I was recently tasked with upgrading the software licenses on one of the products we use at the office—I won't use the real name, but let's call it "Vim"—to a version that works with the latest version of OSX. While a less detail-oriented person might buy one key outright and slap it onto as many computers as one could get away with, I prefer the high road where my employer isn't exposed to liability, and instead chose to upgrade (less cost) existing licenses that would become redundant.
The process should be reasonably simple. Vim's website has a portal that tracks all of the licenses I've purchased in the past, and when I go to their store website to purchase upgrade licenses, it requires me to log in and select which previous-version licenses I want to upgrade to.
Assuming all of my previous licenses were properly registered (which by today they were after a bit of work a couple of months ago), this upgrade purchase is straightforward enough. In and of itself, this worked fine for me.
After making the purchase, I am taken to a receipt page that makes reference to the fact that I've used a credit card, though it only says the total and nowhere does it actually say "paid". I printed it out anyway and hope it's sufficient to serve as a 'receipt' for our accounting department.
The important part, though, is the confirmation e-mail I then received. This looks like a typical invoice, with a listing of what I've purchased, subtotal, etc. There's a column for the product name, a column for the download button, a column for the license key, and price, and quantity.
The only thing is, there was only one line, with one license key and a quantity of 4.
This is where things started to break down. Some frustration:
For a normal software product, this would be fine. You'd use the license key they sent you and install it on up to four computers.
But I knew something was up. I had learned in a previous encounter with "Vim" that they do not have volume licensing or bulk licenses. So why did they just send me a license key with a quantity of 4?
My curiosity got the better of me, and I logged back in to the Vim portal and saw that the license key from the confirmation e-mail wasn't listed among my keys.
The customer support person I was talking with on the phone during much of this process was never able to tell me what the deal is with that code, other than telling me that it isn't a valid license key when I forwarded it.
Luckily, I don't rely solely on Vim's license key portal to track my licenses; I also use a custom-built license key database, which enables me to quickly notice that some of the licenses now in my portal weren't there before.
More frustration:
Meanwhile, there was an "alert" in the Vim license key portal which I would never have seen unless I went back in to the portal (which, seeing the license key in the e-mail, why would I?). The alert told me that three license keys had been generated for my recent order, and it listed the license keys. None of these were the same as the one in my e-mail.
Back in the license key portal, I was able to track down these three, as well as a fourth license key that was new (which also wasn't the one I received in the e-mail). I went back to my e-mail to see if there was something I missed.
"Sure enough, there was fine print in the confirmation e-mail that indicated that this was a temporary license key and four new keys would be generated in my license portal" is what you'd expect to read next, but alas this was not the case. Not only did the confirmation message give no indication that this was not the license key associated with my purchase, but there was also no separate e-mail to inform me that these new keys were created.
Having found my license keys, I decided to stop digging and quit while I was ahead. After verifying that my license portal did indeed show four (not three) new license keys that were purchased today which didn't show up in my own database, I concluded my call with the customer support person.
I had already wasted enough time by this point, but being the altruistic guy that I am, not wishing this situation on anyone else (especially one who might unwittingly try to install the license on multiple computers), I found the website feedback form on Vim's website and sent in my feedback and suggestions on how they can improve their messaging. (Imagine finding that you've installed this license key on various computers and after a while they stop working because it was the wrong license key and you have to track all those installations down!)
As is usual with such customer support encounters, I received an e-mail from my Indian correspondent advising me that the ticket was now closed and I could forward the ticket-closed e-mail to the licensing e-mail address for the company.
Which I did.
I copied and pasted my website feedback and sent it to the e-mail address cited in the e-mail from the customer support person.
More frustration:
Then I got an e-mail saying that that account didn't exist. I triple checked that I spelled the address exactly the way as it was given to me.
I decided then to reply to the customer support person and advise that the licensing e-mail address did not work.
More frustration:
After replying to the customer support person, I received an automated response indicating that I was replying to a closed support ticket, and therefore my e-mail would not be accepted. I could log in to a support portal (which may or may not be the same as the licensing portal) to find my support ticket and reopen it. Or I could contact them by phone.
At this point, I'd done as much as I had the patience for to try to give Vim some feedback on improving their customer communications. After all, by this point, I was trying to submit feedback to someone about a broken feedback mechanism to which they had directed me in order for me to give feedback on another feedback mechanism.
With this amount of Catch-22s, the only thing my feedback could possibly do is give more ideas to the evil twin of Douglas Adams—who must have designed these systems—to adjust any part of the process that wasn't sufficiently frustrating.
My initial feedback did, as far as I know, make it through their website feedback form, and I can only hope that it isn't used against me.
- RG>
Showing posts with label corporations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label corporations. Show all posts
Monday, December 14, 2015
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Hiding in the FedEx logo is something you might not have noticed...
No, not the arrow between the E and the x. Everyone knows about that. Can you see what the other thing is?
It's that FedEx is short for "Federal Express", but some marketing idiot figured it would be good to add another "Express" on to the end for good measure. I guess this is for the division of Federal Express that actually is Express and the other trucks all say 'FedEx / Eventually".
- RG>
It's that FedEx is short for "Federal Express", but some marketing idiot figured it would be good to add another "Express" on to the end for good measure. I guess this is for the division of Federal Express that actually is Express and the other trucks all say 'FedEx / Eventually".
- RG>
Friday, November 08, 2013
One big CFL scam
Sorry football fans (and critics), this is about Coompact Fluorescent Lightbulbs, not the Canadian Football League.
I think I've documented previously that I can be obsessive about things. (In ironic contradiction to that claim, I'm not going to bother linking to an illustrative previous blog post.) I also like having some sort of validation (even anecdotal) of claims I make or causes I defend. That is to say, I am a critical thinker.
In this vein, I didn't vigorously defend the little mercury buggers when a certain friend of mine, the kind who, on principle, doesn't use a green bin, told me that he switched back to incandescent bulbs after trying a set of CFLs.
He told me he tried CFL bulbs once but it didn't last nearly as long as it was promised to last, so he switched back to incandescents. For those of you just joining this decade, compact fluorescent lightbulbs are those little curly bulbs that are supposed to provide the same amount of light for about a quarter of the electricity, thus saving you more money than the much higher cost than traditional incandescent light bulbs.
Like a good little environmentalist sycophant, I use the bulbs and generally go along with the groupthink that they're better. (There are various arguments about the mercury contained in the bulbs vs the amount of mercury released in the generation of electricity for the less efficient incandescents, but since I don't have air conditioning I like that they don't put off as much heat)
For the record, my friend also complained that they took longer to get to turn on (and, subsequently, to get to full brightness). I no longer notice this myself (i.e. I've gotten used to it) but I must admit that it does take a second or so for the lights to come on.
But about the price, I wanted to contradict my friend, and tell him that the lights are rated for many years, so he must have gotten a dud. And the bulbs have gotten better since he would have tried them. But I wanted to be able to say this with the confident knowledge that my own experiences with the things were consistent with this claim.
This was a problem.
Sure, one remembers generally replaces the lights in one's house, but given how long they last, who can really say with confidence how long any particular one lasts?
This guy, that's who.
For the last couple years, I've been writing in fine-tip Sharpie the date of purchase and installation on my lightbulbs, and hanging on to the packaging (which is necessary anyway because I need a way to stockpile the old bulbs, since I don't get anywhere near any place that takes returns of these things, even though there are plenty of places that sell them)
Lo and behold, tonight I replaced a bulb in my bedroom ceiling fixture, and written on the bulb was "purchased 2012-10-28 Home Hardware Glebe, installed same". It was from a Sylvania 3-pack of 100-watt equivalents, and the other two bulbs were still fresh in the package in my closet. Incidentally, to my friend's point, the packaging has a little "Instant On" sticker.
My bulb's usage did not have any of the contraindications: no "dimmer, electronic timer or photocell, illuminated switch, totally enclosed recessed luminaires, or where directly exposed to the weather". So, being just barely a year old, it died well before it's 9-year warranty. The fine print on that is based on "normal household usage in accordance with package and bulb directions", which is to say an average of 3 hours a day, 7 days a week.
I figure I use my bedroom light for more than 3 hours a day, but I'm pretty confident I don't use it for 27 hours a day, which is what would be needed to reach the bulb's 10,000 hour lifespan.
So okay, the bulb died and the warranty obviously applies. So where do I get my replacement? Turn back to the fine print on the side of the box: "if this bulb does not last for the time period guaranteed...return bulb, proof of purchase, register receipt and your name and address to OSRAM SYLVANIA Inc, 435 E. Washington St., Winchester, KY 40391-2298. OSRAM SYLVANIA will replace the bulb. This replacement is the sole remedy available, and LIABILITY FOR DIRECT, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES IS HEREBY EXPRESSLY EXCLUDED [except in states where we're not allowed to exclude it]..." (all-caps original)
So for a set of three bulbs I bought for $14.99 plus tax, I'm going to have to spend how much to ship the bulb to fucking KENTUCKY?!? And that's just the first bulb; if I only use the other two one after the other, I'll have to wait another two years at the current rate to get through them to send all three back together. I mean, if I send in the proof of purchase etc with only the first bulb, I won't be able to get replacements when the other two die prematurely. But what if the other two bulbs last 4 years each? Then by the time I ship them back the warranty period will have been over, despite each bulb lasting less than half its expected lifetime.
But do you know how much it costs to ship things to the U.S.? I'm guessing somewhere between five and ten bucks at the slowest, cheapest rate. And then what? I'll get another bulb that will last a year, and for thirty bucks I'd have three bulbs plus three replacements that lasted for a combined total of 6 years when each one was supposed to last for nine?
I think my skeptical friend may be on to something, since thirty bucks could buy many many years' worth of incandescents (or would have, had Dalton McGuinty not banned them).
So let's summarize:
- bulbs don't last anywhere near warranty
- it costs as much or more to claim warranty as to just buy new bulbs
- BlackBerry's autoreplace changes correctly-spelled words for no reason
- you're not supposed to throw them out due to mercury, but there's you can't take spent ones back to where you bought them (for places downtown, at least)
- I'm still going to be using them
That last one is for two reasons: one, the heat factor. Two, they're still cheaper.
As five bucks a pop, if we assume 3 hours a day 7 days a week, and if we assume 5 cents a Kilowatt-hour, these 23-watt "100-watt equivalent" bulbs save me $4.21 per year over incandescents. Factor in the fact that I likely use it more than 3 hours a day and 5 cents a kWh is the rate before your hydro bill gets more than doubled by fees and taxes, it still saves me money.
So then the only unresolved question is, how do I punish Sylvania for this? I've already spent an hour writing this blog post, so that could be $20 or so of my own time. Why not go all out and play into their game. Here are some ideas:
- send the bulb in a bubble envelope so it will most likely arrive broken when they open the package
- waste at least as much of their time on the phone and responding to emails so their payroll costs match what I paid
- send by UPS with paperwork that triggers UPS to charge the recipient the fixed customs fee of $40
- hire a lawyer to sue them for $15 (hm... or a class-action...)
- send Sylvania a Canadian football
Ah, but this is all a pipe dream. Truth is, just like those weasels gambled, I don't really care to do anything about it, over a five-dollar-a-year investment in lightbulbs.
Except blog about it.
- RG>
I think I've documented previously that I can be obsessive about things. (In ironic contradiction to that claim, I'm not going to bother linking to an illustrative previous blog post.) I also like having some sort of validation (even anecdotal) of claims I make or causes I defend. That is to say, I am a critical thinker.
In this vein, I didn't vigorously defend the little mercury buggers when a certain friend of mine, the kind who, on principle, doesn't use a green bin, told me that he switched back to incandescent bulbs after trying a set of CFLs.
He told me he tried CFL bulbs once but it didn't last nearly as long as it was promised to last, so he switched back to incandescents. For those of you just joining this decade, compact fluorescent lightbulbs are those little curly bulbs that are supposed to provide the same amount of light for about a quarter of the electricity, thus saving you more money than the much higher cost than traditional incandescent light bulbs.
Like a good little environmentalist sycophant, I use the bulbs and generally go along with the groupthink that they're better. (There are various arguments about the mercury contained in the bulbs vs the amount of mercury released in the generation of electricity for the less efficient incandescents, but since I don't have air conditioning I like that they don't put off as much heat)
For the record, my friend also complained that they took longer to get to turn on (and, subsequently, to get to full brightness). I no longer notice this myself (i.e. I've gotten used to it) but I must admit that it does take a second or so for the lights to come on.
