Ryder,
I have no idea why you have to take such a condescending tone with anyone who says D-Link is not treating customer’s right. Many users check the forums ever so often to see if D-Link has followed-up on their promises to fix certain problems. When we discover those problems are not fixed, why should we not post our thoughts and products that we find that deliver what D-Link promised?
If the products work for you great, I am glad for you. I don’t understand why that makes you feel so superior to people who have had a product rendered useless for their purpose by D-Link. I also don’t understand why you waste everyone’s time posting in a thread regarding a problem that you have admitted does not affect you.
Hope you don’t have a problem with nose bleeds while you charge at your windmills on your high horse.
Jordiboy,
You sure do seem to enjoy taking a small part of a post and running with it, so here is the last reply that I will post on this subject. Maybe then the post will revert back to telling Dlink that we would like to see this problem (and others) solved in some way. The thread did start out that way, with that intent, and even offered a few "workarounds" to the problem that worked for some folks, in the first few pages here. Then *someone* started in with the "practically useless", "last Dlink product", "showstopper", "don't know why I even try or hold out hope that D-Link will resolve this problem" types of unhelpful, disruptive posts on page 4. Why would Dlink even bother to try to make customers happy when that is the kinds of posts they have to read! Good thing there are other people on here that wrote Dlink some posts of encouragement, to continue to try and find the problem and hopefully fix it. So here is my last post on some people and their "ridiculous behavior" on this forum!
1. Condescending? Superior? Hardly! I consider myself to be no better/worse than anyone else on this forum! I totally agree with posting a complaint when it takes an inordinately long time to fix a problem. The difference is, I do try to see both sides of the coin, even when I have the same problem as others. But, when I see comments like this next one, I find them useless and counter-productive. And WHEN did I admit that this problem has no affect on me???
"D-Link's response will be "the Synology is more expensive", but if D-Link had just taken care of the permission problem, I would have upgraded to the DNS-343 which is within a few dollars of the Synology."
Dlink is right to say the Synology unit comparable to the 321 IS more expensive. And what does this have to do with the 343, isn't this discussion about the 321? As far as I know, and I'm not 100% certain on this, the 343 is based on the 323, and that unit does not have the same problem as the 321.
"The fact that D-Link cares so little about their customers has really turned me into a former D-Link user."
This comment draws the assumption that they care so little about their customers in general, based on what? I have seen Dlink post many many fixes to other problems. But because this particular one hasn't been fixed, so then a blanket statement about Dlink caring so little about their customers is in order here? I think not. Also, if as you said, you are a "former Dlink customer", why are you still here posting unsubstantiated comments? Shouldn't you be on Synology's forums, exclaiming the virtues of that product and flaming Dlink on that forum? Or is it that you feel that you have some kind of right to flame Dlink on their own forum, much like I feel I have the right to say that comments like yours are ridiculous and do not contribute to either finding a workaround to the problem, or solving it. Yes, you have the right to tell Dlink that you would still like the problem to be fixed, that it's been a very long time since the first post and you see no results yet. And you are unhappy about it, much like I am, and have already stated.
NAS = Network Attached Storage. The product is not useless by the very definition of it's name and purpose. It stores my files, in a place that is attached to my network, just as it says it will do. Part of the firmware is now not working properly for SOME people. Not "many" as some have claimed, but have no way to prove.
And finally, yet another comment: "Look at it this way, it only took D-Link about a year to release this firmware upgrade. Maybe by the time they get around to making this work properly, 5TB drives will be $100 each". And you say that my posts are wasting people's time regarding a firmware problem?
Here are some examples of helpful comments, helpful to Dlink, to show them what their customers want and expect from their units.
"I hope that the behavior will be revisited for the next release of the firmware. I'd really like to have that back...
"Yes, please add it back! Beta or whatever but we're crying for it! I'm just hoping it would be less than a year till we see it."
"I'm with everyone else that not having this feature is a pretty major bug and we're not able to use the NAS the way we'd like because of it. I hope this is near the top of the list on features to be worked on by the team." "With that said, thanks to D-Link for the newest firmware release. Glad D-Link is still behind supporting what can be a great product."
"I'd be happy to see some kind of expert mode or "compatibility mode" that allows mixed shares, maybe with a warning popup that dissuades most users from turning it on."
"To my knowledge, this issue has still not been addressed in an official firmware release. It was reported 14 months ago. I add my vote, as an owner of this product, that this is important to me and I want it addressed."
"I'd like to see this corrected, but there was a dance about how it was difficult to do with the present version of SAMBA. I was disappointed when the ability was removed..."
"The frustrating part is that D-Link engineers acknowledged this as a bug in January 2009 and promised a fix in the next firmware. The reason I continue posting is to try to get D-Link to deliver the firmware fix they promised. I still own my DNS-321, I like the design and hardware, and I want it to run as-advertised."
Do you see how these comments from people tell Dlink that they are unhappy customers and would like to have a function restored to their units? And how they are somewhat constructive comments. They do not whine at Dlink and tell them that they have not fixed the problem, so the "former customer" has moved on and bought something else from some other company, and how wonderful the competitor's product is. And then continued the discussion of the merits and prices of the competitor's units. Do you realize that in some forums it is not even allowed to mention a competitor's product, and doing so will get your posts edited or deleted completely? Dlink's forums are not the place to discuss the competitor's products at length, and how wonderful they are, etc etc. And it is not the place to make unsubstantiated claims about how Dlink doesn't care about their customers because there is a bug that they haven't fixed. That, Jordiboy, is what I find ridiculous!
I too have found things I believe are "bugs" in their firmware. And there are things that I think should work differently than they do now. But I don't believe that it helps anyone to claim that they don't care about anyone. Nor that I am now a "former customer", but continue to post here and hype the virtues of another company's product.
Maybe you find a problem with my posts because I try to be fair to Dlink, and I am not on your "slam Dlink" bandwagon? But, as you are entitled to post here and do your slamming, I am entitled to post too, in hopes of showing people that Dlink is not so "horrible and uncaring" as some would make them out to be. A little balance is a good thing I believe. And, if you do not like my posts and the way they add balance to this thread, then you are surely entitled not to read them, just gloss over them and continue on, as I try to do with your posts! And I really do hope that Dlink sees fit to cap this thread after this as it seems to be doing nobody any good anymore!
Again, just my 2 cents (or nickel if charging by volume,
), as I too am entitled to post.
Ryder
Author
Topic: Permissions for "all"/anonymous (Read 82925 times)