Other than JPI, who else is there?

Newps wrote:

That's not exactly why. I was a member of the Cessna Pilots Assoc at
the time and they had one of their senior people in the company at the
time come on to the CPA forums(CPA provides free membership to industry
reps) and basically tell everybody there they didn't know their ass from
a hole in the ground. Absolutely zero skills in interacting with the
customer. It's our way or the highway. My local avionics shop, which
is one of the largest in the experimental field, will tell you the same
thing. The upper management of JPI could not possibly care less what
you think and they let you know that at every opportunity. I wouldn't
have believed what they did on the CPA forums if I didn't see it for
myself. I will never put any of their crap in my plane.

That was back in 2005. I was in the market for an engine analyzer to go
with my new engine. When I questioned JPI tech support about their
proprietary data encoding, the response was pretty arrogant and defensive.
Basically, they told me their software would perform any function that any
other software package would do, so I shouldn't care if the data had
proprietary encoding. When I listed a few functions that EGView's software
could do that their's could not, they said they were working on adding those
functions (in other words, their original claim was a load of crap).

When I asked outright why I should not be able to choose how to analyze
the data that came from my monitor, I was told that JPI considered the data
that came from their monitor to belong to JPI. That was enough for me.

My experience with EI's customer support was exactly the opposite. I've
been flying behind my EI UBG-16 for 2 yrs./250 hrs. and couldn't be happier.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

JGalban via AviationKB.com u32749@uwe wrote:
: That was back in 2005. I was in the market for an engine analyzer to go
: with my new engine. When I questioned JPI tech support about their
: proprietary data encoding, the response was pretty arrogant and defensive.
: Basically, they told me their software would perform any function that any
: other software package would do, so I shouldn't care if the data had
: proprietary encoding. When I listed a few functions that EGView's software
: could do that their's could not, they said they were working on adding those
: functions (in other words, their original claim was a load of crap).

: When I asked outright why I should not be able to choose how to analyze
: the data that came from my monitor, I was told that JPI considered the data
: that came from their monitor to belong to JPI. That was enough for me.

: My experience with EI's customer support was exactly the opposite. I've
: been flying behind my EI UBG-16 for 2 yrs./250 hrs. and couldn't be happier.

: John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

Yeah, that kind of response would be enough to tell them to go f*ck themselves. Not too uncommon in the embedded
market though, sadly.

It's similar in the digital camera market as well. Many pieces of information in the EXIF and/or RAW data are
encoded via a proprietary algorithm. Some have even been encrypted. The response from the manufacturers have often been,
"That's our proprietary information and our software is enough for anyone." So they own the pictures a photographer takes?
Sounds like a load of crap to me and I won't support such companies.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

On Aug 21, 7:27 pm, wrote:

Yeah, that kind of response would be enough to tell them to go f*ck themselves. Not too uncommon in the embedded
market though, sadly.


The real turn off for me is JPI's constantly lying and misleading in
their marketing. They treat their customers like idiots. They act
like slimy used car salesmen. I find it insulting and unethical.
They tend to make outrageous claims and then lie that their
competitors can't do it; when in reality, they are usually playing
catchup.

If you have a choice between a known good which has a superior or
equal product (EI and probably others) and a company with a checkered
past (JPI), why not go with the known quantity. EI has an excellent
reputation and last I checked, their product was actually better than
JPI's; if only slightly.

On Sep 19, 4:02 pm, Greg Copeland wrote:
On Aug 21, 7:27 pm, wrote:

Yeah, that kind of response would be enough to tell them to go f*ck themselves. Not too uncommon in the embedded
market though, sadly.

The real turn off for me is JPI's constantly lying and misleading in
their marketing. They treat their customers like idiots. They act
like slimy used car salesmen. I find it insulting and unethical.
They tend to make outrageous claims and then lie that their
competitors can't do it; when in reality, they are usually playing
catchup.

If you have a choice between a known good which has a superior or
equal product (EI and probably others) and a company with a checkered
past (JPI), why not go with the known quantity. EI has an excellent
reputation and last I checked, their product was actually better than
JPI's; if only slightly.

And I forgot to mention, EI is usally about 25% - 33% less than a JPI
unless you can find a deal at one of the big aviation shows.