Comments on: Technology's 10 most inexcusable failures

ZDNet's David Berlind has his dander up about half-baked technologies that still don't do what they're supposed to.

[dmm]

One major problem and one pet peeve

Major problem:
How is it possible that I live inside the beltway (the major highway that circles Washington, DC), and I use the cell phone carrier that brags about "5 bars" on its commercials, yet I only have one bar on my cell phone? This happens not just at my house, but at many places all over the East Coast megalopolis, even when traveling on I-95 or an Amtrak train. Don't tell me it is my phone's fault, because I got the phone from the carrier! (And I had the same problems before with another major carrier.)

Pet peeve:
Outlook's calendar has a "monthly" view, but there is no way to get this to show you this week plus the next 3 weeks. So toward the end of every month you need to click back and forth between months. Does anyone really care what happened 3 weeks ago?? Are Microsoft's engineers retarded?

What we all need...

How about using a PC without having to understand the registry? Drivers? Viruses? Kind of like plugging in a toaster. You dont need to understand how the 'tricity works.

i think still the best technologies are low-tech (see http://www.razorba.com/allabout.html) And when I can get rid of the mouse pad that will make my year!

[Inetsec]

David, the beat goes on....

You mention in the preamble of your article about running a testing lab and lamenting at the repetitive nature of issues that arise. Well, since you've left the testing business (however long ago that was) I can tell you that it's SSDD (same s*** different day).

I've been in the "testing" realm in one form or another for about 10 years now. It's no different now for the most part, that it was for you.

I can't even begin to count how many issues I have run across, rejected the production of the projects, railed on the developers / admins, and educated them as to the correct methods only to have to repeat the same exact speech multiple times over the years to the exact same people.

I almost wish the 3 strike rule applied to developers / admins. Make the same mistake 3 times and you're fired. Alas, I'm just the lowly independent tester and wield no power for that type of decision. But I am tired of repeating myself.

The entire concept of better-faster-cheaper is a total farce in most if not all cases and should be removed from the collective managerial consciousness. In my opinion that is what drives development groups to produce slop.

Extracting links

Why can't publication of list of "links", in magazines, etc., be available for inclusing into browser without entering each and every link manually?

Open your eyes wider

The author's suggestions and most of the subsequent posts for the 'technology's 10 biggest inexcusable failures' are so trivial as to be irrelevant. Think bigger, here's a few to start with:

1. the computer operating system user interface
2. battery technology
3. electronic appliance power consumption design
4. durability/ruggedness
5. the dozens of incompatible plugs/connectors

That's enough for now. So can you fix them please?

[zaznet]

the dozens of incompatible plugs/connectors

That's a good one!

This is getting better though. More and more systems are using composite video in and out as well as S/Video. My new cable tuner with digital video recording has Composite, USB, Ethernet, and S/Video connections. Apparently it has a built in cable modem (reason for the ethernet port) but I haven't plugged my PS2 into it yet to see if I can play online...

[t8]

My dumb cellphone

Forget about cameras, when a cellphone comes out that can make a good cup of coffee, then I will upgrade.
I'm waiting...

[t8]

Wireless computer cellphone

How hard would it be to create a cellphone that only required a wireless connection to the Internet. No more Cellular network fees and you could surf anywhere you liked and communicate using the likes of an IM (voice, video, text) etc.

Imaging downloading a picture from the Net for your wallpaper for free. Instead cellphones charge you for this.

Why isn't Google, MS, AOL, or Yahoo making such a phone. They could bypass cellular networks entirely. How hard could it be?

connectivity

How hard could it be? Who's paying to have towers put up? A wireless ethernet connection will only go about 100 meters, hardly far enough to be useful in that respect. Plus, companies like Aim and Yahoo cant afford services like that, some so easily forget that these services are free. Granted, AIM is funded by AOL, but even despite ridiculous prices, they offer so many services they need to pay a huge staff to keep these services running smoothly. It's a great idea, but is an absolutely massive undertaking, plus take into account all the money cell phone companies would lose, which i'm sure would have some major economic impacts.