But about the price, I wanted to contradict my friend, and tell him that the lights are rated for many years, so he must have gotten a dud. And the bulbs have gotten better since he would have tried them. But I wanted to be able to say this with the confident knowledge that my own experiences with the things were consistent with this claim.
This was a problem.
Sure, one remembers generally replaces the lights in one's house, but given how long they last, who can really say with confidence how long any particular one lasts?
This guy, that's who.
For the last couple years, I've been writing in fine-tip Sharpie the date of purchase and installation on my lightbulbs, and hanging on to the packaging (which is necessary anyway because I need a way to stockpile the old bulbs, since I don't get anywhere near any place that takes returns of these things, even though there are plenty of places that sell them)
Lo and behold, tonight I replaced a bulb in my bedroom ceiling fixture, and written on the bulb was "purchased 2012-10-28 Home Hardware Glebe, installed same". It was from a Sylvania 3-pack of 100-watt equivalents, and the other two bulbs were still fresh in the package in my closet. Incidentally, to my friend's point, the packaging has a little "Instant On" sticker.
My bulb's usage did not have any of the contraindications: no "dimmer, electronic timer or photocell, illuminated switch, totally enclosed recessed luminaires, or where directly exposed to the weather". So, being just barely a year old, it died well before it's 9-year warranty. The fine print on that is based on "normal household usage in accordance with package and bulb directions", which is to say an average of 3 hours a day, 7 days a week.
I figure I use my bedroom light for more than 3 hours a day, but I'm pretty confident I don't use it for 27 hours a day, which is what would be needed to reach the bulb's 10,000 hour lifespan.
So okay, the bulb died and the warranty obviously applies. So where do I get my replacement? Turn back to the fine print on the side of the box: "if this bulb does not last for the time period guaranteed...return bulb, proof of purchase, register receipt and your name and address to OSRAM SYLVANIA Inc, 435 E. Washington St., Winchester, KY 40391-2298. OSRAM SYLVANIA will replace the bulb. This replacement is the sole remedy available, and LIABILITY FOR DIRECT, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES IS HEREBY EXPRESSLY EXCLUDED [except in states where we're not allowed to exclude it]..." (all-caps original)
So for a set of three bulbs I bought for $14.99 plus tax, I'm going to have to spend how much to ship the bulb to fucking KENTUCKY?!? And that's just the first bulb; if I only use the other two one after the other, I'll have to wait another two years at the current rate to get through them to send all three back together. I mean, if I send in the proof of purchase etc with only the first bulb, I won't be able to get replacements when the other two die prematurely. But what if the other two bulbs last 4 years each? Then by the time I ship them back the warranty period will have been over, despite each bulb lasting less than half its expected lifetime.
But do you know how much it costs to ship things to the U.S.? I'm guessing somewhere between five and ten bucks at the slowest, cheapest rate. And then what? I'll get another bulb that will last a year, and for thirty bucks I'd have three bulbs plus three replacements that lasted for a combined total of 6 years when each one was supposed to last for nine?
I think my skeptical friend may be on to something, since thirty bucks could buy many many years' worth of incandescents (or would have, had Dalton McGuinty not banned them).
So let's summarize:
- bulbs don't last anywhere near warranty
- it costs as much or more to claim warranty as to just buy new bulbs
- BlackBerry's autoreplace changes correctly-spelled words for no reason
- you're not supposed to throw them out due to mercury, but there's you can't take spent ones back to where you bought them (for places downtown, at least)
- I'm still going to be using them
That last one is for two reasons: one, the heat factor. Two, they're still cheaper.
As five bucks a pop, if we assume 3 hours a day 7 days a week, and if we assume 5 cents a Kilowatt-hour, these 23-watt "100-watt equivalent" bulbs save me $4.21 per year over incandescents. Factor in the fact that I likely use it more than 3 hours a day and 5 cents a kWh is the rate before your hydro bill gets more than doubled by fees and taxes, it still saves me money.
So then the only unresolved question is, how do I punish Sylvania for this? I've already spent an hour writing this blog post, so that could be $20 or so of my own time. Why not go all out and play into their game. Here are some ideas:
- send the bulb in a bubble envelope so it will most likely arrive broken when they open the package
- waste at least as much of their time on the phone and responding to emails so their payroll costs match what I paid
- send by UPS with paperwork that triggers UPS to charge the recipient the fixed customs fee of $40
- hire a lawyer to sue them for $15 (hm... or a class-action...)
- send Sylvania a Canadian football
Ah, but this is all a pipe dream. Truth is, just like those weasels gambled, I don't really care to do anything about it, over a five-dollar-a-year investment in lightbulbs.
Except blog about it.
- RG>
Sunday, October 02, 2011
Pink irony
There were a few articles in the news lately about "pinkwashing": slapping a pink Breast Cancer Awareness Month ribbon on a product to make it sell better. One story in the Ottawa Citizen, Pink Fatigue describes the difficulty some groups face with the many caveats placed on the amounts given in these campaigns, and that money needs to go towards prevention, not just treatment. It's a controversial topic that I won't wade into too deeply.
Except to post this photo of the same issue covered last year.
I wonder if there was any effect on Telus' "Go Pink" campaign after the ad was placed right next to an article decrying just those types of ads!
- RG>
Except to post this photo of the same issue covered last year.
I wonder if there was any effect on Telus' "Go Pink" campaign after the ad was placed right next to an article decrying just those types of ads!- RG>
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Accented characters in domain names are a terrible idea
Normally I ignore the various e-mails I get from CIRA (the Canadian Internet Registration Authority, which oversees .ca domains). This includes requests to vote for CIRA boards of directors, and other stuff that I don't remember because I ignored it.
However the current consultation on internationalized domain names for .ca domains is worrisome.
At the consultation home page you can follow the links to the (relatively straightforward and plain-language) proposal, and provide feedback on how they should implement it (not whether it's a good idea).
There is also a discussion forum that discusses four questions. The first three are variants on "isn't this such a great idea?" and the fourth is "any other comments?"
There are some recurring themes--almost entirely emphatically opposed to this idea as proposed--and I submitted the following comment to the thread (note: my questions are literal, not rhetorical. The intent is for the consultants and CIRA to consider those issues; I don't need to know the answers myself).
- RG>
However the current consultation on internationalized domain names for .ca domains is worrisome.
At the consultation home page you can follow the links to the (relatively straightforward and plain-language) proposal, and provide feedback on how they should implement it (not whether it's a good idea).
There is also a discussion forum that discusses four questions. The first three are variants on "isn't this such a great idea?" and the fourth is "any other comments?"
There are some recurring themes--almost entirely emphatically opposed to this idea as proposed--and I submitted the following comment to the thread (note: my questions are literal, not rhetorical. The intent is for the consultants and CIRA to consider those issues; I don't need to know the answers myself).
I've read through the entire thread and I have a number of comments:If you have additional comments, or just want to give your "no" vote, I suggest you head on over to the IDN Consultation website and speak up before we all get inundated with spam messages from ínfÒ@vÌ4grá.ca.
I am one of those Ottawa-dwelling folks who spends a lot of time thinking about how to properly deliver services to my members, clients, and correspondents in the language of their choice. I hope the consultants thank CIRA for the big paycheque and tell them how bad an idea this is.
The logical decision would go like this:
1. It is fair to allow people to register accented domain names.
2. In order to prevent abuse, "Names that differ only in accents should not be allowed to be registered to different organizations." (as worded by ahooper in comment 60)
3. This would require considerable resources to implement.
4. To pay for this implementation, either domains will have to get a lot more expensive, or CIRA and/or DNS operators will have to take a big hit and allow all variants to be registered to the same user for the current price
5. If the goal of the policy is fairness (point 1), it would be unfair if the policy reduced the accessibility of domain names to individuals and organizations with limited finances.
6. Similarly, it would be unfair to require DNS operators to absorb the full cost of this implementation
7. Therefore, the benefits of the proposal are far outweighed by the costs of implementing it.
Other new comments not already raised:
I have experienced problems with automatically-generated usernames based on the user's name (e.g. FirstnameLastinitial). For StéphanieR, there are some OS/Browser combinations where she will not be able to enter her username; the system will interpret it as StÈphanieR and reject the user. I've experienced similar problems with database exports that have similar errors if they aren't opened in Windows. What will CIRA do to ensure that input from all browser/OS combinations will be correctly interpreted by the DNS?
The company I work for recently received its registration certificate for a couple of its French trademarks. The name on the government-issued certificate was spelled IN CAPITAL LETTERS with obvious accents omitted (i.e. MON NOM REGISTREE). How would we be able to enforce our rights to the domain monnomregistrée.ca if even Industry Canada is ambivalent to accents? (My mind is further blown to learn that CIRA operates under the auspices of Industry Canada)
People need to recognize that not every domain registrant is a corporation with millions of dollars of annual revenue. It is not so simple for some organizations to register the variants. I am involved with some community groups whose annual income is in the tens of dollars, and the domain registration is one of the few expenses. While they are all Anglophone groups, there are likely Francophone groups in the same situation who cannot afford both mélange.ca and melange.ca (not to mention mèlange.ca and mêlange.ca). Fredjubs' suggestion in comment 71 (that business information sugh as a GST number be required for domain registration) does not work for individuals nor for non-incorporated organizations (like many community groups). Further, there are (or at least there should be) privacy implicaitons if more and more information (passport number?!?) is required just to register a domain name.
Are accented characters case-insensitive, as unaccented characters are in DNS?
Elaborations of and rebuttals to other comments:
Elaborating on other comments: I'm offended by those who think that the only people who speak French are in Québec. There are many Franco-Ontarians (including many towns, like Sudbury, where many do not speak English), Manitoba was the first province to be officially bilingual (though it isn't any longer), and New Brunswick is recognized as being officially bilingual in the Constitution. So any solution based on "only for .qc.ca domains" is entirely insufficient. I don't consider myself to be one of these people, I'm merely offended by the total ignorance of those who make this suggestion.
Reiterating cbehnke's point in comment 53: When I give a website over the phone, and I say président.ca (in French), it will be very cumbersome for me to specify to the message recipient whether or not the domain has an accent, especially if the person is not french speaking.
Entering accented French characters is not a "solved issue":
As mentioned elsewhere, IDN is fine in countries like Germany or Spain where the entire population is expected to know how to speak and type accented characters in the dominant language of the respective country. However, since many, if not most, in the Internet-using population that corresponds to .ca domains do not normally speak and type accented characters, I believe this will become a net obstacle to universal access to the internet, not an enhancement.
- On macs (and apparently on Linux) it is easy to do. However, you must know how to do it. Those who generally correspond only in English (including with bilingual francophones who have domains with accented characters) will not know how to use it.
- On Windows, you have a few cumbersome options: if you have French installed, AND you have activated the desktop/menu bar icon for fast keyboard switching, AND you alreay know what keys to use to enter accented characters, then it's easy. If you don't, then you can use Character Map, which I'm sure a vast majority of users wouldn't even know where to look for it, if they knew it existed, and even then it is not simple or convenient.
User Laplante in comment 52 linked to a Microsost KB article on international keyboards. First, a user shouldn't need an FAQ to type a simple domain name. Second, how will a user know to visit that article when they discover they don't know how to type an accented domain name? You could put a link on the homepage of the domain name, but the user won't be able to go there! Catch-22!
I echo amadha's analogy in comment #45 about bilingual names vs. English and French names. Instead of typing "ottawapubliclibrary.ca", I have to type "biblioottawalibrary.ca", which is much more cumbersome, and harder to remember, even as a bilingual person. The point of the analogy is that it's intended to be more fair but ends up being more confusing.
pdobeda@acm.org in comment 86 suggests that two names with similar names will have already addressed the issue with their corporate registrations. This is a false assumption: for example Apple Computer and Apple Records both operate under the name "Apple" (not to mention numbered companies). And while accents aren't usually used with them, acronyms are often shared among many organizations.
- RG>
Saturday, April 23, 2011
For a free press, you must abandon your privacy
I tried commenting on the Ottawa Sun's new website, where they use this assheaded "Disqus" platform that tries to be a hell of a lot more than it is.
After typing my comment, I clicked on the "post as" button. Up came a dialog asking me to sign in using my Facebook, Twitter, Google, OpenID, or other account. I tried to sign in with my RealGrouchy google account, and it asked me if I wanted to remember this authentication (i.e. Google account with Disqus) or just do it this one time. It displayed "[name] realgrouchy@gmail.com" and I clicked "OK" expecting it to take me back to the comment form to customize how my name will appear and preview my comment.
