From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Apr 19 13:07:49 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA06552 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 19 Apr 1997 13:07:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from etinc.com (et-gw-fr1.etinc.com [204.141.244.98]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA06512 for ; Sat, 19 Apr 1997 13:07:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ntws (ntws.etinc.com [204.141.95.142]) by etinc.com (8.8.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA14954; Sat, 19 Apr 1997 16:11:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970419160450.00b59990@etinc.com> X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 16:04:54 -0400 To: Stephen Roome From: dennis Subject: Re: Price of FreeBSD (was On Holy Wars...) Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , Narvi , Nate Williams , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 08:38 PM 4/19/97 +0100, Stephen Roome wrote: >On Fri, 18 Apr 1997, dennis wrote: >> <<<< Snipped loads of stuff out of here >>> >> SDL has been working on frame relay for 2 1/2 years now.....you really want >> to >> use the result? > >Mmm, SDL do sell very similar cards, when I was looking for a serial card >for our E1 line here, I tried out both etinc and sdl... >Frankly the folks answering the phone at etinc made me call sdl again, >even though someone had said etinc made better kit. > >So, I have a SDL WANic here, it's much the same as the etinc version and >yes I'd be prepared now to use the SDL frame relay card when it comes out >above the etinc one. > >This is because SDL seem to understand that the customer is always right, >and etinc (and you) seem much more prepared to argue with the customer. > >So, yes, I'll use the result, and I know that even if it doesn't work SDL >will be helpful when I ring up and ask why it broke. Ah, but the customer isnt always right...... db