[theirgrrreat]

new PC migration problem

The answer to your problem is a Mac with OSX. Although Apple
doesn't market this genius (I don't know why), it is one of the
biggest reasons why I'm hooked on Macs! When I upgraded
from one laptop to the next, all I had to do was connect a
FireWire cable to both machines, enter a few commands and wait
about an hour. My new laptop was an exact duplicate of my old
one (albeit, a lot faster due to the hardware update)!

[cyberpoet]

Global Text, old data, and universal exports

OK, somewhere in the far distant past (one I unfortunately
have the honor of remembering in person), there was ASCII
and that was it. Simple, straight-forward. Then came
stylized text. Font selections. Multiple font technologies.
Global fonts (designed to incorporate tens of thousands of
possible characters into a single font). Multiple Master
fonts. Yet, for 99.9% of the data reposited somewhere, that
font information is basically useless, especially as the
march of time progresses. What I want is for every single
software vendor that saves files containing predominantly
textual data (be it word process, database, spreadsheet,
etc) to be able to create a simple "save as ASCII text" option
for every single document of that app on a system -- or a
bundled app to do the same -- so when the time comes to
migrate (platforms, OS's, applications, solutions), I can
simply churn through the entirety of the drive contents and
save out the results. Stupid? Sure, formatting data will be
lost. I want a lowest-common-denominator factor here
(KISS). Because the raw long-term value of the data is not in
the fonts or stylizing most of the time.
XML might help, but not enough and it's too intensive to
tag everything (especially in older software, software that
was pre-XML). What's this, a MacWritePro letter written in
1989 to the lawyer -- can't open it. Email database
customized in 4D in 1991 (or an old AOL 1.0 mail
database)? Nope. Stock portfolio data from Mr Jone's unit
from '95? Sorry bud... I can migrate files, but not always
data, especially if I wasn't there for each system/OS/app
upgrade...
I can search text files rapidly with modern hardware to try
to find what I'm looking for -- if it can be found. And the
old data can quickly be grepped into new formats if need
be -- provided it can be recovered in the first place.
RTF? Seriously -- how many really need it in their emails?
Whistles and bells, smoke and mirrors.
----
The carriage return/new line/linefeed debacle. Hey, why are
there four competing standards for this on different
platforms? Can't we get rid of this line-printer left-over
from the dark ages?
----
Attachments. Specifically MS Office attachments. How often
do I get a word document embedded in an email that
contains textual data that should have been sent in the
email itself? Way, way too often.
----
Attachment points. How long will it take manufacturers to
figure out that most of what gets attached to a computer
shouldn't lurk in the very back of the box where it's the
most problematic to get at? I suspect this is to reduce both
the data plane size and to encourage users not to wear out
their connectors, but let's be serious here -- who is the
customer and what about what they want/need/can use?
----
My gripes are mostly about technology underpinnings that
didn't have the bigger picture in mind... The fact that
companies fold, that software goes obsolete, that import
file filters don't support every obsolete app on the planet.
Most of these should be no-brainers.

Cheers
=-= The CyberPoet
www.cyberpoet.net

[reststop]

MacWrite Pro?

If you still need it I may have a 400K floppy around somewhere
with MacWrite Pro on it ;-) I know for sure I have some MacWrite
floppies :-)

[reststop]

Failures of Technology?

To begin, I have to agree that the title of your article would be
better suited to "My Top 10 Peeves With Technology" as many
are just rants or personal peeves. Don't get me wrong, I agree
on many of them.

(1) Cell Phone Technology exists that is much better than we
have in the US. I believe that this is because in the US the
companies that control (read build) the technology have too
much invested in OLDER technology to just throw all that away.
So much physical plant in wires, fiber, and transmission lines to
give it up for wireless. In Malaysia the Cell phone technology far
outstrips the wired technology because a major portion of the
wired technology there was installed during WWII, some portion
by the US for it's own communications needs. Maybe if the US
companies took the wired physical plant and converted it for use
in tieing all the wireless technology together we could move to
affordable and usable (without dropped calls) technology.

The technology is not at fault here. it exists. It just isn't being
used or managed properly to catch up. Too many big
companies are still trying to milk every last penny out of the old
technology instead of figuring out how to leverage that physical
plant to use the new technology. I know that sometimes it's hard
for a big company to move customers to a newer product, but
hey, touch tone saved the company money, so why was there a
$2/month surcharge for so many years if you had touch-tone
service versus dial service?

