Technically Incorrect

Sometimes, readers write to me. Sometimes, a couple of their words begin with an "f" or a "b." However, on Friday it was just "b"s. "Best Buy," "Best Buy," they said, along with one or two other words beginning with "b."

The customers' simmering frustration seemed to be directed at a Black Friday offer of a spectacular deal on an HP Pavilion P6214y package. I am sure this was a very fine offer. Unfortunately, Best Buy kept taking orders for it after it didn't have any more of the product.

The Best Buy community forum was positively humming with anguish. A poster named Ibanezlord wrote: "I ordered the HP Pavillion P6214y bundle the minute it was available online which was on 11/26 around 11:36pm Pacific time. How long will it be untill (sic) I receive my entire order?"

This sounded reasonable. Measured, even.

Best Buy employs such warm, friendly people.

(Credit: CC Kyle Mac/Flickr)

Ibanezlord continued: "The printer is supposed to be here this Friday 12/4, but I am more concerned on how long it is going to take to get the whole package. I would hate for BB to send me a part of the package and then expect me to pay shipping to send it back if my computer never shows up. Why would BB sell me something they do not even have in stock? Also, there was no indication of the package being back ordered."

The more I read, the more concerned I became. I know people can get rather upset when they buy things, when they Best Buy things, and then don't get them. Posters to Best Buy's forums were concerned that they wouldn't even get their shipping fees back. And it's the little things that can really rile.

So I contacted Best Buy about the readers' complaints, and the official reply was this: "On Thanksgiving morning we noticed a system error that allowed a limited quantity of special offers to be processed after the product had sold out. This resulted in a limited number of orders involving those products to be canceled."

As all mathematicians know, many numbers have their limits, but this was an offer that enticed people to buy computers with very lovely numbers.

Best Buy continued: "While it is unusual for our system to experience errors like this, as soon as we became aware of the issue we fixed it and notified affected customers. We encourage those customers to contact us if they have any questions, and we'll continue to make the appropriate adjustments to ensure our customers receive the service they expect when shopping with Best Buy. We apologize for the uncommon error."

But will Best Buy do anything for these depressed, disconsolate, discombobulated customers?

I did ask. And here's the reply I got late Friday from Erin Gunderson at Best Buy: "At this time we are encouraging affected customers to contact our customer relations department. Once they get in touch with a representative, we will handle [the problem] on a case by case basis."

One can only hope it will all be handled with that most service-oriented "f" and "b"- fair and balanced.

Perhaps you have already become used to Verizon's Droid tossing names at the iPhone like an 8-year-old boy behind his teacher's back.

However, the latest ill feelings directed at Apple's little cutey seem beyond even anything heard in an elementary school.

In a new TV spot, Droid asks an important question: "Should a phone be pretty?" To which many sane people would say "yes," and many emotionally challenged beings made of metal would say, "Huh? What?"

Its answer--the latest in its presentation of the Droid as a robotphone--is to hurl metallic-tasting custard pies as if the Apple store was a state fair.

"Should it be a tiara-wearing digitally clueless beauty pageant queen?" belches the ad's rhetoric, clearly referencing the iPhone, while wrapping the pie in a question.

I know many Socratically-inclined Apple fanpersons will object to the notion that beauty is only skin deep. But they will surely rail against the mere suggestion that the iPhone is digitally clueless.

Of course, this ad implicitly suggests that the Droid is, well, one of Cinderella's sisters, which might well affect its abilities to entice certain sectors of the populace.

Actually, the suggestion is more than implicit, for the deeply hirsute voice declares: "Is it a precious porcelain figurine of a phone? In truth, no."

So do you wait for a design that is pretty and is, as this ad so elegantly puts it, "racehorse duct-taped to a Scud missile fast" or do you have to compromise?

I know they say you can't have everything in life, but surely there must be some very attractive engineer out there who can give us everything in a few square inches of cell phone.

An increasing number of people are meeting the loves of their lives, or at least of their months, on Facebook.

However, a consequence of this might be that an increasing number of people think they will encounter love's intrepid arrow by socially networking. It seems, indeed, that some might be making advances toward their psychologists. Or even their proctologists.

