The people who say that getting a summary from the boss is helpful are, of course, correct. I often find that something is gained in the translation, especially with non-technical folks.

That is to say, my message goes astray not because of what I said or didn't say, but because of the assumptions and misconceptions they bring to the conversation. Many non-technical people miss the connections between technical systems and their business activities, and assume that the computer can "figure out" the gaps in the requirements or the errors in the data. When we explain that the system is having a particular problem, they can't answer the "how does that affect me?" question, or they assume that they can work around the problem.

One system we put in was specified for a 3-day recovery time in case of system failure because the records were not "delivered in real time". They screamed after the first hour because they didn't make the connection between the data entry backlog that had them working 60-hour weeks and system availability (they assumed we meant that the reports would be delayed three days, not the data entry). I learned to explain how technical issues touch business activities.

It may be that your boss is interested in a productivity metric or cost that seems to him independent of your issues. You'll need to follow the thread past tech and into operational impacts to make those connections for him, then he'll get much more interested in managing the situation. We all have our expertise and our blind spots, or as Nero Wolfe put it, opportunities for snobbery. Consider objectively your business literacy in comparison to the boss's computer literacy, and see if you can help each other overcome blind spots. Not only will you make this boss better at understanding you, you'll be bettter equipped to manage the next boss.