Whether intended or not, I am receiving bad service

[Euler's_Identity]

Currently it is unknown whether or not I should use the forum or the "ask an engineer" option for requesting service, as I've been told both.

I'm now using the forum because the service I've received thus far via "ask an engineer" is unsuitable.

I sent a circuit in I don't know how long ago to find out why the voltmeter doesn't work.  I was told by the engineer, eventually, that nothing was done, in order to get my circuit to simulate, except delete and replace two switches.  The circuit that was returned to me 1) did not simulate, and 2) was not my circuit because two indicators were missing.

I responded to the engineer and, thus far, have heard nothing for days.

This service is totally unsuitable.  At this point I have no idea what the status of the solving of my problem is, but I'm betting that no one is working on it at this point based on the evidence. 

Who will take responsibility for this?  Am I supposed to just solve my own problems?  Am I just supposed to take my time (which I DO NOT have) to come to this forum over and over, hunting down my own solutions, spend every waking hour trying this that and the other just so I can finally understand why, when I include the multimeter, my circuit suddenly won't simulate because it's spitting out some crazy error? 

I was told, when I was making my decision whether or not to buy the service agreement, that this was a new MultiSim, that things weren't so good in the past but things were different now.  I don't believe it at this point.  No, this is the same old thing.  I present a problem that somehow hoses up MultiSim, and then I get zip for a solution AND the solution returned is totally unworkable.  I've been here.  I've done this.

Now, don't show me that I'm right once again by asking me to send my circuit in again.  Your engineer already has it.  He's your engineer, so you should be able to get it from him.

Hint: Now I'm really upset, because MultiSim has yet again caused me to burn up more time that I cannot afford just to get service!  Don't you dare ask me to resend my circuit, spend more of my time trying to fix your program.

     





 

[lacy]

I don't mean to interupt your outrage, but unforturnately in a big corporation such as NI there are probably millions of problems happening all over the world. You can imagine what it may be like just by looking at this forum.

With that said, there are a tremendious amount of knowlegeable people on this forum who usually will respond to any problems fairly quickly. If you could get permission from your company to post circuit to the forum, I am sure a solution could be found by someone. We are all honest people who will not use any portion of their design for our own gain. It time is critical, this is your best option.

[Euler's_Identity]

Lacy,

First, I considered that.   However, when one sells support to a customer, that customer is owed support, even if it's just a simple explanation that the problem is being studied and that, as soon as the solution is found, the solution will be on its way.  For even in this response, the customer will at least know that the problem is, indeed, with the product and that a solution is coming asap.  A customer should never be left hanging for days on end without either resolution or a clear path to resolution.  It matters not if there are 100, 1000, or 1x10^6 customers who have bought support; the company must have a mechanism in place to support every one of them.

Second, yes, there are knowledgeable people here.  However, it is not the job of these people to provide support.  Rather, they provide support simply by their convenience, as they have time to provide it.  Likewise, they bear no responsibility, for they did not sell the service, so there is no means to resolution beyond a certain extent.

Third, I don't know about you and your situation, but I'm burning time coming here daily, time I can't afford to burn.  The last thing I can afford to do is troubleshoot MultiSim, especially when in regard to a circuit that should work without question.   True, I have received some good suggestions here, but I just don't have much in the way of time for this kind of troubleshooting.  In fact, the only reason you are getting this response is 1) you have graciously volunteered your time to me, 2) I believed it'd be wrong to say what I said and leave others who are reading hanging, and 3) I could give up some valuable time and chose to so. 