Instead, it posted my real name, which was linked to http://profiles.google.com/realgrouchy. I do not associate my real name with RealGrouchy; it is an alias. I have plenty of other accounts to which I associate my real name, and if I wanted to use my real name I would have used one of them. The Ottawa Sun's "Sun and the City" blog (managed by Sue Sherring and Jon Willing) has posted comments before signed as RealGrouchy and linking to this blog, as has Citizen blogger David Reevely and even Ken Gray. This is because RealGrouchy has a reputation for making cogent (if sometimes aggressive) comments about relevant matters. I can be contacted to defend my comments, just as can those who sign with their real names. Sure it's an alias, but I could just as well have used an alias that looked like a real name and people would be none the wiser (actually, they'd be actively deceived).
Getting back to the Ottawa Sun/Disqus/Google website comments, I couldn't even access "http://profiles.google.com/realgrouchy" to change these settings because Google thinks my browser isn't new enough (it uses the same fucking engine as Firefox 4). When I am finally able to log in with Internet Explorer, if I change what name is associated with my account it doesn't change the previous comment. I can't customize any settings for my "google profile" account because it says I have to create a public profile to even access the settings, and I doubt it will help.
I've edited the comment, and sent a message to the Sun through their feedback form. That also doesn't appear to be working right, so I sent an e-mail to a couple people too explaining the situation and the nuances that should be investigated to improve the integrity of the system (I managed to temper it down to what I think was a rather polite message, from an angry "fuck you and your stupid comment system" type of thing, which wouldn't really help to encourage them to help me).
The Sun seems to be opening itself up to liability here, since it is allowing private contact information to be posted on their site without express authorization from the individual. That is in direct contravention to Canada's privacy legislation. Even if Disqus and Google aren't Canadian companies, it's still being published on the Sun's website.
The irony is that they instituted this comment thing to protect themselves from liability. Remember how Ken Gray always harps on about 'not being able to verify the identity of every commenter'? The Citizen also now requires you to log in to comment on their site, so I have ceased contributing to discussions on their site. Had they had a simple form that asked for name, required (but promised not to publish) an e-mail address, and offered the ability to add a URL, I could have commented and attributed my comment precisely as I wanted it to be published.
While I'll give the Sun the benefit of the doubt, since their new website is only a few days old and still in "beta", the way things are moving it seems that the mainstream, corporate media not only wants to store all sorts of information on your computer in the form of cookies (who knows how much information it tracks about you), but it also wants to take what information it does know about you from shared services and publish it against your will.
In essence, you must sell your soul and waive your right to privacy in order to participate in the information economy.
No wonder the comments sections on news sites are filled with posts by fucktards.
- RG>
After typing my comment, I clicked on the "post as" button. Up came a dialog asking me to sign in using my Facebook, Twitter, Google, OpenID, or other account. I tried to sign in with my RealGrouchy google account, and it asked me if I wanted to remember this authentication (i.e. Google account with Disqus) or just do it this one time. It displayed "[name] realgrouchy@gmail.com" and I clicked "OK" expecting it to take me back to the comment form to customize how my name will appear and preview my comment.
Instead, it posted my real name, which was linked to http://profiles.google.com/realgrouchy. I do not associate my real name with RealGrouchy; it is an alias. I have plenty of other accounts to which I associate my real name, and if I wanted to use my real name I would have used one of them. The Ottawa Sun's "Sun and the City" blog (managed by Sue Sherring and Jon Willing) has posted comments before signed as RealGrouchy and linking to this blog, as has Citizen blogger David Reevely and even Ken Gray. This is because RealGrouchy has a reputation for making cogent (if sometimes aggressive) comments about relevant matters. I can be contacted to defend my comments, just as can those who sign with their real names. Sure it's an alias, but I could just as well have used an alias that looked like a real name and people would be none the wiser (actually, they'd be actively deceived).
Getting back to the Ottawa Sun/Disqus/Google website comments, I couldn't even access "http://profiles.google.com/realgrouchy" to change these settings because Google thinks my browser isn't new enough (it uses the same fucking engine as Firefox 4). When I am finally able to log in with Internet Explorer, if I change what name is associated with my account it doesn't change the previous comment. I can't customize any settings for my "google profile" account because it says I have to create a public profile to even access the settings, and I doubt it will help.
I've edited the comment, and sent a message to the Sun through their feedback form. That also doesn't appear to be working right, so I sent an e-mail to a couple people too explaining the situation and the nuances that should be investigated to improve the integrity of the system (I managed to temper it down to what I think was a rather polite message, from an angry "fuck you and your stupid comment system" type of thing, which wouldn't really help to encourage them to help me).
The Sun seems to be opening itself up to liability here, since it is allowing private contact information to be posted on their site without express authorization from the individual. That is in direct contravention to Canada's privacy legislation. Even if Disqus and Google aren't Canadian companies, it's still being published on the Sun's website.
The irony is that they instituted this comment thing to protect themselves from liability. Remember how Ken Gray always harps on about 'not being able to verify the identity of every commenter'? The Citizen also now requires you to log in to comment on their site, so I have ceased contributing to discussions on their site. Had they had a simple form that asked for name, required (but promised not to publish) an e-mail address, and offered the ability to add a URL, I could have commented and attributed my comment precisely as I wanted it to be published.
While I'll give the Sun the benefit of the doubt, since their new website is only a few days old and still in "beta", the way things are moving it seems that the mainstream, corporate media not only wants to store all sorts of information on your computer in the form of cookies (who knows how much information it tracks about you), but it also wants to take what information it does know about you from shared services and publish it against your will.
In essence, you must sell your soul and waive your right to privacy in order to participate in the information economy.
No wonder the comments sections on news sites are filled with posts by fucktards.
- RG>
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Why do I even bother not stealing movies?
It turns out my issues with the fucks who decigned Dexter DVDs were grander than I thought.
Microsoft's insidious collaboration with the movie industry has finally hit me. I've kept Microsoft from installing WGA on my computer (I don't need a tool to know that I purchased this copy of Windows XP fair and square, or to keep me from using it once Microsoft's servers stop responding to WGA's requests), and I've stuck with Windows XP because of the DRM inherent to the more recent versions of Windows.
I just rented two DVDs from the video store--you know, instead of simply pirating them which would actually be easier and cheaper--and neither of them would play in Windows Media Player. They wouldn't open in the other program on my laptop, and they crashed my old laptop when I tried any of the three DVD players installed on it.
After over an hour of troubleshooting, my guests and I instead watched TV shows online.
This morning, I called Dell and asked them for help. The guy I spoke with essentially said, "oh yeah, some rental DVDs don't play on computers due to rights somethingorother" (he didn't say "somethingorother" exactly, but he sure didn't know it by name). At least I didn't have to go through dozens of prompts or wait on hold for hours to get this response.
He said the solution is simple: "when I get that problem, I just pop the DVD in to the DVD player and watch it on the TV." Well fuck you. I don't have a DVD player or a TV, and I'm not about to buy one knowing that the industries behind them are out to prevent me from paying for and watching their content.
Of course, the irony is that I specifically rented the videos out of some latent guilt about downloading (thanks to all sorts of fearmongering and propaganda from the movie industry), yet the movie industry itself is behind the restrictions that prevent me from watching these legally-obtained borrowed copies of the films. Not that this is news to anyone, especially me: anyone who follows slashdot has heard all the latest tricks of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), collectively and pejoratively referred to as the MAFIAA.
After my failed tech support call to Dell, I did a quick Google search, which returned VLC Player a free, open-source, cross-platform video player that is a project on SourceForge.net, a sister-company to Slashdot that hosts open-source development.
VLC player is able to play my DVDs flawlessly. I wish I'd found it last night when my friends were still here!
Anyway, I've learned my lesson about paying for copyrighted content. I'm going to go download some Bittorrent software and start getting my movies from the pirates, who are more trustworthy than the film industry.
PS: The Conservative party wants to facilitate this process of screwing media consumers and make the punishments stronger--their failed bills would have given Canada one of the most restrictive copyright regimes in the developed world. They scare you by saying the Liberal party will institute an "iPod tax", which is essentially what we already have, and which makes filesharing quasi-legal in Canada. If the Pirate Party has a candidate in your riding in the current federal election, go listen to what they have to say about copyright restrictions. They're not a joke party like the NeoRhino party, they're a serious one-issue party like the Marijuana party.
- RG>
Microsoft's insidious collaboration with the movie industry has finally hit me. I've kept Microsoft from installing WGA on my computer (I don't need a tool to know that I purchased this copy of Windows XP fair and square, or to keep me from using it once Microsoft's servers stop responding to WGA's requests), and I've stuck with Windows XP because of the DRM inherent to the more recent versions of Windows.
I just rented two DVDs from the video store--you know, instead of simply pirating them which would actually be easier and cheaper--and neither of them would play in Windows Media Player. They wouldn't open in the other program on my laptop, and they crashed my old laptop when I tried any of the three DVD players installed on it.
After over an hour of troubleshooting, my guests and I instead watched TV shows online.
This morning, I called Dell and asked them for help. The guy I spoke with essentially said, "oh yeah, some rental DVDs don't play on computers due to rights somethingorother" (he didn't say "somethingorother" exactly, but he sure didn't know it by name). At least I didn't have to go through dozens of prompts or wait on hold for hours to get this response.
He said the solution is simple: "when I get that problem, I just pop the DVD in to the DVD player and watch it on the TV." Well fuck you. I don't have a DVD player or a TV, and I'm not about to buy one knowing that the industries behind them are out to prevent me from paying for and watching their content.
Of course, the irony is that I specifically rented the videos out of some latent guilt about downloading (thanks to all sorts of fearmongering and propaganda from the movie industry), yet the movie industry itself is behind the restrictions that prevent me from watching these legally-obtained borrowed copies of the films. Not that this is news to anyone, especially me: anyone who follows slashdot has heard all the latest tricks of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), collectively and pejoratively referred to as the MAFIAA.
After my failed tech support call to Dell, I did a quick Google search, which returned VLC Player a free, open-source, cross-platform video player that is a project on SourceForge.net, a sister-company to Slashdot that hosts open-source development.
VLC player is able to play my DVDs flawlessly. I wish I'd found it last night when my friends were still here!
Anyway, I've learned my lesson about paying for copyrighted content. I'm going to go download some Bittorrent software and start getting my movies from the pirates, who are more trustworthy than the film industry.
PS: The Conservative party wants to facilitate this process of screwing media consumers and make the punishments stronger--their failed bills would have given Canada one of the most restrictive copyright regimes in the developed world. They scare you by saying the Liberal party will institute an "iPod tax", which is essentially what we already have, and which makes filesharing quasi-legal in Canada. If the Pirate Party has a candidate in your riding in the current federal election, go listen to what they have to say about copyright restrictions. They're not a joke party like the NeoRhino party, they're a serious one-issue party like the Marijuana party.
- RG>
Monday, January 03, 2011
This is why I don't buy music from online
Fuck Windows Media Player.
A while back, I used Audacity to rip my LP of Billy Joel's the Stranger to mp3 so I could listen to it on my Blackberry.
More recently, I noticed that a few of the tracks weren't on the album.
Today, I discovered the source of the problem: Windows Media Player ~helpfully downloaded updated track information for this album, including numbering half the tracks as Track 4. It then overwrote the file information on my hard disk with these new details.
Because it saw a number of "Track 4"s, it also did me the favour of removing the extras from my library. And apparently the default setting is to automatically delete files from my hard drive when deleted from my library.
Now that I've disabled those settings, I'm hoping that I will have the original on my backup drive at home. If not, at least I still have the LP and I can rip it again.
- RG>
A while back, I used Audacity to rip my LP of Billy Joel's the Stranger to mp3 so I could listen to it on my Blackberry.
More recently, I noticed that a few of the tracks weren't on the album.
Today, I discovered the source of the problem: Windows Media Player ~helpfully downloaded updated track information for this album, including numbering half the tracks as Track 4. It then overwrote the file information on my hard disk with these new details.
Because it saw a number of "Track 4"s, it also did me the favour of removing the extras from my library. And apparently the default setting is to automatically delete files from my hard drive when deleted from my library.
Now that I've disabled those settings, I'm hoping that I will have the original on my backup drive at home. If not, at least I still have the LP and I can rip it again.
- RG>
Thursday, December 09, 2010
And you already thought I was sick...
I didn't find my phone, and ended up spending the better part of two days switching over from Bell to one of the new carriers.
