Hot take: Remote diagnostics vs. on-site visits for small business clients

I had a client last month with a server that kept crashing at 3 PM every day. The easy call was to remote in and check event logs, which I did. But after 3 days of that, I still couldn't pin down the glitch. I finally drove 45 minutes to their office in Medford, and in 20 minutes I found a dusty power supply fan that was overheating the RAM. That got me thinking: is the time saved on remote work worth missing those physical clues? On one hand, remote saves gas and lets me handle more jobs per week. On the other, being there in person catches stuff no software can see. I ended up charging them for 4 remote hours plus a site visit, which felt like double dipping but the client was happy. Has anyone else dealt with deciding between remote and in-person for a tricky fix?

3 comments

3 Comments

reese_nelson9h ago

Isn't relying on remote diagnostics just lazy troubleshooting that misses obvious physical problems every time?

jamesm389h agoMost Upvoted

Over at my shop we had a '94 F150 come in last month that the remote diagnostic said was just a bad alternator. @reese_nelson you're spot on, we popped the hood and found a cracked ground cable you could see from the driveway. Makes you wonder how many other simple fixes get missed when people skip the visual check.

elliot_johnson317h ago

Ain't it possible both tools have their place depending on the situation?