The U.K.'s Medical Defense Union, an organization whose goal is to "defend the professional reputations of our members when their clinical performance is called into question," is concerned that some of its members resort to politeness when patients request the pleasure of their company via Facebook.

According to the Telegraph, the MDU believes that doctors have become well aware of the need to be careful about material they post on their Facebook pages.

Wasn't the original purpose of Facebook to find a date?

(Credit: CC Andrew Feinberg/Flickr)

But Dr. Emma Cuzner, the MDU's medical-legal adviser recently wrote in the MDU Journal: "Doctors may be less prepared for patients using sites like Facebook to ask them out on a date."

Some doctors apparently feel one ought, at the very least, to politely reply in the negative. However, Cuzner contended: "Given that this is not a professional route of communication, any correspondence of this sort would clearly stray outside the doctor/patient relationship."

But sometimes even the definition of what is professional is open to interpretation.

What if one of your patients happens upon you at the local corner shop and suggests you have coffee? It would hardly be possible to look him or her in the face, say nothing, turn away, and recommence your search for peanut butter and a large tub of Ben & Jerry's Magic Brownies.

So one can perhaps understand a doctor's natural urge to at least politely decline. What if that patient then badmouths them to other patients? What harm can possibly be done by a simple "no, thank you"?

Moreover, the thing about the Web is that if someone wants to find you, if someone wants to contact you, they can and they will. Yes, you can have better privacy controls on your Facebook account. But information tends to take on a freedom that is hard to anticipate and approaches can come in ways that one least suspects.

The MDU's first priority is protection. Yet one can imagine that some doctors, when approached in any kind of public forum, might feel more inclined to reply in that same forum, however politely, just so that it can be clear and known what their reply really was.

Of course, they could always reply by sending a "Which Kind of Drug Are You?" quiz. Or perhaps the even more popular "What Kind of Evil Creature Are You?"

That's the thing about Facebook. It just brings you so many new, fun ways to communicate.

If you thought that all wireless carriers know just how good their competitors' networks are, you might be suffering from a dropped conception.

In a recent speech to the Association of National Advertisers, posted on the AdAge Web site, Verizon Chief Marketing Officer John Stratton explained that his company couldn't get hold of any good data on just how reliable AT&T's network is. So it commissioned a third-party survey, one that seems to have sent it giddy with joy.

"What we saw, we sort of suspected, but it was almost astounding," he said.

So almost astounding, in fact, that Stratton said the company canned its fourth-quarter holiday campaign, which had already been produced but not yet aired (and presumably did not mention AT&T), and began mapping out its besmirchment of its rival's alleged network deficiencies.

"There was a bit of fact here that needed to be expressed aggressively to the marketplace," he added.

The bit of fact, which AT&T feels has been stretched into the part of the bookstore entitled "fiction," revolved around the accusation that AT&T's network has more holes than your average chunk of emmental.

The new Verizon ads seem certainly to have stirred a girding of loins in the marketplace and perhaps helped sales of the Droid, which are approaching 1 million.

Stratton added that because people are using cell phones in so many more ways, the strength of a company's network will be an increasingly important factor in consumer choice.

Strangely, he said nothing about Verizon one day offering the iPhone on its network.

There again, with the agility the company showed in producing the anti-AT&T ads so quickly, perhaps they're already shooting some happy Verizon iPhone ads. You know, just in case. You know, somewhere in Fiji, perhaps. You know, with the money they're saving now that AT&T has dropped its lawsuit against the map ads.

You know that apocalypse thing we're always being told might be just around the corner? Well, do you feel the chilling breeze? Do you feel the troubled twittering in the trees?

For here is a tale that I know you will discuss with your loved ones, perhaps with other people's loved ones, even with your psychological professional, the minute you hear it.

It appears a man called Dana Hanna is standing at the altar on November 21. He utters those most solemn vows about how he will love and obey or whatever it is that married people claim to do these days.

The officiant pronounces that Dana and his lovely bride, Tracy, are now married. Does Dana weep? Does he kiss his bride?

Ah, no. For Dana's Twitter moniker is TheSoftwareJedi and his first loyalty is to his digital followers. So, much to his wife's surprise, he whips out his cell phone and updates his statuses on both Twitter and Facebook. Right there at the altar. He also hands his wife's cell phone over to her.