I know one thing is for sure.  Based on this experience, I am yet still leery about using MultiSim for original design work.  Thus far I have received evidence that MultiSim will only support when I do what I can, as a customer, to make MultiSim give support.  Yes, the engineer, within 24 hours of my post yesterday, has responded.  That is not support, not in my world.  When I buy support, I do not expect to have to force it to happen.  One does not go out on a limb when there is no evidence that the wood will support.  Think about what I'm saying this way.  Do you use a program that simulates electronic designs to prove already proven designs?  No, you use it to study designs that are cost restrictive.  You use it for prototyping without the expense of killing expensive parts.  At least that's the intention in my world.  In other words, in my world, it is expected that a multimeter work like a multimeter. 😉

By no means do I mean to sound heartless, but in my world, kindness requires spare time to be kind, to be patient.  I have a heart but little time to devote to proving proven designs.

I hope my burning up of time to leave you this response suffices for you as it does for me, because this is all I can afford to say, while I don't want to have to come back, at least not over this matter.         

[lacy]

Thanks for your time and reply. I can understand your fustrations. I have been there, done that in my field. I would just hope that you can get your problems resolved and just remember if you ever decide to use the forum at anytime we are here willing to try and help.

Have a Nice Day

[Euler's_Identity]

Lacy, (to you and others reading)

I just got a chance to try out the latest "fix" for my circuit from the engineer.  We're back at square one again.  It's as if if I never sent it in.

There's no telling when or if MultiSim will get this problem solved.  Although I don't know the program's guts, I see this latest bug as a core flaw, as the multimeter is a staple of the program.

This program just does not work, and until it works I do not recommend it for anything other than proven designs and there only with reservation.  That is not how I'd intended for my company to use the program.

(I'm not going to recommend my company purchase this program until it works for me.  Currently I use the program only at home, as I could not justify continually being stopped from work at work by MultiSim's bugs.  Plus, I'd look bad if I recommended the purchase of a program that never works. 😉  Hence, I'm using my own personal purchase, an academic purchase that's spanned many years, where, of course, I get the latest version as part of my service contract.  This program has NEVER worked.  I've been using it since '00, since its first release.  ....you'd think, as much as I've fought with the program from the beginning, they'd make me a Beta tester by now.)

This said, I may upload the circuit to the forum and let you all give it a crack.  In my opinion, there is nothing proprietary about the design, far from it, and, technically, the design has never been on company property, even though in the end, it will be company property.

As I said, the design uses hierarchical blocks.  Therefore, if I upload it, it will require three uploads.  (I needed 1:16 multiplexers, so I made a 1:16 multiplexer using simple perfect analog switches and CMOS logic as a hierarchical block.  Then I did the same for a 2:1 multiplexer.) 

As I see it, uploading the design will not violate my contract, but I will check into it just the same.  But, as I see it, if MultiSim, the manufacturer of the program, can't help me while you may want to try...

P.S.  Is there anything involved with uploading hierarchical blocks to the forum?  As I see it they'd just be other files, but the circuit would need to have a correct path to retrieve them.
          

[lacy]

By chance are you using busses within you heirarchy blocks? Answer the question and I'll explain the reason behind it.

There is a size limit for posting circuits on the foum. If you would prefer, you can e-mail it to me at lacy@cwv.net. I promise to keep it confidential and just between us if you that would be more acceptable.

Message Edited by lacy on 08-26-2007 12:27 PM

[Euler's_Identity]

No, no busses are used.   I'm just using simple input and output lines, albeit loads of them.

Main circuit is 743kb

hb1 is 1kb, and hb2 is 342kb

I don't see any harm in emailing it to you.  Just give me feedback to let me know you got it, okay?  You'll see the thing is hardly proprietary.


 

[lacy]

O.K. thanks for answering. laProfe and I had found that if you use digital components inside subcircuits with busses then it won't simulate and returns an error. This is the reason I asked. I will take a look at your circuit, but I can't make any promises. If I would happen to find something I will be sure to lt you know. After all, you really have nothing to lose at this point, unforturnately.

Have a Nice day and thanks for trusting me with this.

[Euler's_Identity]

Lacy,

Fire in the hole!

[lacy]

I got it. It took me a little bit to get past your security measure, but I did it.