Verizon FiOS TV → Re: IMG 1.9 is live!!

That's really my point. Verizon didn't plan well for the call volume if they are getting more calls than expected. They should have anticipated more than usual. They should have staffed up the call centers with temps to handle 'how to select the right format', or 'how to change the format if you chose incorrectly' calls that must be the large percentage of calls.

I think you're missing it here. Yes, they anticipate additional calls, but in terms of planning, you go by what your metrics dictate. In other words, if I plan for a deployment, I have an expectation of what that call increase will be. If my experience is right in line with my expectations, then all is good. My deployment plan is a good one.

But if the call volume is an order of magnitude greater than history has told me is normal for this type of deployment, then something is wrong. There's one part of their plan that is out of whack. It's totally valid to assess the situation and say 'where did we go wrong with our plan?' and to fix it before moving forward.

That's what they're doing. It's not a matter of not planning for enough callers. That's not it at all. Their plan said that they should expect x number of calls following a deployment like this, and instead they're getting far greater than x. That means that something in their deployment is amiss. I guess I'm struggling to understand why them delaying deployment while they fix it is such a bad thing.

Let's put it this way. Let's say they just roll with it - they decide 'you know what, we HAVE to make this schedule come hell or high water, so just ADD the staff we need to field the calls!' Let's set aside the fact that you would have to also upgrade their phone system, likely, to be able to adequately handle the volume. So, they start planning based on what they've seen in THIS deployment... how many people would they have to add to handle a huge increase in phone calls? Is it realistic to really add THAT many people? Probably not.

Again, I don't know what their actual call volumes are as measured against what they expected. Is it possible that their expectations were unreasonably low? Maybe... but doubtful. They have a track record (historical metrics) on what such a deployment takes. All planning of this type is based off such metrics. So they're planning according to what the metrics are telling them.

Are they overreacting? That's certainly a possibility - meaning that the call volume really isn't THAT much higher than expectations and Verizon's just being anal about the whole thing. It wouldn't shock me if this was a part of it - Verizon seems to be pretty risk-averse when it comes to this stuff. But more likely, in my mind, is that the call volume far excedes what they expected. If that's the case (and I have no reason to doubt that it is) then why exactly is it unreasonable for them to fix that before the roll-out hits markets that will just magnify the pain for them and for their customers? Especially if the fix is THIS easy to make. They're updating (if what's reported here is accurate) what the user sees when they first get 1.9. You're not talking about a fundamental change in the s/w. They changed it in the middle of the beta without much effort. I really don't see this change as being a biggie. And if you can make it, without delaying things too much, and it prevents further pain, why wouldn't you do it? It makes no sense to just move forward knowing all that.

Here's why I feel it's a biggie.

1.9 is a pre-requisite for any other improvement in service. Things are basically at a standstill until it's complete.

Any serious channel expansion is going to require 1.9 due to the MPEG4 support. Any of the goodies that were shown off at CES this year like device streaming are likely going to require 1.9 (and even if they don't, Verizon isn't going to run two projects at once.)

We are over 3 weeks out from the first DAC with no progress. There are 5 dac's to go. Even if they started again next week (which sounds optimistic at this point) and did one DAC a week (pretty much the most aggressive schedule they've ever done), we would be into June before 1.9 is completed. I would say more realistically, we are looking at the early to mid July for completion at this point.

So, most likely, we aren't going to see any significant channel adds until late summer/ early fall and who knows if we'll see any of the streaming apps for mobile devices before the end of this year even.

That's why this seems silly to a lot of us. The SD Override is such a minor hiccup in the grand scheme of things and it's derailing Verizon's plans for major enhancements this year that are required to keep a competitive edge. Hell, my box won't even retain my SD Override setting for more than a week as it is without getting reset to 1080i on 1.8 and I would be surprised if I'm alone there. So, I would think customers would already be accustomed to going and setting the thing up themselves by now.

I don't want to keep swirling on this, but you have to stop thinking of this as a technical issue. It's NOT the SD override. It's that the initialization when the s/w loads is causing user confusion, leading to an inordinate call volume. Don't get hung up on the fact that TJ called in an SD override issue. As to whether the issue is minor or not - again, you're looking at it from a technical perspective. That's not what's at issue here. It's what could be considered a 'user acceptance' issue - although it's not really that either. If they get a slew of phone calls, it doesn't matter if the issue is a technical non-starter. That's an indicator of an issue SOMEWHERE that needs to be addressed.

I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but what are you measuring this against? Did the original plan call for a 3 week gap between the first set and the second? How much over plan are we? Do you even know how much of a delay this is really likely to cause? You simply don't have enough information here. You can't say that this issue is causing an undo delay because you don't know what their original plan was! All that you can say with what you've seen is that the roll-out is going slower than you would have liked to have seen. Whether that's due to this issue or their original plan, you have no idea. Neither do I. I have no inside information. I'm just making educated guesses based on what I've seen with 1.9, and with what I know about this particular issue.

Look the people who don't have 1.9 are frustrated. Right or wrong they are frustrated and disappointed. Anything you or VZ says won't make that any better.

I say lets just move along because only VZ getting 1.9 down the pipe will resolve the situation.

I'm not measuring against anything. This is the reality of the situation. Even if they start next week and do one DAC a week it will be June until the last DAC is done. No, I don't know what their original plans for this rollout are of if they are behind them, or even if they are going to restart next week. I do know that they keep telling us that dozens of HD channels are coming "soon." They've been telling us that since Feb. As far as anyone has been able to determine, the only way they are going to be able to keep that promise is with MPEG4 and we know 1.9 is required for MPEG4.

Keep in mind that Verizon publicly said last year that 1.9 would launch before the end of 2010. So, they are unquestionably behind their original plans at this point.

I appreciate that Verizon does move faster than anyone else in the industry seems to move for certain things. I worry that they are going to be left behind when it comes to their competitors when it comes to channel lineup. I miss the days of being able to point at the local comast lineup and laugh at it. Nowadays, I get to be jealous of some of the stations that they have and I don't.

You are measuring it against something. For example, how much of a delay is this issue causing? Do you know? Unless you're working the 1.9 deployment you don't because you don't know what the original roll-out plan was. How do you even know this has caused ANY delay? Do you know that they've missed any milestons so far because of this issue? I don't. All they've said is that they've hit an issue and they're pausing in the deployment to fix it. We don't know how long that pause is going to be or if it even puts their original roll-out plan in jeopardy.

"They should have staffed up the call centers with temps to handle 'how to select the right format', or 'how to change the format if you chose incorrectly' calls that must be the large percentage of calls."

You are happy to absorb this cost into your monthly charge?

Hob