Now that he has uploaded the evidence (which we're assuming isn't staged), Dana insists that this was all done for fun.

Indeed, he explained on YouTube: "I have a lot of family scattered around the country and we all use Facebook a lot to keep in touch. So when Tracy and I were engaged, most of my family found out via Facebook because we updated our statuses."

If you're wondering what it is he tweeted from the altar, here it is: "Standing at the altar with @TracyPage where just a second ago, she became my wife! Gotta go, time to kiss my bride. #weddingday"

However, another tweet sent on Monday night by Hanna, who is chief architect of NextDayPets.com and president of Torian Technologies, might perhaps offer an even greater insight into his complex and socially networked psyche: "Just changed over the laundry for @TracyPage and was thrown off by the fact a bra was in there. Not used to living with a woman again."

Oh, Tracy, are you sure about this? I only ask because I just tried to access the Tracy Page Twitter feed and received the message "this page doesn't exist."

Some, perhaps including Rupert Murdoch, might find this story uplifting.

While there has been much recent bellowing, whining, and general cat-on-heat griping about Google making money from the fine work of others, now I can report that some are finding ways to make money piggybacking on the broad spine of Google's engineering.

Two enterprising entities, different in their form but united in their purpose, have attempted to use Google's Street View as a medium for their own commercial messages.

First, there was car rental company AutoShare, the Canadian equivalent Zipcar in the U.S. You know, the folks who are always reserving spots in your favorite parking lot. Well, AutoShare thought it would be fun to ask its customers to look out for its cars on Street View and offer a limited number of them prizes for their vision.

(Credit: AutoShare)

The prize wasn't much: 100 strong Canadian dollars. But with some astute ad targeting in locations such as Facebook and Google, their "In-The-Wild" promotion seems to have entertained the world-weary citizens of Toronto.

Indeed, the AutoShare Twitter page shows that people got rather excited about looking for AutoShare's 200 cars on Google's public-spirited cameras.

This enterprising thought process was, perhaps, topped by Editors. Editors is an indie band (don't most bands have to be indie these days?) from the British town of Birmingham, where the people who claim to be my parents say I was born.

To launch their latest album, Editors used a little Flash trickery to hack into Street View, London version, and create their own custom locations where people could enjoy some of their really very fine music and even see some of the band's fans. (Video embedded)

Editors were rather clever in choosing locations that were not normally accessible on Street View.

Recently, I wrote about IKEA's wonderful use of Facebook to launch a store in Malmo, Sweden. And I know some people thought one should point out that this use was not entirely in accordance with Facebook's promotional guidelines.

However, when companies decide that on occasion they'd prefer to use information you thought might be private for commercial gain, when companies ask you to opt out (if they ask you at all) rather than opt in, there are those who might feel that some enterprising uses of, say, Facebook and Google Street View, should be classified as pioneering.

Great commerce, just like great art, sometimes breaks a couple of rules, doesn't it? In fact, Murdoch has done it quite brilliantly on occasion.

The Disney Company is always so good at accessing one's inner child. The hope, the joy, the glory of absolute love, family goodness, and everything that sails in it.

So I am thrown a little off course when I hear that Disney may have falsely accused an 11-year-old boy of hacking the Pirates of the Caribbean video game and disabled his account.

The account I have read comes from the boy's dad, Brian Guy. Guy is a manager of MySQL's hardy pirates at Sun Microsystems. He also has a blog, which was positively fulminating with frustration Tuesday, as Guy told the story of his son's video game review site.

The site, Carsonreviews.com, seems to this untrained eye to be a rather fine construction, full of wit and wisdom. For example: "While my parents are busy cleaning the house for Thanksgiving, I am busy checking out free online games.= )"

Yet Carson's dad says: "Disney has falsely accused my 11-year-old son of hacking the online game, and Disney temporarily banned his account. They sent him a curt e-mail lecturing him about something he didn't even do."

Does a pirate ever accused another pirate of pirating? Just wondering.

(Credit: CC Joe Shlabotnik/Flickr)

Dad does seem like a fair and remarkably balanced chap as he explained: "I can see how at first glance, they might have misinterpreted his chat logs. Another user had made my son aware of a "glitch" (that's what they called it) that allowed users to rapid fire their cannons."

