At 11:26 AM 12/17/96 -0500, you wrote:
>   Here at Duke University Neurobiology, we use a Noran Odyssey
>with a Silicon Graphics Indy front-end (Noran standard). We have
>technically intensive needs -- focal uncaging, patch clamping, and
>calcium imaging in brain slices -- and we are constantly testing the
>limits of Noran's software and hardware.
>
>   Throughout this process, our contacts at Noran have been very
>pleasant and helpful. When a problem arises, they always make
>efforts to identify the source, sometimes over the phone and
>sometimes by logging in to the machine remotely.
>
>   The system software is complex, and when problems arise they are
>more often with that than with hardware.  I am guessing that the story
>would be the same for the home-grown software used at at UCSD.
>Unfortunately, since they did not develop it, the Noran
>people might not be in the best position to be helpful in that regard.
>If I were buying from Noran (which I would!) I'd get the whole
>schmear.  And tell them Sam sent you.
>
>Dr. Sam Wang
>Laboratory of Dr. George Augustine
>Dept. of Neurobiology, Box 3209
>Duke University Medical Center
>Durham, NC 27710
>
>>At 10:51 AM 12/13/96 -0800, you wrote:
>>>>We are planning a grant to purchase a new confocal, presumably one with
>>>>faster acquisition (video rate?) and better sensitivity than our MRC600.  I
>>>>have been rereading some of the old traffic regarding what is the "best"
>>>>confocal in current opinion.  I have heard virtually nothing about the
>>>>Noran and Meridian instruments in comparison to Nikon, Zeiss, BIorad and
>>>>Leica.  Are they not worth the energy to investigate or do the users not
>>>>read this list?  Dave
>>>>
>>>>Dr. David Knecht
>>>>Department of Molecular and Cell Biology
>>>>University of Connecticut
>>>>U-125
>>>>Storrs, CT 06269
>>>>[log in to unmask]
>>>
>>>David,
>>>
>>>We have a Noran, and it has been no end of trouble. Part of our problem is
>>>that we have a non-standard Mac controller package that we bought instead
>>>of the Noran software. However, Noran has given us absolutely *awful*
>>>customer service. They are consistently rude when we call them, and they
>>>blame every problem that our confocal has (and it has many) on the
>>>software. I wouldn't buy anything from them.
>>>
>>>Jamie Eisenhart
>>>UCSD Neuroscience
>

Dear Confocalists,

Ok, I do not want to get into a public trashing of Noran, but since this is
about the 5th email to reference mine I feel that I should say something
more about our experiences.

Here in the Neurobiology group at UCSD, we have a Noran Odyssey that was
purchased about 4 years ago. I was not involved in the purchase, so my
understanding of those events is based on what other people have told me.
The root of our problems seems to be that we bought a non-standard Macintosh
controller package rather than the authorized PC package than Noran usually
sells. The Mac package was not written by us. It comes from a very nice,
extremely smart local guy who uses it to control his own Odyssey. I gather
that the reasons for chosing it were that 1) there were some limitations in
Noran's own software at the time, 2) we are mostly Mac-based here, and 3) no
one thought that the software was a very big deal.

In retrospect, all parties now admit that this was a serious mistake. The
Mac package has a worldwide installed user base of 2, with us being number
2. That's ok for the guy who wrote it; if there's a problem he can just dive
into the code and fix it. But it's not so great for us; our user base is
constantly turning over, and it is not to great for all of us to have to
deal with so many purely technical hassles.

So far none of this is Noran's fault. Here's where my & all of our problems
with them start. First, although Noran didn't write the Mac package, we did
actaully buy it from them. I gather that they licensed it from the author.
We believe that this means they have some obligation to stand behind the
product. Second, we have been paying about $10k/year for a service contract
with Noran. For this, we believe that we have a right to expect some service.

Instead, Noran has taken the position that because we didn't buy their
software, we are on our own. Whenever we have a problem, they tell us that
it is software rather than hardware, and we need to talk to the guy who
wrote it. I gather that initially they may have tried to work with us on
setup problems, but they have become frustrated with how often we call them.
However, this has not stopped them from taking our $10k/year (although it
now looks like they may not want to renew our service contract). Rather they
just refer us to this poor guy who is not getting paid anything to deal with
our problems and can't always drop whatever he is doing to come help us out.

In Noran's defense, I should say that most of our problems *have* been
caused by software rather than the hardware, and when our microscope
actually works the image quality is great. In my view, the problem is one of
attitude. We made this mistake (with their acquiescence) by buying a
non-standard setup. We can't buy their controller package now because it
costs $20k, even at wholesale. So what are we going to do about it? We here
have been trying our best to troubleshoot problems as they come up and get
them fixed so we can get on with our work. Noran seems to be mostly
interested in getting us out of their hair.

On the issue of rudeness, I gather that Noran also feels that a lot of our
problems come about because we are a bunch of silly biologists who don't
know anything about computers or microscopes. I will freely admit to being
quite silly, and I am trying very hard to become a biologist. BUT it happens
that I already know a lot about computers and have put a ton of effort into
learning about microscopes & confocals. So I have been exasperated when
people at Noran have refused to even listen to me describe a problem, but
instead have assumed that I just don't know what I'm talking about. This
happened in particular on an occasion when I spent an entire day on the
microscope preparing documentation of a serious image defect, only to find
out that our representative at Noran would not even look at the pictures
that I had sent him. The ostensible reason for this was that no one from
Noran he trained me on how to use the microscope, but the subtext clearly
was that the problem was me and not the microscope. I do not think that this
is an appropriate response from a company that we are paying $10k/year for
service. Moreover, there *was* a significant problem with the microscope
(software again, not hardware), and if the guy would have just spent 5
minutes looking at the pictures and talking to me he would have seen that.
Perhaps then he would have been able to offer some constructive suggestion
on how we might fix the problem. Instead, the microscope was down for
several months, and it has only gotten fixed through the personal, virtually
non-stop efforts of the chair of the biology department and one of his
postdocs over a 2 week period.

So that's been my & our experience. I would like to emphasize again that 1)
it was a mistake to buy a non-standard software package, 2) most of our
problems have been caused by this software rather than the Noran hardware,
and 3) we have no reason to think that anyone who does buy a complete
package from Noran would have as many problems as we have had. However,
Noran has not dealt with these problems very well, and it is as a
consequence of this that I say I wouldn't buy anything from them. Clearly
other people's experiences have been different, and it may be that if we had
a different representative or if we had set up a better mechanism for
communicating with them, things would have gone more smoothly. But our
experience here has been so frustrating and negative that I feel obliged to
say something. Hopefully no one else will have these problems, and Noran
will continue to make innovative microscopes for many years to come.

Sincerely,
Jamie Eisenhart
UCSD Neuroscience/Biology