(2) Computers and the paperless office are at odds because
most of the computers we use today -- point big finger at
Microsoft -- make the users jump through hoops to learn how
to use them, instead of the computers jumping through hoops
as enablers for us to use the technology. Think of this as the
old DWIM instruction for computers. (DWIM is Do What I Mean,
or Want, rather than Do What I Say).

Sorry, but even the Macintosh falls short in this area, but at least
the user interface is better than Windows. I get asked all the
time which is better, Mac or PC? My answer is always, "If you
want to learn about computers and how they work, buy a PC. If
you want to get a computer and start using it, buy a Mac."

Just because PCs are more prevalent doesn't mean they are
better. Cockroaches are more prevalent than Humans, does that
make them better? (sorry, a quote I remember, but can't quite
forget).

(3) Back to telephony... with VOIP becoming usable, maybe we
will see VOIP phones and gadgets that bypass the cell-phone
technology of having to carry a cell-phone to send email or that
picture or movie to your grandparents. The technology already
exists in part in different gadgets. It just isn't all in one place
yet. And the reason is standards that don't talk to one another
(yet).

(4) PDAs? I don't own one. Or at least I haven't bought one
myself. I have an old Palm I someone gave me. I learned to use
it, and entered a bunch of data. The battery died between uses
and all my stored information was lost. It wasn't worth the time
and effort to re-enter it, so the PDA is sitting on a shelf
somewhere. Not a very good Personal Digital Assistant. I still
want one, but I want one that will DWIM and one that I will not
have to learn a new language to be able to talk to it.

Again, we have the technology, to have anyone who wants to
carry a PDA to have it synchronize with our laptops, our
desktops, our "family" database, our wired and wireless
telephones, and let everyone we want to know when and where
we may be at any given time. But we can't, because all of these
things that CAN talk to one another, don't, or won't unless we
pay a fee for every conversation.

(5) Another peeve. Why don't we have automated cars and
busses to whisk us to and from appointments, dates, nights out
on the town, or just back and forth from home to work safely
and economically. Whether they be publically owned or personal
vehicles, what's keeping us from stepping out our front door
and getting into a vehicle and telling it where to go and by what
time and it drives itself, allowing us to enjoy the view, continue
working on our laptop or PDA, or amusing ourselves instead of
having to drive ourselves? We have the technology, why aren't
we using it for purposes like this? Oh yes, and they should
schedule and take themselves in for servicing when they know
we won't need to use them.

(6) Back to computers, viruses, worms and trojans... How long
have computer viruses and trojans been around? How often do
we hear that another buffer overflow problem exists that allows
a cracker to take control of some resource that would otherwise
be safe? Why don't these big faceless companies that distribute
the current software just hire a team (large or small) whose only
job is to review code and replace any code which could be
suseptable to a buffer overflow with newer and safer code? If
that's their only job, how long would it take to review all the
code coming out of any large company? Wouldn't that be the
FIRST step your took as a large company concerned about the
security or safe use of your software? I can see a small 2-5
person company making this mistake, but why hasn't Microsoft
with one of the richest men in the world at it's helm done this
simple, job. Ok, we find another type of vulnerability... we set
the same team to fix all possible instances of that one, and we
move on to the next, and the next until they are all fixed. Why
isn't this happenning? Why isn't there a class action lawsuit
asking for damages in the real cost of securing each and every
company agains the producer of this software which after all
these years still contains the same security bugs/flaws? How
much productivity is lost every day, or every time a new virus is
released?

(7) On to energy, fuel cells, hydrogen-based cumbustable
engines, solar power, etc. Just why were the recent batch of new
cars just barely better in fuel economy than cars built in the mid
1970s? C'mon, I just bougt a RAV4 mini SUV from Toyota 3
years ago that got better gas mileage that their Camry? And
these were better than most other cars on the road today? The
Prius and other hybrid cars should have been on the road 20
years ago. Talk about technology moving at a snail's pace? Who
is getting paid off to allow this?

(8) Another technology failure? You tell me. Why is it that when
almost any appliance in the home breaks, it costs more than
buying a new one to fix it? I can understand that a new
appliance pre-assembled may cost less than buying all the parts
and re-assembling a new one, but it seems that you can't buy
just the part that broke. And it is cheaper to buy a new
appliance, although the new version may not have all the
features the old one had. Ready-made parts could make a mint
if they marketed themselves the right way. Bring in your old
broken part and we'll make you a new one.