We are all insecure in this currently crazy world and any opportunity to rapid fire one's cannons at least deserves some attention. However, Carson quickly realized that speeding up his firing might require some file-changing. Which is a bad, bad thing to contemplate.

Dad posted the logs from his son's site to show that Carson was merely asking questions. I post them here for your perusal and edification:

However, he says Disney rapid-fired an e-mail that showed the darker side of its piratical nature.

Dad says Disney espied the logs, reached for its rum, muttered yo-ho-ho, and declared this was proof of "the use of third-party software, shown in the logs." The company also froze his son's account.

Dad entreated Disney by e-mail. Someone called Tony from Disney's Online Member Services apparently replied: "As a family-friendly company, all in-game chat is moderated equally for everyone regardless of age to maintain a friendly and safe online environment for all to enjoy. In regards to your account, the use or distribution of any software or device that allows automated or other manipulation of gameplay is not allowed. Such use may result in the termination of your account."

Dad didn't feel this answered the question, so he adorned his blog with his feelings. He would like Disney to apologize and, as of writing, he says he has not received such an apology.

I do not sense Pinocchio's lengthening nose in any part of Guy's story, so I, too, have attempted to contact Disney and will update should I receive a reply. I do hope that everyone can become BFFs again.

Perhaps this is an instance of careless customer service. But when your customer is 11 years old, perhaps you should pause and ask yourself: What would Johnny Depp do?"

Sometimes ingenuity doesn't quite lead you to a comfortable place.

The enterprising folks at WPMI TV in Mobile, Ala., decided that they should reach out on a real-time basis to their viewers. They erected a billboard, adorned it with an image of three of its most photogenic anchors, and added a live Twitter feed.

The whole thing ran very smoothly, until a passing human took this photograph and sent it in to The Palmetto Scoop.

(Credit: The Palmetto Scoop via Mashable)

Perhaps one's first reaction would be that this image might have enjoyed a little concoction.

However, Mashable has confirmed that not only is it real, but, citing the Lagniappe blog, it says WPMI-TV's general manager and news director have allegedly been suspended for a week because of this unfortunate conflagration.

This all seems just slightly odd. Television and radio has always been fond of slipping in a seven-second delay just in case untoward syllables slip through the mouths of guests or, indeed, hosts. It seems that no such delay was considered for this Twitter feed.

Yet who might have imagined such an unhappy coincidence might have occurred?

I'm sure that all Dell laptops are wonderful machines that would make perfect gifts for even the most misanthropic, laptop-loathing humans.

However, my feelings were temporarily frozen, not unlike Michael Douglas' forehead, when I espied that Austin's finest was trying to garland this holiday period with a Netbook that seems to have special twittering powers.

I see the liquid remnants of your scoffing floating through the ether. However, please peruse the picture with which I have decorated this post.

(Credit: Dell.com)

It's from the Dell site and it seems like a normal Dell Netbook, doesn't it? The blurb beneath this picture declares, "Build it your way make it your own," which is quite a tempting offer when you consider the price seems to be a vastly generous $299.

Yet this sweet little device appears to be called the Twitter Mini. And the promise that Dell offers reads: "Perfect for Tweeting! Windows 7 Starter Included!"

Naturally, I am already excited. It has been something of my month's dream to find a device that is perfect for pumping out my 140 finest characters. But I'm stumped to the point of limping to work out why this particular Netbook is perfect for tweeting and others aren't.

I clicked on the image and found myself at this page, which offered me nothing other than some severe pain in my neck and brain.

While telling me this was a Netbook, and while mentioning that this series of Netbooks was "small, ultraportable, and designed to keep you connected," there wasn't even a mention of the word "Twitter."

Look, were there a Technological Olympics, I would not even make it as a hostess. But could someone please explain to me why the Twitter Mini is perfect for tweeting when the Mini 10, for example, is perfect for, well, according to the site, nothing at all?

Does the Twitter Mini automatically shorten tweetable URLs if I just stare at the screen? Does it have a direct and very hot line to Ashton Kutcher, Shaquille O'Neal, Stephen Fry, and that weird Russian girl who keeps following me, even though the Twitter folks keep deleting her naked entreaties?

Or did someone in the Dell marketing department get a little over-excited? Please feel free to send me a tweet.