FACSAria service

Derek Davies derek.davies at cancer.org.uk
Sun Nov 6 16:39:20 EST 2005


Kristie and Robin,

For once I can say that we in the UK appear to 
have a bit better service. This may be because we 
have fewer Arias, LSRIIs and Cantos here but I 
can say that calls to the service dept are dealt 
with pretty swiftly and I nearly always get a 
reply back from Tech Service or a FSE within a 
working day. These machines are very different 
from the previous generation and there will 
inevitably be a bit of lag while engineers etc 
get to grips. We do benefit from being a smaller 
user base and the fact that we only have one time 
zone may help....

Derek


>Robin,
>I don't think what you are experiencing is 
>limited to the Aria.  The poor tech support for 
>LSRII and Aria (and I assume Canto) 
>occurs because of several issues.  I think with 
>so many new instruments the volume of calls must 
>be higher.  Rarely does a live tech support 
>person answer the phone anymore,  the call 
>almost always gets bumped to Dispatch.  Then 
>when you finally get a callback from tech 
>support (hours sometimes) they are 
>not knowledgeable on these newer 
>instruments (unlike the Calibur).  Therefore 
>they are incapable of troubleshooting at all and 
>the call must be dispatched to the field service 
>engineer anyway.  This has wasted precious hours 
>and many times I have missed them getting a 
>dispatch to the FSE that same day.  This is made 
>worse if you are on the East Coast where there 
>are very few people in the phone room from 
>9am-12pm EST, and they don't bother calling back 
>after 5pm EST, or wait until you have safely 
>gone home at 7pm EST to leave a callback 
>message.  This means you must call them back in 
>the morning and start all over again with 
>Dispatch.  Thankfully the instruments and 
>software are much better and I don't need to 
>call as often.
>
>
>Kristie M. Gordon
>Flow Cytometry Core Facility
>Department of Medicine
>Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons
>1130 St. Nicholas Avenue Rm938
>New York,  New York  10032
>212-851-4574
><mailto:kmg2109 at columbia.edu>kmg2109 at columbia.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>
>From: <mailto:StingleyRobinL at uams.edu>Stingley, Robin L
>To: <mailto:cytometry at flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu>Cytometry Mailing List
>Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 7:06 PM
>Subject: FACSAria service
>
>Dear flow community,
>
>For those of you with a FACSAria—do you feel 
>that you get the same quality of service with 
>the Aria that you do with your other BD 
>instruments?  I’m assuming that Aria users all 
>have a service contract, given its difficult 
>beginning.  Am I mistaken?  I realize that BD 
>has been working to create fixes for the 
>specific instrument problems and after a few 
>updates, I’m not having nearly as many problems 
>as I did early on.  This message is not really 
>to gripe about the instrument itself, but to 
>find out how others feel about the support for 
>it.  Do you find the tech support to be helpful? 
>Are your problems resolved in a timely manner? 
>Do you ever feel that you’ve been completely 
>forgotten and find yourself calling tech support 
>multiple times to get a problem solved?  Has the 
>person that “will be calling you ASAP” ever 
>actually called you? 
>
>The service contract for the Aria is somewhere 
>in the range of twice that for the Calibur, as 
>I’m sure it should be due to the differences in 
>cost and complexity.  However, I often feel that 
>I get much better service in the rare event that 
>I have a problem with the Calibur.  Is this an 
>unreasonable comparison?  I realize that the 
>Calibur has been out there for a long time and 
>the Aria is still relatively new, but shouldn’t 
>the service still be comparable?    
>
>I’m not trying to gripe about a particular 
>person, and have no trouble with the engineers 
>who have been here, but I’m confused by the 
>overall difference in response between issues 
>with the Calibur and those with the Aria. 
>
>Thanks in advance for any comments,
>
>Robin
>
>Robin Stingley, Ph.D.
>Flow Cytometry Core Facility
>Department of Microbiology and Immunology
>University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
>Slot 511, Rm B504
>4301 West Markham Street
>Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
>Phone:  501-686-6927
>E-mail:  <mailto:StingleyRobinL at uams.edu>StingleyRobinL at uams.edu
><http://www.uams.edu/flowcytometry/>http://www.uams.edu/flowcytometry/
>
>
>================================================================================================
>
>Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, 
>including any attachments, is for the sole use 
>of the intended recipient(s) and may contain 
>confidential and privileged information. Any 
>unauthorized review, use, disclosure or 
>distribution is prohibited. If you are not the 
>intended recipient, please contact the sender by 
>reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the 
>original message.
>================================================================================================


-- 
***************************************************************
Derek Davies					Voice: (44) 020 7269 3394
FACS Laboratory,			FAX: (44) 020 7269 3479
London Research Institute,		e_mail: derek.davies at cancer.org.uk
Cancer Research UK		mobile: 07790 604112
44 Lincolns Inn Fields, London, UK.

Web Page: http://science.cancerresearchuk.org/sci/facs/

In tenebris lux
***************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed


More information about the Cytometry mailing list