(9) Packaging is another pet peeve. Can anyone open the
cassette, or videotape packages without resorting to a knife or
other sharp instrument? Why do I pay $3.99 for a $0.25 part
because they had to put one part per package and enclose it in
plastic and paper so it can hang on a hook instead of sitting in a
parts drawer or box. Shoplifiting? Hardly. And the 11"x14"
plastic case that my Compact Flash memory comes in? If these
things are that easy to pilpher keep them behind a counter and
let people ask for them. There's 4 times the plastic in the
packaging than in the item. And it's to make things easier? I've
broken 2-3 pairs of scissors trying to cut open some of the
plastic packaging they ship things in today. I think the packages
cost more than the parts they protect, er.. hold.

(10) Automobiles, safety and functionality. Where did the
bumper go? I can understand crumple zones, but 50 years ago
a bumper was there so you wouldn't damage the car when you
backed into a post or another car while parking. Today, you
back into a post at one mph and you have a $2000 bill to
replace the bumper panel, the rear quarterpanels which were
bent when the back panel crumpled, and any special shock
absorbers needed to keep the bumper in place. Then there's the
labor cost and painting costs. I thought technology was
supposed to keep us safe and reduce the cost of damage. I
think someone lost sight of keeping the costs down.

Well, those are some of MY pet peeves with technology!

Especially since I believe that they should all be available and on
the market today. I know the "Not Invented Here" is one reason
things take so long, and another is patenting ideas and calling
them software patents. But that's another whole topic.

Now we get to see if any of the formatting works or if this post
is just too long to submit. Gotta luv web submission forms!

When You Can't Write They Make You An Editor

Great comments, you should have written this article.

A better title for this article might have been "I've Surrounded Myself With So Many Gadgets I Can't Figure Out How To Make Any Of Them Work - Oh Woe Is Me"

If CNET really wants to publish an article on this subject they should contact you and assign this "writer" to the Dear Abby section.

Actually. . .

"
(5) Another peeve. Why don't we have automated cars and
busses to whisk us to and from appointments, dates, nights out
on the town, or just back and forth from home to work safely
and economically. Whether they be publically owned or personal
vehicles, what's keeping us from stepping out our front door
and getting into a vehicle and telling it where to go and by what
time and it drives itself, allowing us to enjoy the view, continue
working on our laptop or PDA, or amusing ourselves instead of
having to drive ourselves? We have the technology, why aren't
we using it for purposes like this? Oh yes, and they should
schedule and take themselves in for servicing when they know
we won't need to use them."

. . .I think the recent failures in DARPA's robot races show us that the technology is *not* yet available for this to be done reliably and safely. The only way with current technology would be to refit the entire road system with some sort of guiding sensors or controllers. Can you manage the expense of that? And the testing that would have to be done to ensure safety?

No, I think we're a long way away from that yet. . .sadly.

"
(6) Back to computers, viruses, worms and trojans... How long
have computer viruses and trojans been around? How often do
we hear that another buffer overflow problem exists that allows
a cracker to take control of some resource that would otherwise
be safe? Why don't these big faceless companies that distribute
the current software just hire a team (large or small) whose only
job is to review code and replace any code which could be
suseptable to a buffer overflow with newer and safer code? If
that's their only job, how long would it take to review all the
code coming out of any large company? Wouldn't that be the
FIRST step your took as a large company concerned about the
security or safe use of your software? I can see a small 2-5
person company making this mistake, but why hasn't Microsoft
with one of the richest men in the world at it's helm done this
simple, job. Ok, we find another type of vulnerability... we set
the same team to fix all possible instances of that one, and we
move on to the next, and the next until they are all fixed. Why
isn't this happenning? Why isn't there a class action lawsuit
asking for damages in the real cost of securing each and every
company agains the producer of this software which after all
these years still contains the same security bugs/flaws? How
much productivity is lost every day, or every time a new virus is
released?"

