Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Dear Robert,

As a 3rd party Ion & Solid State laser system and service provider; I do
understand
your many points in regards to Field Service. But, you have to understand
that the
knowledge attained in the field is not retained by "big companies" who pay
little salary
to those who work (sweat) so hard in the field. This results in a high
turn-over rate.

It is a tough job being that of the Field Engineer / Technician; and
juggling the many
"hats" one must wear with this prestigious title. Everything is always
broken, and you
are the one that will (and must) fix it; and save the day ;-). Unfortunately
you are the
last to know that the customer has been down for a week (or longer), and
they have
lost most (if not all) of their patience, and oh ya the factory has shipped
out the wrong
parts....or forgot all together.

If these large biotech companies would spread the wealth instead of lining
their
upper management pockets, or providing "golden parachutes", they would keep
their Field Engineers & the invaluable knowledge they posses. These hard
working
individuals are the true recipients of the what the customer really thinks
about the
company and the products they sell. They are the ones who have the
invaluable
feedback, that management always ignores. (Too bad for big companies)

This is the very same knowledge that you pay for, with these high prices -
Without
this knowledge, their product & warranty support, is not worth the paper it
is written on.

As for the "performance specification" information, I agree this is a must
!! And I find
it hard to believe that they do not provide this information to you.

As a manufacturer who has sold and serviced over 5,000 laser systems...over
15 years
of being in the business...We do NOT sell, or service a laser system,
without providing the
customer a complete detailed Specification sheet. This valuable piece of
paper has all of
the required system perimeters listed. So if there is a future problem; both
the Customer
and the Vendor have a logical starting place.

Another point to mention is the lack of proper laser training. These big
companies all
purchase their laser systems as OEM's, and do not properly train all of
their field engineers
on this very important part of the equipment. The laser "light source" is
the engine of the
machine, and a very expensive one at that.

These big companies would rather sell you another expensive "light bulb"
than simply
clean, or re-align the one you have. No ethics always strengthens the bottom
line.

Well you wanted to here from a manufacturer ;-)...We are not a big company
listed
on NASDAQ, or on the "Forbes 500"....

But, we have plenty of common sense.

Best Regards,

R. Eric King
OEM Sales & Marketing Manager
[log in to unmask]
www.laserinnovations.com
www.solidimaging.com

Laser Innovations
668 Flinn Avenue
Suite #22
Moorpark, CA 93021-2074
805.529.5864 tel
805.529.6358 fax

"No man knows what price he pays for substandard parts, or slipshod service,

 until fate adds the cost of tragedy to his bill." - Jon B. Cooper

Camarillo, CA


Robert Zucker wrote:

> Search the CONFOCAL archive at
> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>
> Confocal Service variability
> We have had a Leica TCD-4D and a Leica TCS-SP1 for the last 8 years.
> Currently I feel that the Leica service organization is the best it has
> been over that eight-year period.  Contrary to what Karl has said
> regarding Leica service, I feel the current the service director is very
> responsive and I believe is doing the best he can to operate an
> effective service organization for the customer needs in USA bearing in
> mind that it is a foreign owned company that controls the product
> development, design, service and almost all other aspects of the
> product. I have personally found him to be responsive to my concerns.
> The Leica technician, John Zhang is a college graduate in bioengineering
> from a respected US University. He has provided excellent service to our
> institution in his three visits to our laboratory.  I would gladly have
> him service our machine in the future. I would request his service for
> difficult problems and have a high regard for his ability to problem
> solve technical problems.
>
> Why is there a difference of opinion on the service organization between
> two knowledgeable users of similar confocal equipment?
>
>  I feel the problem lies with the foreign manufactures and their lack of
> providing consistent protocols to their service technicians. In America,
> all point scanning confocal machines that are sold are built and
> developed by foreign companies. These include the following:  Biorad
> (England) Nikon (Japan) Olympus (Japan) Leica (Germany) and Zeiss
> (Germany). These companies build the equipment and supply the necessary
> protocols to their technicians to insure that their equipment is
> functioning correctly. However there are NO published performance
> specifications on the equipment from these companies. Therefore
> technicians go into the field without performance specifications, which
> may result in an inadequate knowledge on how to set up, align and fix
> these machines.  Sometimes they succeed in repairing the machines to
> acceptable subjective standards and sometimes they don't succeed in
> solving the repair problems leaving the core operator very frustrated.
> I believe this is the reason for the difference of opinion between
> competent investigators about personnel in a specific service
> organization.
>
> It seems the service performed are evaluated by subjective criteria and
> that is why a technician may not sometimes be able to adequately solve a
> problem.  Where are the performance specifications for the machines? To
> my knowledge not one of these manufacturers has a published set of
> criteria or standards by which the investigator can insure his machine
> is functioning properly. Thus it does not appear that service
> technicians in the field have reliable published performance
> specifications in their hands for the machines they are repairing.
> Therefore I do not believe it is fair to hold an American service
> manager or a technician responsible for the deficiencies of a foreign
> company who has not provided the proper criteria to the service
> organization to insure the machine is properly functioning. I think our
> focus should be on the manufacturer and not the service technicians in
> America who are trying to do the best they can without performance
> specifications and specific protocols from the confocal manufacturers.
> As a scientific community we should demand that these manufacturers
> provide better criteria to insure our machines are functioning to the
> level they were designed to perform at. They all are great machines when
> they work properly.
>
> We would gladly like any manufactures to comment to this confocal user
> group on why there are NO performance specifications on their high
> priced machines. This is not a subjective science and our data is
> important to us and it should be not only be accurate but also
> reproducible between different laboratories. Contrary to some opinion --
> It is not only about Pretty Pictures. Some of us take measurements from
> the machines and ask the machines to do critical things for our research
> that require an aligned and properly functioning machine. Where are the
> performance specifications on these machines?.
> Bob
>
> Robert M. Zucker, PhD
> U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
> Office of Research and Development
> National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
> Reproductive Toxicology Division, MD 72
> Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27711
> Tel: 919-541-1585; fax 919-541-4017
> e-mail: [log in to unmask]