(The main hitch with the transition was that my address with Bell was a PO box, buit the new provider's form required a street number, so the records didn't match. After waiting on hold for half an hour, I got in touch with a upper-tier CSR who found a solution and waited while I called Bell to implement it. To Bell's credit, they were prompt and polite when I called to switch--and effectively cancel--my account)
I've gotten another BlackBerry after having experimented previously with alternatives, and because I'd be able to restore my backup from my previous phone (even though my most recent backup was a month old and so all of my current schedule had to be rebuilt from my emails and memory, which typically is the other way around)
Like previously, I don't have a data plan, but my new phone has wifi, which occasionally works (consistently at home and work--you know, where I usually have a computer on--but not at hotspots. My phone kept rebooting itself whenever I tried to use the Royal Oak's hotspot at lunch yesterday). The upshot is that I'm typing this in bed on my BlackBerry, which I guess is kinda cool, if tedious.
The reason I'm in bed is that for various reasons--including, I suspect, pushing myself too hard--I have been sick this week. I took the day off to try to get some rest, and some Bell workers outside have been performing a life rendition of a "soothing Nature sounds" cassette, rendered in backhoes and jackhammers.
Vengeance for switching providers, I guess.
Now to head off to work to catch up on my self-destruction.
- RG>
(The main hitch with the transition was that my address with Bell was a PO box, buit the new provider's form required a street number, so the records didn't match. After waiting on hold for half an hour, I got in touch with a upper-tier CSR who found a solution and waited while I called Bell to implement it. To Bell's credit, they were prompt and polite when I called to switch--and effectively cancel--my account)
I've gotten another BlackBerry after having experimented previously with alternatives, and because I'd be able to restore my backup from my previous phone (even though my most recent backup was a month old and so all of my current schedule had to be rebuilt from my emails and memory, which typically is the other way around)
Like previously, I don't have a data plan, but my new phone has wifi, which occasionally works (consistently at home and work--you know, where I usually have a computer on--but not at hotspots. My phone kept rebooting itself whenever I tried to use the Royal Oak's hotspot at lunch yesterday). The upshot is that I'm typing this in bed on my BlackBerry, which I guess is kinda cool, if tedious.
The reason I'm in bed is that for various reasons--including, I suspect, pushing myself too hard--I have been sick this week. I took the day off to try to get some rest, and some Bell workers outside have been performing a life rendition of a "soothing Nature sounds" cassette, rendered in backhoes and jackhammers.
Vengeance for switching providers, I guess.
Now to head off to work to catch up on my self-destruction.
- RG>
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
Fuck! I lost my phone!
I lost my phone today. I last saw it while I was at my office, or possibly when I was stopping over at home before a meeting at 1pm.
It's not in any of my pockets.
It's not in my panniers.
It's not at my office.
It's not a home.
It's not in a car, in a bar, on a train, or on a plane.
It might have fallen out of my pocket in a lane.
I guess this is my opportunity to switch from Bell, who are a bunch of fucks, though I'll stick with a Blackberry to avoid the poison apple.
My last backup was a month ago, though. Which is good that I backed up, but sucks that I've lost everything since then, as well as my unsaved voice notes (many!) and the microSD card in there.
I'm going to have a hell of a time retrieving my various scheduled events and reminders, because my phone is where I kept them. Also any contacts and memos-to-self that I added since the last backup.
And I'll have to do it quickly, because I've been invited to the swearing-in ceremony for Council, and I'm hungry for timbits.
- RG>
It's not in any of my pockets.
It's not in my panniers.
It's not at my office.
It's not a home.
It's not in a car, in a bar, on a train, or on a plane.
It might have fallen out of my pocket in a lane.
I guess this is my opportunity to switch from Bell, who are a bunch of fucks, though I'll stick with a Blackberry to avoid the poison apple.
My last backup was a month ago, though. Which is good that I backed up, but sucks that I've lost everything since then, as well as my unsaved voice notes (many!) and the microSD card in there.
I'm going to have a hell of a time retrieving my various scheduled events and reminders, because my phone is where I kept them. Also any contacts and memos-to-self that I added since the last backup.
And I'll have to do it quickly, because I've been invited to the swearing-in ceremony for Council, and I'm hungry for timbits.
- RG>
Friday, November 12, 2010
Who the fuck designed the Dexter DVDs?
So I'm watching the TV show Dexter, and being the good (and lazy) person that I am, I am doing so by renting the DVDs from my local video store, instead of downloading them illegally from the internet. I did the same thing for House, which was powerfully addictive. Once you get past the hokey acting, it's an interesting show that keeps you wanting to see what happens next.
I'm now at season 3 of Dexter, and there are some major issues with the way they designed the DVD.
First off, you get about thirty seconds of FBI warning and Showtime advertisement that you can't skip through.
Then you get some ad that thankfully you can skip through.
But then you have to sit through the animation/advertisement for the disc menu. In previous seasons, you could just click on the "disc menu" button and it would skip the animation. With season 3 (or at least disc 2), if you click the "disc menu" button in the middle of the animation, it takes you back to the beginning of the animation.
What a piece of garbage.
Then, when you finally get the episode started, it starts with a couple minutes of "previously, on Dexter" clips. Only I guess the producers don't realize I'm watching the fucking DVD. I know what happened previously and want to start seeing the next part of the story.
So I click the "next chapter" button. On the House DVDs, clicking "next chapter" at the beginning of the episode would take you to the start of the opening credits, and clicking a second time would take you to the end of the credits--the beginning of the episode. With season 3 of Dexter, if you click "next chapter" at the beginning of the episode, it skips the first few minutes of the actual episode.
What benefit do the producers think they gain by forcing me to first sit through adverisements for the show I just paid them to watch, and then not be able to conveniently access that content?
On top of this, the bonus features in the DVD suck monkey balls. There are promo episodes of miscellaneous TV shows that I can only assume sucked too badly to make it to air, then there are text biographies and photos of the cast with cludgy interfaces. LAaaaame.
I think for season 4 I'll just download the torrent. Lazy as I am, at least the DVD producers won't punish me anymore for acquiring their content legally.
- RG>
I'm now at season 3 of Dexter, and there are some major issues with the way they designed the DVD.
First off, you get about thirty seconds of FBI warning and Showtime advertisement that you can't skip through.
Then you get some ad that thankfully you can skip through.
But then you have to sit through the animation/advertisement for the disc menu. In previous seasons, you could just click on the "disc menu" button and it would skip the animation. With season 3 (or at least disc 2), if you click the "disc menu" button in the middle of the animation, it takes you back to the beginning of the animation.
What a piece of garbage.
Then, when you finally get the episode started, it starts with a couple minutes of "previously, on Dexter" clips. Only I guess the producers don't realize I'm watching the fucking DVD. I know what happened previously and want to start seeing the next part of the story.
So I click the "next chapter" button. On the House DVDs, clicking "next chapter" at the beginning of the episode would take you to the start of the opening credits, and clicking a second time would take you to the end of the credits--the beginning of the episode. With season 3 of Dexter, if you click "next chapter" at the beginning of the episode, it skips the first few minutes of the actual episode.
What benefit do the producers think they gain by forcing me to first sit through adverisements for the show I just paid them to watch, and then not be able to conveniently access that content?
On top of this, the bonus features in the DVD suck monkey balls. There are promo episodes of miscellaneous TV shows that I can only assume sucked too badly to make it to air, then there are text biographies and photos of the cast with cludgy interfaces. LAaaaame.
I think for season 4 I'll just download the torrent. Lazy as I am, at least the DVD producers won't punish me anymore for acquiring their content legally.
- RG>
Sunday, August 08, 2010
I'm poor again (but not for long!)
I recently got a new job, which pays considerably more than my old one (I wanted to link to the comment I left on someone's blog sometime about all the things that were good about my previous job, but I can't find it). The main downside is that it's full-time, whereas the old one was flexible part-time.
The upshot is that by making more money, I'm no longer poor, at least until the term is up at the end of next July. I'll have lots of time to save up between now and then.
I'm not entirely sure exactly what the after-tax income will be, as I haven't yet had a complete pay period. I do know that It's a lot more than what I was making before, which was nearly enough to live comfortably. Being unable to budget for a new high-falutin' lifestyle, I've kept to my old, miserly ways.
Except for the laptop I just ordered online.
I figured it was time, since my laptop is breaking again (the sound is going and I don't feel like taking it apart and re-soldering it again, the replacement battery I bought isn't hold its charge as long as it used to, and the SD card reader remains broken). I had also wanted to buy a spare AC adapter, keyboard/mouse, and replace the battery again, and since I'd been planning on getting a new laptop soon anyway, now was as good a time as any. This one has served me well enough, and this way I can give it to a friend who has had to computer-surf (using other people's computers, as in couchsurfing) since her computer died.
The outgoing laptop's a Dell Vostro 1000 that I bought in September 2007. I chose once again to go with Dell--this time a Latitude E5500--because I like:
Since I haven't been spending much more than I did before the new job, this purchase will delay my plans to pad up my savings. On the bright side, it also means no more impulse buys for at least a couple pay periods. Which means I'm poor again, but not for long!
- RG>
The upshot is that by making more money, I'm no longer poor, at least until the term is up at the end of next July. I'll have lots of time to save up between now and then.
I'm not entirely sure exactly what the after-tax income will be, as I haven't yet had a complete pay period. I do know that It's a lot more than what I was making before, which was nearly enough to live comfortably. Being unable to budget for a new high-falutin' lifestyle, I've kept to my old, miserly ways.
Except for the laptop I just ordered online.
I figured it was time, since my laptop is breaking again (the sound is going and I don't feel like taking it apart and re-soldering it again, the replacement battery I bought isn't hold its charge as long as it used to, and the SD card reader remains broken). I had also wanted to buy a spare AC adapter, keyboard/mouse, and replace the battery again, and since I'd been planning on getting a new laptop soon anyway, now was as good a time as any. This one has served me well enough, and this way I can give it to a friend who has had to computer-surf (using other people's computers, as in couchsurfing) since her computer died.
The outgoing laptop's a Dell Vostro 1000 that I bought in September 2007. I chose once again to go with Dell--this time a Latitude E5500--because I like:
- The many ways Dell lets you customize your machine (choose the "small business" option ALWAYS!)
- I can still get it with Windows XP
- I've been able to buy replacement parts for my old laptop at reasonable prices (this time I've gone for 3-year full hardware support since I can afford it upfront)
- The online repair documentation is thorough
- Many of Dell's business laptops have minimal amounts of crapware/bloatware (this was the advertised feature that first attracted me to the Vostro, is what turned me off this time to the XPS, and appears to still apply to the Latitude)
- it comes with 4 USB slots, not two like so many other laptops (or only one, like the MacBook Air!), plus an SD card slot
- the new laptop will come with a clit mouse. I haven't had one of those since my old IBM ThinkPad, three laptops ago.
Since I haven't been spending much more than I did before the new job, this purchase will delay my plans to pad up my savings. On the bright side, it also means no more impulse buys for at least a couple pay periods. Which means I'm poor again, but not for long!
- RG>
Monday, May 10, 2010
Advancing to 2003
So I did it. The Bell guy on the phone confirmed that my daytime usage is under the 200 minutes/month, so I can safely drop the $10/month for free incoming minutes (except for one month, where I'll have to reinstate it or pay $50 extra if my usage is the same as last year).
Then I added a $5/month texting plan, which includes unlimited incoming texts and 250 outgoing texts/month. So the bunch of fucks will be getting five dollars less per month of my money, and they won't be charging me fifteen cents every time somebody sends me a hundred and sixty-odd characters of information I'd care less about.
Since the people who complain about not being able to text me are the same people who tell me they read this blog, I figured I'd might as well mention it here, and sod the rest of 'em.
That is to say, I will now receive your newfangled text communications, but don't get the impression that I'll actually read them, much less acknowledge or respond. E-mail is still the best way to contact me. If you want to reach me, just remind yourself that grouches like to be distant.
- RG>
Then I added a $5/month texting plan, which includes unlimited incoming texts and 250 outgoing texts/month. So the bunch of fucks will be getting five dollars less per month of my money, and they won't be charging me fifteen cents every time somebody sends me a hundred and sixty-odd characters of information I'd care less about.
Since the people who complain about not being able to text me are the same people who tell me they read this blog, I figured I'd might as well mention it here, and sod the rest of 'em.
That is to say, I will now receive your newfangled text communications, but don't get the impression that I'll actually read them, much less acknowledge or respond. E-mail is still the best way to contact me. If you want to reach me, just remind yourself that grouches like to be distant.
