult for you to become aware of changes outside of France, but English has been the lingua franca of the world for more than a half century already and continues to grow. Icelanders, who are even more protective of their language than France is of hers, have begun to adopt some English words as well as patterns of usage and modification.

The irony of it all is that had it not been for France's interference in 1066, English wouldn't be the language it is today. Instead we'd talk like the Germans, but with even more atrocious grammar, and French would be a more likely candidate for worldwide communication. You have only yourselves to blame.

There are only 62 million native French speakers in the EU. There are over 90 million native German speakers, making German the largest native language inside the EU which should, by all rights, make it the EU's common language. However, one cannot dictate language use without enforcement; the EU members have chosen English, wisely ignoring any decisions reached by and passed out from any EU Directorate.

the internet: amplifier of stupidity -- discordia

[ Parent ]
well, you've convinced me by martingale (2.00 / 0) #9 Sun Jan 14, 2007 at 03:30:59 PM EST
I am so impressed that I shall come and visit you and praise you in person. Allow me to bring along, as a gift and token of gratitude, a small puppy...
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]
Not Thai, Hindi. by ReallyEvilCanine (2.00 / 0) #7 Sun Jan 14, 2007 at 04:42:51 AM EST
Considerably more appropriate in my line of work.

the internet: amplifier of stupidity -- discordia

[ Parent ]
A Day in the Life | 9 comments (9 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback