Steven Critchfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >Not exactly. The complaint here was that if a call was parked the user >thought they had to wait for the timeout to have the call bounce back to >their phone. My comment was that the user was just as capable of dialing >the parked call as the intended transfer target, thus removing the wait >for timeout. > Which is exactly what I said, but let's not start an argument over who said what - suffice it to conclude we're still talking about the same topic ;-)
>> Which is a completely and utterly wrong answer to users complaining >> about usability. > >Not always. Sometimes it is absolutely necessary. > Is there anything absolutely necessary, probably caused by *'s design, that mandates that old-fashioned transfer mechanisms shouldn't work? >This is where it might come down to redesigning the way calls are dealt >with in an organization. Sometimes new phone systems do this, and >hopefully the company sees new efficiencies with dealing with the >customer in general. > Oh, I'm fully aware of the value of AA, IVR, and whatnot. In fact, we're working hard to implement this in the various companies I'm involved with. But it will not completely eliminate all transfers, and I must say that it's not up to the 'technologists' to decide how this then should be handled (barring some hard technological limits, budget limitations, etcetera). If a customer wants to do old-fashioned, out-of-date, stupid stuff like faxing, flash-transfers or wearing digital watches, we may object, protest, and call the customer a [expletive deleted]; but then we should shrug and implement the damn thing. >All phones more complicated than a home phone start as a barrier to a >new user. So does that thing usually on the right of the keyboard. >Eventually they learn to use it and understand it, if it was implemented >well to begin with. > So you throw Linux at people's desktops and say "stop whining, you'll adapt eventually"? Or Macs, for that matter? Steering users towards new behavior is ok. Ramming it down their throats never works (and I should know - I've been in the 'convert people from Word to StarOffice' market, it is always a matter of a lot of patience, and the ONLY thing that finally gets them across is the promise of compatibility). >[...] Also on >the occasions I have to park a call, I can usually walk over to the >person about to answer the call and give them the quick 10 second >briefing before they take the call. > We're completely virtual, we don't even have an office. I'd need to hop in the car and drive for well over an hour to reach some colleagues ;-) But the issue is not: 'how does the alternative feature work', the issue is 'why is the original feature absent'. I haven't heard anyone giving any reason whatsoever why * does not allow a user to retrieve an on-hold call with old-fashioned flashing (or pressing #). I think that is what the debate should focus on, not on whether the customer is right... -- Cees de Groot http://www.tric.nl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> tric, the new way helpdesk/ticketing software, VoIP/CTI, web applications, custom development _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