- RG>
Of Black Berries and Poison Apples
Seeing as Bell and Blackberry are a bunch of fucks, as recently established, I figured I'd might as well find a way to wean myself off of them.
Considering I paid $109.95+tax for the extended warranty and they wanted to charge me $92.66 before they even look at what's wrong with it, and considering they're selling new ones of the same model for $199 without a contract, and considering I had the same problems with the (presumably not broken) loaner phone... well, there's no real conclusion, other than that they're a bunch of fucks. I just hoped saying it again in a slightly different way would help me feel better.
The problem with Bell is an easy one to treat. The goal is to give them as little of my money as possible, without wasting any. The problem is that I'm in a contract, and the monthly cost of breaking the contract ($20) exceeds the savings from going elsewhere ($14).
To ease the pain, I recently got an e-mail from them telling me that they wanted to charge me $2/month to continue to receive bills by e-mail. Either they're bluffing (wouldn't be the first time), or I need to call them up and get them to find four dollars more to charge me per month so that I can justify breaking up.
Also, I realized that if I drop the $10/month free incoming minutes charge, I have ten dollars' worth of leeway to spend on a texting plan, while still giving them less money than I am now.*
As for the Blackberry, that was a tougher nut to crack.
I use it for four things, all of which would have to find new homes if I switched away from it:
- Phone/addressbook
- Music player
- Calendar/to-do list
- Audio recording
The audio recorder was the first one I wanted to replace, since it is no longer working on the Blackberry at all. I went around to a couple stores and found that they're all crap. But then a twinkle under the counter gave me a thought: if a smartphone can make a good voice recorder, so would a sleek new mp3 player, designed in California.
Now, if Microsoft, and Rogers and Bell and Blackberry all disgust me, Apple makes me sick. Their devices--and I do mean their devices: you just buy the right to look hip with one--are designed to be controlled entirely by Apple unless you break into them. You can't even change the damn battery on one without sending it out for repair. They can remotely shut off iPhones, and you can only load music onto the iPod that Apple software lets you put onto it. (By contrast, I just load music onto a microSD card and the Blackberry scans and reads it. The Blackberry even acts as a reader for my microSD cards when I plug it in with the cable.)
But I have to admit the guy at the Apple store knew his shit. When I said I'd go to research the audio recording quality on the web before deciding to purchase, he recited the bitrate and format from memory. He also told me that the cables are included in the $40 AppleCare warranty, whereas the headset that no longer works with my Blackberry--yet surprisingly works perfectly well with the iPod--isn't covered by jack shit, which is why I have to buy a new one every three months or so. The AppleCare is also transferable if I sell the iPod or upgrade to a different model, which, at the very least, gives the impression of decency.
He also told me that the AppleCare also covers a free battery replacement, which is usually such-and-such amount of money, and that a user might need to replace it in every few months or years, depending on usage.
I bought the shiny dark purple iPod Nano, with the knowledge that I'd have to pay a 10% restocking fee if I returned it within the allotted 14 days. My boss is an Apple fanboi, so to speak, and I've heard her make use of the AppleCare, so I opted for that too.
So far, it's pretty neat. It's got FM radio that uses the headphones as antennae (I haven't listened to radio in years, and discovered I haven't missed anything), and it's got a pretty decent audio recorder. I've only put music on it from my work computer, because I don't yet have the heart to infect my Dell laptop with the iTunes software I downloaded (nor the Songbird setup file on my hard disk waiting to be clicked).
And I realized that I missed the Blackberry.
More specifically, the music playing isn't what's wrong with the Blackberry (well, with the latest firmware it is wrong, but otherwise the intended functionality satisfies my needs). I suppose it could be the headset or the headset jack, but the primary irritant is with the calendar and to-do list reminders that keep freezing. And the iPod can't replace that (yes, it has a calendar feature, but no keypad to add entries!). If anything, I'd be better off getting a PDA calendar and keeping the Blackberry for everything else.
Furthermore, the iPod doesn't fit my wardrobe. I stick it in my shirt pocket so it doesn't get scratched or crushed in my pants, but that won't work when I wear a t-shirt--or a sweater.
The input on the Blackberry is better, too. I can use it when I've got my cycling gloves on, and I can even push the volume up/down buttons when it's in its holster and my winter jacket is covering it. If I'm traveling with my iPod in my ear and suddenly the music gets a bit too loud, I've got to unzip my jacket, dig under the scarf, fish the iPod out of my pocket, remove my glove and do the click-wheel thingy to turn it down. Unless it's in radio mode and I accidentally pressed one of the buttons, in which case I just changed the station, or rewound the station (it does a tivo-like thing for radio, which is also cool when it's not getting in the way).
More importantly, the reason I wanted an audio recorder was to be able to quickly turn on the record mode. With the Blackberry, I've programmed one of the side buttons to switch to audio record mode, then I just click the button on the headset when I want to start or stop recording. With the iPod, I've got to do a whole lot of clicking and scrolling to get to the audio record mode, and that's not the least bit discreet (in the event that discretion is necessary).
Splitting the phone and audio modes to different devices also means I can't use one set of wires for both functions (wireless headset isn't an option either: the wireless sound quality is shit and the wires help to tether the device if I drop it, which has saved me on many occasions). And if I had to choose, I'd put the headset on the phone, and I did with all of my pre-Blackberry, non-music-playing cellphones.
Oh, and just one more complaint before I move on: the iPod charges with USB, whereas the Blackberry comes with an AC adapter that I plug into at night. During the day, I'm at work and I want to listen to the damn thing, so I can't plug it in. At night, my laptop is off to save power (he says, using an LCD projector to type a blog post). At other times, my laptop is packed away in my bag or it's on my lap, where I don't want white wires hanging about.
All of this is sounding like an argument in favour of Blackberries, which is troubling considering my thesis is that they're a bunch of fucks. But don't be worried: it's an argument in favour of what the Blackberry promises, not what it delivers. I'd much rather put all this time and energy into finding the cause of this problem, so that a Blackberry programmer could fix it. Which I could do, but it would be pointless, because Blackberry's repair people want me to pay $92.66 to get them to replace the faceplate and tell me there's nothing else wrong with my phone. Therefore... (wait for it) fucks.
So after less than a week, I'm breaking up with the iPod. But I'm not bitter, not even about the 10% restocking fee.
Okay, I am bitter, but the bitterness is toward Bell and Blackberry. This little Apple affair helped to reinforce my resolve to, well, resolve the situation.
I may not win with Bell and Blackberry, and it may not even be a zero-sum situation, but if I can at least come out neutral, I can at least do my best to make the sum negative.
- RG>
*Alas, when I checked my bill to confirm that my usage is under my limit, I discovered that nowhere in my bill or my contract does it say how many minutes are included in the motherfucking "Preferred All In 35" plan, nor can I find it on their website. This is leading me to write a complaint to the ministry of consumer affairs for not having a clear contract. I also might complain about the warranty thing, if I can figure out the tangle of legalese surrounding that too. Unfortunately, that requires me to contact Bell in writing, and I'd rather not spend an all-nighter writing an essay. It'd probably take less of my time to pay the fuckers to break my contract and work some more hours to earn the money for the difference, but that's probably just what Bell's lawyers and actuaries bank on. I'm too stubborn to roll over.
Considering I paid $109.95+tax for the extended warranty and they wanted to charge me $92.66 before they even look at what's wrong with it, and considering they're selling new ones of the same model for $199 without a contract, and considering I had the same problems with the (presumably not broken) loaner phone... well, there's no real conclusion, other than that they're a bunch of fucks. I just hoped saying it again in a slightly different way would help me feel better.
The problem with Bell is an easy one to treat. The goal is to give them as little of my money as possible, without wasting any. The problem is that I'm in a contract, and the monthly cost of breaking the contract ($20) exceeds the savings from going elsewhere ($14).
To ease the pain, I recently got an e-mail from them telling me that they wanted to charge me $2/month to continue to receive bills by e-mail. Either they're bluffing (wouldn't be the first time), or I need to call them up and get them to find four dollars more to charge me per month so that I can justify breaking up.
Also, I realized that if I drop the $10/month free incoming minutes charge, I have ten dollars' worth of leeway to spend on a texting plan, while still giving them less money than I am now.*
As for the Blackberry, that was a tougher nut to crack.
I use it for four things, all of which would have to find new homes if I switched away from it:
- Phone/addressbook
- Music player
- Calendar/to-do list
- Audio recording
The audio recorder was the first one I wanted to replace, since it is no longer working on the Blackberry at all. I went around to a couple stores and found that they're all crap. But then a twinkle under the counter gave me a thought: if a smartphone can make a good voice recorder, so would a sleek new mp3 player, designed in California.
Now, if Microsoft, and Rogers and Bell and Blackberry all disgust me, Apple makes me sick. Their devices--and I do mean their devices: you just buy the right to look hip with one--are designed to be controlled entirely by Apple unless you break into them. You can't even change the damn battery on one without sending it out for repair. They can remotely shut off iPhones, and you can only load music onto the iPod that Apple software lets you put onto it. (By contrast, I just load music onto a microSD card and the Blackberry scans and reads it. The Blackberry even acts as a reader for my microSD cards when I plug it in with the cable.)
But I have to admit the guy at the Apple store knew his shit. When I said I'd go to research the audio recording quality on the web before deciding to purchase, he recited the bitrate and format from memory. He also told me that the cables are included in the $40 AppleCare warranty, whereas the headset that no longer works with my Blackberry--yet surprisingly works perfectly well with the iPod--isn't covered by jack shit, which is why I have to buy a new one every three months or so. The AppleCare is also transferable if I sell the iPod or upgrade to a different model, which, at the very least, gives the impression of decency.
He also told me that the AppleCare also covers a free battery replacement, which is usually such-and-such amount of money, and that a user might need to replace it in every few months or years, depending on usage.
I bought the shiny dark purple iPod Nano, with the knowledge that I'd have to pay a 10% restocking fee if I returned it within the allotted 14 days. My boss is an Apple fanboi, so to speak, and I've heard her make use of the AppleCare, so I opted for that too.
So far, it's pretty neat. It's got FM radio that uses the headphones as antennae (I haven't listened to radio in years, and discovered I haven't missed anything), and it's got a pretty decent audio recorder. I've only put music on it from my work computer, because I don't yet have the heart to infect my Dell laptop with the iTunes software I downloaded (nor the Songbird setup file on my hard disk waiting to be clicked).
And I realized that I missed the Blackberry.
More specifically, the music playing isn't what's wrong with the Blackberry (well, with the latest firmware it is wrong, but otherwise the intended functionality satisfies my needs). I suppose it could be the headset or the headset jack, but the primary irritant is with the calendar and to-do list reminders that keep freezing. And the iPod can't replace that (yes, it has a calendar feature, but no keypad to add entries!). If anything, I'd be better off getting a PDA calendar and keeping the Blackberry for everything else.
Furthermore, the iPod doesn't fit my wardrobe. I stick it in my shirt pocket so it doesn't get scratched or crushed in my pants, but that won't work when I wear a t-shirt--or a sweater.
The input on the Blackberry is better, too. I can use it when I've got my cycling gloves on, and I can even push the volume up/down buttons when it's in its holster and my winter jacket is covering it. If I'm traveling with my iPod in my ear and suddenly the music gets a bit too loud, I've got to unzip my jacket, dig under the scarf, fish the iPod out of my pocket, remove my glove and do the click-wheel thingy to turn it down. Unless it's in radio mode and I accidentally pressed one of the buttons, in which case I just changed the station, or rewound the station (it does a tivo-like thing for radio, which is also cool when it's not getting in the way).
More importantly, the reason I wanted an audio recorder was to be able to quickly turn on the record mode. With the Blackberry, I've programmed one of the side buttons to switch to audio record mode, then I just click the button on the headset when I want to start or stop recording. With the iPod, I've got to do a whole lot of clicking and scrolling to get to the audio record mode, and that's not the least bit discreet (in the event that discretion is necessary).
Splitting the phone and audio modes to different devices also means I can't use one set of wires for both functions (wireless headset isn't an option either: the wireless sound quality is shit and the wires help to tether the device if I drop it, which has saved me on many occasions). And if I had to choose, I'd put the headset on the phone, and I did with all of my pre-Blackberry, non-music-playing cellphones.
Oh, and just one more complaint before I move on: the iPod charges with USB, whereas the Blackberry comes with an AC adapter that I plug into at night. During the day, I'm at work and I want to listen to the damn thing, so I can't plug it in. At night, my laptop is off to save power (he says, using an LCD projector to type a blog post). At other times, my laptop is packed away in my bag or it's on my lap, where I don't want white wires hanging about.
All of this is sounding like an argument in favour of Blackberries, which is troubling considering my thesis is that they're a bunch of fucks. But don't be worried: it's an argument in favour of what the Blackberry promises, not what it delivers. I'd much rather put all this time and energy into finding the cause of this problem, so that a Blackberry programmer could fix it. Which I could do, but it would be pointless, because Blackberry's repair people want me to pay $92.66 to get them to replace the faceplate and tell me there's nothing else wrong with my phone. Therefore... (wait for it) fucks.
So after less than a week, I'm breaking up with the iPod. But I'm not bitter, not even about the 10% restocking fee.
Okay, I am bitter, but the bitterness is toward Bell and Blackberry. This little Apple affair helped to reinforce my resolve to, well, resolve the situation.
I may not win with Bell and Blackberry, and it may not even be a zero-sum situation, but if I can at least come out neutral, I can at least do my best to make the sum negative.
- RG>
*Alas, when I checked my bill to confirm that my usage is under my limit, I discovered that nowhere in my bill or my contract does it say how many minutes are included in the motherfucking "Preferred All In 35" plan, nor can I find it on their website. This is leading me to write a complaint to the ministry of consumer affairs for not having a clear contract. I also might complain about the warranty thing, if I can figure out the tangle of legalese surrounding that too. Unfortunately, that requires me to contact Bell in writing, and I'd rather not spend an all-nighter writing an essay. It'd probably take less of my time to pay the fuckers to break my contract and work some more hours to earn the money for the difference, but that's probably just what Bell's lawyers and actuaries bank on. I'm too stubborn to roll over.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Bell and Blackberry are also a bunch of fucks
For the last two weeks, I've had a loaner Blackberry from Bell, because my phone (a Blackberry Pearl 8130) was sent in for extended warranty repairs. You see, when I had tried to update my firmware to the latest version, it caused a bunch of problems.
Because it's been more than a year since I had my phone, the extended warranty required me to take my phone into the store, rather than them send me a new phone and I return the old one (which is what happened when my phone broke inside the standard warranty period). So this inevitably long trip takes time out of my work day.
Finally, two weeks after giving in my phone, and having to put up with the various problems from transferring data to the loaner, I get a call that my phone is back.
Good, I thought. They found out what's wrong with it.
Nevermind that the exact same problems I had with my phone, I also encountered with the loaner phone. This despite the phone rep I had spoken to (the one who told me I'd have to take it into the store) assuring me that it must be a problem with the handset, otherwise he'd be getting calls like mine all the time. I have long been convinced that the problems I've had were with the Blackberry firmware, but there's no way to file bug reports, so the best you can do is update to the latest firmware when it comes out and hope they fixed your problems (which it never does)0.
Anyway, I went in today to pick up my phone.
They handed it back to me with a note saying that Blackberry didn't look at it because there's damage to the casing (from frequently being taken out of and replaced into the holster), and they'd charge me $92 or so before even looking inside it.
Excuse me? Warranty mean anything to you? My problems are with the inside, not the outside.
They asked if I wanted to pay the $92 and I asked them how much it would cost for a new phone (starting at $129), and how much it would cost to break my contract ($260!).
I was about to leave, when I realized that they didn't pay me back my deposit for the loaner. Also $280--more than they sell a new one for with no contract!
After about fifteen minutes of looking around, they concluded they lost the record of my deposit and I'd have to come back into the store (again!) with my receipt so they can refund me.
So these are my options:
- I pay $92 to have them send my phone away for another two weeks or more with the possibility that they fix the problems that I was also encountering with the loaner phone
- I keep my phone on the old firmware, voiding the extended warranty (which requires the customer to keep the phone's firmware up to date)
- I stay with Bell and switch to a different, cheaper phone (at least $130 plus tax and transferring fees)
- I pay $260 to drop my contract and move to a different provider (a "door #3 provider"), probably also invoking a bunch of other hidden fees, not to mention the price of the phone I'd probably have to buy with the new provider.
And this doesn't even include the saga of all the bullshit I had to take from Bell when I got this Blackberry in the first place!
I wish they still sold real cell phones, the kind that don't have cameras, try to play mp3s do your laundry.
Because the people who sell the things we have now are all a bunch of fucks.
- RG>
Because it's been more than a year since I had my phone, the extended warranty required me to take my phone into the store, rather than them send me a new phone and I return the old one (which is what happened when my phone broke inside the standard warranty period). So this inevitably long trip takes time out of my work day.
Finally, two weeks after giving in my phone, and having to put up with the various problems from transferring data to the loaner, I get a call that my phone is back.
Good, I thought. They found out what's wrong with it.
Nevermind that the exact same problems I had with my phone, I also encountered with the loaner phone. This despite the phone rep I had spoken to (the one who told me I'd have to take it into the store) assuring me that it must be a problem with the handset, otherwise he'd be getting calls like mine all the time. I have long been convinced that the problems I've had were with the Blackberry firmware, but there's no way to file bug reports, so the best you can do is update to the latest firmware when it comes out and hope they fixed your problems (which it never does)0.
Anyway, I went in today to pick up my phone.
They handed it back to me with a note saying that Blackberry didn't look at it because there's damage to the casing (from frequently being taken out of and replaced into the holster), and they'd charge me $92 or so before even looking inside it.
Excuse me? Warranty mean anything to you? My problems are with the inside, not the outside.
They asked if I wanted to pay the $92 and I asked them how much it would cost for a new phone (starting at $129), and how much it would cost to break my contract ($260!).
I was about to leave, when I realized that they didn't pay me back my deposit for the loaner. Also $280--more than they sell a new one for with no contract!
After about fifteen minutes of looking around, they concluded they lost the record of my deposit and I'd have to come back into the store (again!) with my receipt so they can refund me.
So these are my options:
- I pay $92 to have them send my phone away for another two weeks or more with the possibility that they fix the problems that I was also encountering with the loaner phone
- I keep my phone on the old firmware, voiding the extended warranty (which requires the customer to keep the phone's firmware up to date)
- I stay with Bell and switch to a different, cheaper phone (at least $130 plus tax and transferring fees)
- I pay $260 to drop my contract and move to a different provider (a "door #3 provider"), probably also invoking a bunch of other hidden fees, not to mention the price of the phone I'd probably have to buy with the new provider.
And this doesn't even include the saga of all the bullshit I had to take from Bell when I got this Blackberry in the first place!
I wish they still sold real cell phones, the kind that don't have cameras, try to play mp3s do your laundry.
Because the people who sell the things we have now are all a bunch of fucks.
- RG>
Friday, November 06, 2009
"We will be greeted as Lansdowne Liberators"
I've compared Larry O'Brien to George W. Bush before, if only because he did it first.
And here I go again. This time, it has to do with the long-anticipated results to the Nanos poll evaluating public opinion on the Lansdowne Live proposal. As fellow blogger David Reevely says, you can read pretty much anything into this poll.
However, one thing this poll puts to rest is O'Brien's assertions that Lansdowne Live has widspread support from the "silent majority". Using the Bush analogy, O'Brien was saying of himself and the Lansdowne Live people that "we would be greeted as liberators," and the Nanos poll shows that success at Lansdowne takes a heck of a lot more work than that.
I'll be at the Rally for a public solution to Lansdowne Park at City Hall (Marion Dewar Plaza) at noon next Friday, November 13th. Hope you will too.
- RG>
And here I go again. This time, it has to do with the long-anticipated results to the Nanos poll evaluating public opinion on the Lansdowne Live proposal. As fellow blogger David Reevely says, you can read pretty much anything into this poll.
However, one thing this poll puts to rest is O'Brien's assertions that Lansdowne Live has widspread support from the "silent majority". Using the Bush analogy, O'Brien was saying of himself and the Lansdowne Live people that "we would be greeted as liberators," and the Nanos poll shows that success at Lansdowne takes a heck of a lot more work than that.
I'll be at the Rally for a public solution to Lansdowne Park at City Hall (Marion Dewar Plaza) at noon next Friday, November 13th. Hope you will too.
- RG>
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Book release Friday: "SUN, FUN & SLAVERY : How to South Became the North's Playground"
Exile Infoshop is hosting a book release this Friday. Below is the text of the announcement.
- RG>
SUN, FUN & SLAVERY : How to South Became the North's PlaygroundIf you've never been to Exile (especially since they moved across the hall to their current space), check it out, it's a great space with lots of interesting stuff that you won't find in a regular bookstore.
a new book by our very own, Nelson Ross Laguna
"In our attempts to re-invent our own little paradise in someone’s else’s
backyard, we have in turn recreated a system we were determined to
destroy."
Friday, August 14th, 2009
8:00pm - doors open
8:30pm - one-on-one with the author
Exile Infoshop 256 Bank St. (at Cooper) Second Fl.
In the sixth Exile Press release, Sun, Fun & Slavery, Nelson Ross Laguna
explores modern day tourism in the americas and its intersections with
terrorism. Exposing modern tourism's calculated and disastrous effects in
South and Central America. As tourism, and the production of tourist
infrastrure entrench the priviliges of the North, and reinforce the
racilaization of poverty, we ask: What are our hidden histories of modern
slavery? How is the path of western imperialism continuing today? What is
to be done? Join us on Friday, August 19th for a discussion with Nelson
Ross Laguna, who will share his experiences & perspectives on sun, fun,
and slavery.
- RG>
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Solders in tight places
My laptop has had a couple of problems since I bought it in September 2007. Right off the bat, I didn't like that you could only adjust the volume through the software, requiring Windows to be running. This was an unwelcome change from my 2003 Toshiba laptop, which had a little wheel on the side so you could manually adjust the volume.
In April '08, the hard disk died. While this was stressful and took me a month to eventually deal with, Dell's warranty support was very helpful and got my drive replaced quickly. I was able to recover the information off of it, and since then I've always* backed up my hard disk (*read: I backed up once right after the incident, and have never crossed "back up" off my to-do list since then).
Earlier this year, my laptop battery reached the end of its life, and would no longer hold a charge. I had to weigh getting a new laptop versus simply replacing the battery.
If I bought a new battery, it would be about $200 instead of $600 (neither amount I was pleased with spending), and I wouldn't have to reinstall all my programs or worry about Windows Vista or Yogourt. But it also meant that I'd have to live with the other problems my laptop has.
A while ago, sometime after the one-year warranty expired, the audio jack started thinking that there was always something plugged into it, even if there wasn't. If I had earphones plugged in, audio went to the earphones. If I didn't have them plugged in, it still thought I did, so it didn't play sound on the onboard speakers. I eventually learned that if I stuck a mini jack cable in partway and used strong rubber bands to pull it sideways, it would work. I also couldn't rip records to mp3 because the line-in wasn't reliably carrying both channels.
This audio problem had a number of influences on my battery-or-new-laptop decision:
- I wouldn't be able to sell the Dell as easily
- A new laptop (i.e. one with working speakers) is that much more attractive
- While it's faster than my 2003 Toshiba laptop with the broken screen (which I use as my 'desktop'), it doesn't have audio to complete the audio/visual experience, and it doesn't have a parallel port for my laser printer.
I decided that if the price was under $200 and if I could get it by the end of the following week, I'd order the new battery. I phoned them up and spoke to some guy in southeast Asia who assured me that I'd get it by the prescribed time. Of course, he's from one of those cultures where customer service only goes so far as telling the customer what he wants so he'll buy the thing from you, and not a culture where it matters if this information is true.
On Friday of the following week, Gabby at Dell customer support got a call from an irate customer. I had been assured that I would receive the battery by the end of this week, and it has not arrived yet. Gabby told me it was shipped out that day, meaning it wouldn't arrive until the next business day--Monday--which is precisely the kind of waiting I deliberately tried to avoid. If I had known it would take that long, I would have bought a new laptop, and not from Dell!
So fast forward to tonight, and I plug in my earphones, and I hear a quiet electronic "click" and get no audio. I try jiggling the jack and putting pressure on it, with no luck. My audio is dead.
On top of this, I notice that the audio jack is very hot, which is quite unusual. I figure there's probably a short circuit, meaning the laptop's not safe to use.
Time to open 'er up.
I had previously opened up the laptop and gotten to the sound jack, only to discover it was hardwired into the motherboard. If it were connected by a plug, I'd have ordered a new one long ago to swap it out. But it isn't, so I couldn't.
And it's a long process to get that far into the machine. Dell has excellent documentation for disassembling its machines, including step-by-step instructions on how to get in to the motherboard (and how to get it back together). However, it still took me about an hour to get inside. While I had it open, I cleaned some of the parts of dust and other dirt.
Diagnosing the problem was hard. There are contacts that push against each other when you put the plug in, and I saw that the ones for the audio jack weren't making good contact. I did some fiddling around and got the contact working, but there was a second one in an angle I couldn't see, and I was hoping that it wasn't a source of the problem, because I didn't want to open this thing up again.
But the loose contact wasn't the only problem. I tried to inspect the connection to the board, and it was tough. The contacts are very small, 0.6mm wide. The solders are even smaller. I had a magnifying glass, but I couldn't get it close enough without blocking the light.
So I used my camera's macro mode to take a close-up photo, which I could then zoom in on the camera's screen to investigate.
This, too, was hard, as the lighting was poor, and it was hard to get the camera to autofocus at the right distance. I held up a bright bike light to the board, and took the photo top-down to make focusing easier. Unfortunately, a top-down angle also makes it hard to inspect the solders.
Nevertheless, I could tell that the all three solders in the leftmost cluster were broken.
So I knew I had to solder them back together. I plugged in my soldering iron and put some electrical tape over the neighbouring parts so that I didn't accidentally melt them off, as I was working with very small bits at a very tight angle. The furthest contact was easier, because there was about 0.3mm of space next to it, whereas the other two contacts were less than 0.2mm apart. That big black tarp on the right in the photo is the electrical tape.
I appeared to be successful with the first one, but the other two were too close together, and I would have difficulty trying to get a glob of solder on them without accidentally soldering the two of them together, which would be very tough to fix.
I tried anyway--without the glob of solder on the end of the iron--and took a photo to see if this made any progress.
Success! There was enough original solder on the contacts that I just had to melt it and it reestablished contact on its own (much more elegantly than my fix on the far one).
Of course, success wouldn't be conclusive until I get the machine back together.
Midway through reassembly, I find a screw that belonged somewhere inside. I taped it under the keyboard for future consideration (I am NOT going to take it back apart now!), and screwed the keyboard back into place. It's late, goddamnit.
When I turned on my laptop, I got onboard sound, for the first time in months!
Yay!
Let's hope it stays that way.
- RG>
In April '08, the hard disk died. While this was stressful and took me a month to eventually deal with, Dell's warranty support was very helpful and got my drive replaced quickly. I was able to recover the information off of it, and since then I've always* backed up my hard disk (*read: I backed up once right after the incident, and have never crossed "back up" off my to-do list since then).
Earlier this year, my laptop battery reached the end of its life, and would no longer hold a charge. I had to weigh getting a new laptop versus simply replacing the battery.
If I bought a new battery, it would be about $200 instead of $600 (neither amount I was pleased with spending), and I wouldn't have to reinstall all my programs or worry about Windows Vista or Yogourt. But it also meant that I'd have to live with the other problems my laptop has.
A while ago, sometime after the one-year warranty expired, the audio jack started thinking that there was always something plugged into it, even if there wasn't. If I had earphones plugged in, audio went to the earphones. If I didn't have them plugged in, it still thought I did, so it didn't play sound on the onboard speakers. I eventually learned that if I stuck a mini jack cable in partway and used strong rubber bands to pull it sideways, it would work. I also couldn't rip records to mp3 because the line-in wasn't reliably carrying both channels.
This audio problem had a number of influences on my battery-or-new-laptop decision:
- I wouldn't be able to sell the Dell as easily
- A new laptop (i.e. one with working speakers) is that much more attractive
- While it's faster than my 2003 Toshiba laptop with the broken screen (which I use as my 'desktop'), it doesn't have audio to complete the audio/visual experience, and it doesn't have a parallel port for my laser printer.
I decided that if the price was under $200 and if I could get it by the end of the following week, I'd order the new battery. I phoned them up and spoke to some guy in southeast Asia who assured me that I'd get it by the prescribed time. Of course, he's from one of those cultures where customer service only goes so far as telling the customer what he wants so he'll buy the thing from you, and not a culture where it matters if this information is true.
On Friday of the following week, Gabby at Dell customer support got a call from an irate customer. I had been assured that I would receive the battery by the end of this week, and it has not arrived yet. Gabby told me it was shipped out that day, meaning it wouldn't arrive until the next business day--Monday--which is precisely the kind of waiting I deliberately tried to avoid. If I had known it would take that long, I would have bought a new laptop, and not from Dell!
So fast forward to tonight, and I plug in my earphones, and I hear a quiet electronic "click" and get no audio. I try jiggling the jack and putting pressure on it, with no luck. My audio is dead.
On top of this, I notice that the audio jack is very hot, which is quite unusual. I figure there's probably a short circuit, meaning the laptop's not safe to use.
Time to open 'er up.
I had previously opened up the laptop and gotten to the sound jack, only to discover it was hardwired into the motherboard. If it were connected by a plug, I'd have ordered a new one long ago to swap it out. But it isn't, so I couldn't.
And it's a long process to get that far into the machine. Dell has excellent documentation for disassembling its machines, including step-by-step instructions on how to get in to the motherboard (and how to get it back together). However, it still took me about an hour to get inside. While I had it open, I cleaned some of the parts of dust and other dirt.
Diagnosing the problem was hard. There are contacts that push against each other when you put the plug in, and I saw that the ones for the audio jack weren't making good contact. I did some fiddling around and got the contact working, but there was a second one in an angle I couldn't see, and I was hoping that it wasn't a source of the problem, because I didn't want to open this thing up again.
But the loose contact wasn't the only problem. I tried to inspect the connection to the board, and it was tough. The contacts are very small, 0.6mm wide. The solders are even smaller. I had a magnifying glass, but I couldn't get it close enough without blocking the light.
So I used my camera's macro mode to take a close-up photo, which I could then zoom in on the camera's screen to investigate.
This, too, was hard, as the lighting was poor, and it was hard to get the camera to autofocus at the right distance. I held up a bright bike light to the board, and took the photo top-down to make focusing easier. Unfortunately, a top-down angle also makes it hard to inspect the solders.
Nevertheless, I could tell that the all three solders in the leftmost cluster were broken.
So I knew I had to solder them back together. I plugged in my soldering iron and put some electrical tape over the neighbouring parts so that I didn't accidentally melt them off, as I was working with very small bits at a very tight angle. The furthest contact was easier, because there was about 0.3mm of space next to it, whereas the other two contacts were less than 0.2mm apart. That big black tarp on the right in the photo is the electrical tape.
I appeared to be successful with the first one, but the other two were too close together, and I would have difficulty trying to get a glob of solder on them without accidentally soldering the two of them together, which would be very tough to fix.I tried anyway--without the glob of solder on the end of the iron--and took a photo to see if this made any progress.
Success! There was enough original solder on the contacts that I just had to melt it and it reestablished contact on its own (much more elegantly than my fix on the far one).Of course, success wouldn't be conclusive until I get the machine back together.
Midway through reassembly, I find a screw that belonged somewhere inside. I taped it under the keyboard for future consideration (I am NOT going to take it back apart now!), and screwed the keyboard back into place. It's late, goddamnit.
When I turned on my laptop, I got onboard sound, for the first time in months!
Yay!
Let's hope it stays that way.
- RG>
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
McDonald's Fiveniversary
Five years ago, June 16, 2004, back when I had many fewer things to blog and a lot more time in which to blog, I went out with some friends to see Super Size Me with a handful of friends at the Bytowne. After the show, we visited the McDonald's on Rideau. It was the last time I've stepped into a McDonald's restaurant.
Of course, now that I have a job and less time to prepare actual meals, it just means I eat at other fast food joints instead with even greater frequency. Which kinda defeats the point.
I still get cravings for McDonald's food, which is why I cringe whenever I see a parent bring their kid into a fast food place. No, those of us in here are already lost! Save your children and keep them away!
To commemorate the fiveniversary, I bought a copy of Super Size Me from the Elgin Street Video table at the Minto Park Sale this weekend. I don't think I'll watch it.
- RG>
Of course, now that I have a job and less time to prepare actual meals, it just means I eat at other fast food joints instead with even greater frequency. Which kinda defeats the point.I still get cravings for McDonald's food, which is why I cringe whenever I see a parent bring their kid into a fast food place. No, those of us in here are already lost! Save your children and keep them away!
To commemorate the fiveniversary, I bought a copy of Super Size Me from the Elgin Street Video table at the Minto Park Sale this weekend. I don't think I'll watch it.
- RG>
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Scotiabank's MoneySlave
I've got a couple things to blog about tonight. I'll schedule the other post to go up tomorrow, assuming I get to it. [Edit: which I won't.]
Anyhoo, I was checking my credit card balance online and noticed that they had credited my account with the annual moneyback payment. Which is unusual, since the annual credit is supposed to happen in July. 'Taint annual if it happens every seven months!
Now, Scotiabank (or more formally, the Bank of Nova Scotia) doesn't have the best reputation in many parts of the world, nor had it with my mother. But my dad did his banking with Scotiabank, and started me up with an account when I was ten years old.
Since then, I, like my father, have gotten credit cards, investments, and RSPs through Scotiabank. I've got a MoneyMaster "High Interest" savings account. Hell, I've even applied for a job with the company, unsuccessfully, my conscience is glad to report. I've considered changing banks, but most banks charge you an arm and a leg to take money out of other banks' machines, and Scotiabank has pretty darn good branch and bank machine coverage in downtown Ottawa.
So not having had abysmal treatment by Scotiabank, I've stayed with them.
And I haven't minded the Moneyback VISA card either. Not many frills (which, frankly, is how I like things), no annual fee (as far as I knew, though apparently it was $8), and it gives you "money back".
Now, the "free money" concept is, obviously, not free. Whenever you make a purchase at a store with your credit card, the credit card company takes a fixed per-purchase fee (like $0.50 to $1) plus a variable "discount fee" off the price of the item (like 1% to 3%). So by simply using a credit card, you are driving costs up for the businesses you frequent. For this reason, I try to use cash or debit when making smaller purchases at local stores. I don't try too hard, but I try.
Since the bank is taking a few percent from each purchase, it is to their benefit to get you to spend more money with your card, especially if you're the type of person who doesn't earn them much money otherwise, through annual fees and exorbitant interest charges. To encourage you, they often offer various incentives, either in the form of points programs (like for cards associated with stores like Canadian Tire, Sears, or Loblaws) or with "Moneyback" type deals.
These "Moneyback" deals are structured so that the more you spend, the more you'll get back (PDF warning). In the case of the Scotiabank Moneyback VISA, they'll give you a mere 0.25% "back" on the first $1500 you spend in a year, 0.50% on the second $1500, and 1% on anything above that.
Every July, they cash you out for however much money you spent in the last year, the counter resets to $0, and you go back to earning 0.25% until you spend enough money to kick up to the next bracket. So when I paid a decent price on a new bed this past Boxing week, even though I could afford to pay cash, it benefited me to use my Moneyback card, in order to maximize my cash back rewards.
(Incidentally, Sears tried to sign me up for a Sears card when I bought the bed. The benefits they offered me were $10 credit, free delivery, and I could pay for the bed in April with zero interest. Seeing as $10 is nothing on the cost of a bed, I had the money to pay for it now, and I had a great friend with a minivan, "zero interest" was also an accurate description of my reaction to this offer.)
But once you get up to 1%, it's a sweet spot to stay in. You don't want to, say, have your counter set back to zero. Which is why I was annoyed by the cashback getting cleaned out in February. Only eight months into the year, and four months until the next reset, I was getting seriously deprived of my rightfully-earned dozen or so dollars of upcoming reward.
So I called up the bank. Oh what fun that always is.
They politely explained to me that my card was being discontinued, and that since "most people" would be switching to the new "Momentum VISA" card (which isn't even listed on their list of all Scotiabank VISA cards), they were taking the liberty of switching everybody over to this card which they would be sending me in March.
How nice of them to tell me this.
So apparently there was something on my November statement. I didn't have my November statement with me when I was on the phone, and even then this wasn't sufficient notice in my opinion. I check my statements online, and I only receive the paper statements as a backup. I later discovered that this notice was on the third page of that statement, after the list of purchases was long finished. I don't see why I never got any notice of this in the online message centre when I signed on to my online account.
Nevertheless, switching me over without my explicit permission was.not.cool.
So I asked them what was different about this Momentum card and why I was forced to change. Well, for one, the Moneyback card was being discontinued, she said. As for what was different, she started off by telling me that the interest rate went up from an insulting 18.59% to an obscene 19.99%, there was a $39 annual fee. Oh really?
The reward structure was also different. Instead of the ladder structure described earlier, the lady told me there would be "2% cash back on the first $25,000 if the vendor is in the VISA network" (I stopped her before she bothered telling me what happened after that threshold), otherwise 1%. I didn't get a decent explanation of what the hell the "VISA network" is. Not this.
"So a store that accepts VISA is in the VISA network, right?"
"No, they have to be registered..."
Yeah, right, whatever. So the rate is really 1% then.
One thing I discovered in this conversation was that whenever I didn't know how to respond with flustered indignation, I'd just remain silent and she would fill the silence by volunteering more information I wouldn't have even thought to ask about. Which is actually a tactic I learned about tonight (after the phone call) in this helpful YouTube video law lecture called Don't talk to cops.
I think this silent treatment was how I happened to learn that there's this thing called the "No-Fee Moneyback VISA" card. Like the Momentum VISA, the No-Fee Moneyback has the same higher interest rate (not a problem for me since I never spend what I don't have), it has the same insurance plan, and it has the same payback structure as the Moneyback card I currently have. It also--get this--doesn't have any fucking annual fee!
So I'm trying to figure out the logic of their decision. Here we have a card that is nearly identical to the one Scotiabank is discontinuing--it even is slightly better, in terms of fees--and one that costs more in annual fees, requires a new card to be issued and is called something different. And they decided that most people would choose the different one. And by "choose", they mean "the bank will tell you that they are doing this automatically, and they aren't going to tell you upfront about any alternative."
I even went through this very painstakingly with the CSR and followed it with "now you can see why I'm frustrated by this, right?" and she said yes, although I think that's just a habit for call centre people.
So I told her to sign me up for the no-fee card, and she let me in on the little secret that I could keep the card I already have. It's that similar. More flabbergastion flummoxed from my flanges.
It wasn't until after I hung up that I realized that the whole point I had called in the first place--being shortchanged by my Moneyback being cashed out too early--hadn't been dealt with at all! So I called back and spoke with a rep named Candice.
She wasn't nearly as helpful, nor, it seemed, as friendly. Without the backstory to help me out, I could tell I wouldn't have much luck.
It didn't help that she didn't seem to have a fuck of a clue of why I was upset about this, either. Apparently the new payout period ends in November, so I'll get about seven months, giving me two seven-month periods in a row, shortchanging me of five months of top-rate cash-backing. Are the banks really this desperate?
She said she couldn't do anything for me for money I hadn't "earned" yet, and to call back in November.
Thanks, Candice.
So now I'm at home and looking at my December 3 statement, and the notice saying how much fun I'll have with the Momentum VISA card.
And looking at the Momentum rates on paper, I thought it would actually be a better choice, and I created the table below [hand-coded, since Blogger doesn't seem to want to do tables... I have no idea what the table will look like when I hit "publish"] to prove it, only to realize that the old Moneyback card with the lower cashback rate on the first $3000 would still be better, due to the lower fees.
Now, this doesn't include the fact that one apparently gets "A full 2% cash back on eligible Gas, Grocery, Recurring Payments and Drugstore purchases," since I have no clue what "eligible" is supposed to mean, nor did the first CSR, other than the fact that these companies have to be in the "VISA network". (See above link for "VISA network" for how helpful that information is)
It also doesn't include the fact that additional cards on the Momentum plan are an additional $15 each, nor does it include the fact that I am now on the No-Fee card, meaning that first column can increase by an $8 reward per year.
So in addition to forcing people into a higher interest rate, Scotiabank is conning its customers into accepting at least $19.25 ($11.25 + $8) in increased net annual charges--even more to those customers who spend under $3000 per year (or Moneyback period, which at this rate seems to be more like seven months).
And this kind of bullshit happens all the time. No matter how closely you look, there will always be finer print to overlook with the lovely bastards we call credit card companies.
- RG>
Anyhoo, I was checking my credit card balance online and noticed that they had credited my account with the annual moneyback payment. Which is unusual, since the annual credit is supposed to happen in July. 'Taint annual if it happens every seven months!
Now, Scotiabank (or more formally, the Bank of Nova Scotia) doesn't have the best reputation in many parts of the world, nor had it with my mother. But my dad did his banking with Scotiabank, and started me up with an account when I was ten years old.
Since then, I, like my father, have gotten credit cards, investments, and RSPs through Scotiabank. I've got a MoneyMaster "High Interest" savings account. Hell, I've even applied for a job with the company, unsuccessfully, my conscience is glad to report. I've considered changing banks, but most banks charge you an arm and a leg to take money out of other banks' machines, and Scotiabank has pretty darn good branch and bank machine coverage in downtown Ottawa.
So not having had abysmal treatment by Scotiabank, I've stayed with them.
And I haven't minded the Moneyback VISA card either. Not many frills (which, frankly, is how I like things), no annual fee (as far as I knew, though apparently it was $8), and it gives you "money back".
Now, the "free money" concept is, obviously, not free. Whenever you make a purchase at a store with your credit card, the credit card company takes a fixed per-purchase fee (like $0.50 to $1) plus a variable "discount fee" off the price of the item (like 1% to 3%). So by simply using a credit card, you are driving costs up for the businesses you frequent. For this reason, I try to use cash or debit when making smaller purchases at local stores. I don't try too hard, but I try.
Since the bank is taking a few percent from each purchase, it is to their benefit to get you to spend more money with your card, especially if you're the type of person who doesn't earn them much money otherwise, through annual fees and exorbitant interest charges. To encourage you, they often offer various incentives, either in the form of points programs (like for cards associated with stores like Canadian Tire, Sears, or Loblaws) or with "Moneyback" type deals.
These "Moneyback" deals are structured so that the more you spend, the more you'll get back (PDF warning). In the case of the Scotiabank Moneyback VISA, they'll give you a mere 0.25% "back" on the first $1500 you spend in a year, 0.50% on the second $1500, and 1% on anything above that.
Every July, they cash you out for however much money you spent in the last year, the counter resets to $0, and you go back to earning 0.25% until you spend enough money to kick up to the next bracket. So when I paid a decent price on a new bed this past Boxing week, even though I could afford to pay cash, it benefited me to use my Moneyback card, in order to maximize my cash back rewards.
(Incidentally, Sears tried to sign me up for a Sears card when I bought the bed. The benefits they offered me were $10 credit, free delivery, and I could pay for the bed in April with zero interest. Seeing as $10 is nothing on the cost of a bed, I had the money to pay for it now, and I had a great friend with a minivan, "zero interest" was also an accurate description of my reaction to this offer.)
But once you get up to 1%, it's a sweet spot to stay in. You don't want to, say, have your counter set back to zero. Which is why I was annoyed by the cashback getting cleaned out in February. Only eight months into the year, and four months until the next reset, I was getting seriously deprived of my rightfully-earned dozen or so dollars of upcoming reward.
So I called up the bank. Oh what fun that always is.
They politely explained to me that my card was being discontinued, and that since "most people" would be switching to the new "Momentum VISA" card (which isn't even listed on their list of all Scotiabank VISA cards), they were taking the liberty of switching everybody over to this card which they would be sending me in March.
How nice of them to tell me this.
So apparently there was something on my November statement. I didn't have my November statement with me when I was on the phone, and even then this wasn't sufficient notice in my opinion. I check my statements online, and I only receive the paper statements as a backup. I later discovered that this notice was on the third page of that statement, after the list of purchases was long finished. I don't see why I never got any notice of this in the online message centre when I signed on to my online account.
Nevertheless, switching me over without my explicit permission was.not.cool.
So I asked them what was different about this Momentum card and why I was forced to change. Well, for one, the Moneyback card was being discontinued, she said. As for what was different, she started off by telling me that the interest rate went up from an insulting 18.59% to an obscene 19.99%, there was a $39 annual fee. Oh really?
The reward structure was also different. Instead of the ladder structure described earlier, the lady told me there would be "2% cash back on the first $25,000 if the vendor is in the VISA network" (I stopped her before she bothered telling me what happened after that threshold), otherwise 1%. I didn't get a decent explanation of what the hell the "VISA network" is. Not this.
"So a store that accepts VISA is in the VISA network, right?"
"No, they have to be registered..."
Yeah, right, whatever. So the rate is really 1% then.
One thing I discovered in this conversation was that whenever I didn't know how to respond with flustered indignation, I'd just remain silent and she would fill the silence by volunteering more information I wouldn't have even thought to ask about. Which is actually a tactic I learned about tonight (after the phone call) in this helpful YouTube video law lecture called Don't talk to cops.
I think this silent treatment was how I happened to learn that there's this thing called the "No-Fee Moneyback VISA" card. Like the Momentum VISA, the No-Fee Moneyback has the same higher interest rate (not a problem for me since I never spend what I don't have), it has the same insurance plan, and it has the same payback structure as the Moneyback card I currently have. It also--get this--doesn't have any fucking annual fee!
So I'm trying to figure out the logic of their decision. Here we have a card that is nearly identical to the one Scotiabank is discontinuing--it even is slightly better, in terms of fees--and one that costs more in annual fees, requires a new card to be issued and is called something different. And they decided that most people would choose the different one. And by "choose", they mean "the bank will tell you that they are doing this automatically, and they aren't going to tell you upfront about any alternative."
I even went through this very painstakingly with the CSR and followed it with "now you can see why I'm frustrated by this, right?" and she said yes, although I think that's just a habit for call centre people.
So I told her to sign me up for the no-fee card, and she let me in on the little secret that I could keep the card I already have. It's that similar. More flabbergastion flummoxed from my flanges.
It wasn't until after I hung up that I realized that the whole point I had called in the first place--being shortchanged by my Moneyback being cashed out too early--hadn't been dealt with at all! So I called back and spoke with a rep named Candice.
She wasn't nearly as helpful, nor, it seemed, as friendly. Without the backstory to help me out, I could tell I wouldn't have much luck.
It didn't help that she didn't seem to have a fuck of a clue of why I was upset about this, either. Apparently the new payout period ends in November, so I'll get about seven months, giving me two seven-month periods in a row, shortchanging me of five months of top-rate cash-backing. Are the banks really this desperate?
She said she couldn't do anything for me for money I hadn't "earned" yet, and to call back in November.
Thanks, Candice.
So now I'm at home and looking at my December 3 statement, and the notice saying how much fun I'll have with the Momentum VISA card.
And looking at the Momentum rates on paper, I thought it would actually be a better choice, and I created the table below [hand-coded, since Blogger doesn't seem to want to do tables... I have no idea what the table will look like when I hit "publish"] to prove it, only to realize that the old Moneyback card with the lower cashback rate on the first $3000 would still be better, due to the lower fees.
| Amount spent | Cash back with $8 Fee Moneyback | Cash back with Momentum |
| $0 | -$8 Annual Fee | -$39 Annual Fee |
| $1500 | $3.75 @ 0.25% -$4.25 total | $15 @ 1% -$24 total |
| $2350 | $3.75 @ 0.25% + $4.25 @ 0.50% $0 total | $23.50 @ 1% -$15.5 total |
| $3000 | $3.75 @ 0.25% + $7.50 @ 0.50% $3.25 total | $30 @ 1% -$9 total |
| $3900 | $3.75 @ 0.25% + $7.50 @ 0.50% + $9 @ 1% $11.25 total | $39 @ 1% $0 total |
| Over $3900 | Above plus 1% | Above plus 1% |
Now, this doesn't include the fact that one apparently gets "A full 2% cash back on eligible Gas, Grocery, Recurring Payments and Drugstore purchases," since I have no clue what "eligible" is supposed to mean, nor did the first CSR, other than the fact that these companies have to be in the "VISA network". (See above link for "VISA network" for how helpful that information is)
It also doesn't include the fact that additional cards on the Momentum plan are an additional $15 each, nor does it include the fact that I am now on the No-Fee card, meaning that first column can increase by an $8 reward per year.
So in addition to forcing people into a higher interest rate, Scotiabank is conning its customers into accepting at least $19.25 ($11.25 + $8) in increased net annual charges--even more to those customers who spend under $3000 per year (or Moneyback period, which at this rate seems to be more like seven months).
And this kind of bullshit happens all the time. No matter how closely you look, there will always be finer print to overlook with the lovely bastards we call credit card companies.
- RG>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