The buffer overflow issues will soon part of the past. Both Intel and AMD are including technologies in their CPUs that prevent a buffer overblow from being exploited by an hacker. This is very good since testing software and finding all the bugs on any conceivable combination of equipment is a very daunting task. I agree that the job should be done better, but even with the procedures you mention, many bugs would likely be missed.

A lot of this will also go away as programming languages and compilers improve. Microsoft's new "managed code" makes accidental memork leaks far more difficult as well; while programmers never should have been allowing them to happen, it is certainly easy enough to do.

I'll bet *debugging* itself probably introduces a lot of new bugs as things are tested and modified. It's sad, but true.

Your other examples, though, I think are fairly good points.

[zaznet]

Word Processors...

Why is it that the word processor (maybe I'm just too used to MS Office) has to make the "page" look like a piece of paper? I mean really? Some of these documents will never be printed. We see "web pages" as outside the 8 1/2 x 11 world, but word processors still limit themseves to being a page. Margins are there, then there is a "grey space" beside that. I'm using 50% of a screen to fill with a big void.

I'm able to "zoom" but then I have a scroll bar to center properly that isn't needed. The sad thing is we added this "feature" over time. I used to use word processors in the DOS days (and on Aplle II's, Comodores, etc) where I got to fill all of the screen with text.

I want to remove the margins, remove the rulers, and just focus in on what matters, the words and pretty tables.

[dmm]

simple fix

This problem is quite easily fixed.

If you are using MS Word, then just go to the View menu and choose Normal. Also, in that same View menu, make sure Ruler is unchecked. (If it is checked now, then click on it to uncheck it.) Also, in that same View menu, click on Toolbars and uncheck the toolbars you don't want.

Once you have things the way you like, choose File, SaveAs, and choose "Document Template (*.dot)" in the SaveAsType menu. Pick "Normal.dot" and click OK. Now every time you start Word it will be the way you like.

I don't know for certain, but it's a safe bet that competing word processors like WordStar and WordPerfect have these same capabilities, and the steps will be quite similar.

[mmormando]

Yes you're an idiot

If you insist on integrating home and business networks, you have to follow the business network plan, get a printserver for the printer, then it just plugs into the network all on its lonesome and everyone maps to it with very little problem, from windoze or linux

Technology gripe...

I want to know when there will be a short-cut to change CAPS to
lower-case. Have you ever typed an entire paragraph only to
realize the CAPS LOCK was on? Wouldn't it be nice if you could
highlight an entire section and then press a button and wellah...?

[dmm]

another simple fix

You must be a good typist. I peek too much to type a whole paragraph in ALLCAPS by mistake. But the solution is quite simple.

In Word: Highlight the ALLCAPS text. In the Format menu, click on ChangeCase, then choose SentenceCase. Voila!

Other word processors: I don't know, but I'd bet that they can do this also.

Wow.. look at all the people..

Computers are an interactive tool... not a toaster.. do you walk up to a printing press and just start "using it"? Do you sit in the cab of a front loader and just "start digging"?

The problem lies with the end users and their inability (or unwillingness) to learn how to USE the tools before just touching it.

Heres one for the list...

Worse thing that happened in the 90's..

Personal computers became Home computers.

If you use something while being uninformed of what it does and why.. then you assume the risk for your own ignorance in your pursuit to be "popular" with everyone else.

So when it breaks or doesnt work as you wish.. dont whine and cry about.. take responsibility for your own failure of knowledge.. open a book and find the way to solve your problems with knowledge.

A quick search of the internet (using Google perhaps) for any issue will always net you a bunch of suggestions from other people that have already solved your problems.. everything on this list is no exception.. maybe its not a solution as much as a workaround.. but its there.. so skip the porn search or the american idol update page.. and try to solve your own issues first.

Yeah, okay...

Most of us live in America, my friend, which means that it's "IT BETTER BE EASY TO USE OR I'M GONNA SUE YOU!" heh. I know. The problem is that people have become so stupid, and our society so dumbed down and lazy that the mere comprehension of a term called "LEARNING" is out of grasp for most.

Sad...but true.

[markdoiron]

There Are Certainly People Who Need To . . .

... learn more about the computers they own. i just was helping a friend over the phone to solve his wireless networking problem and he was unable to figure out how to copy a file from his hard drive to a blank cd. :-(

but it's wrong-headed to blame the failure of technology totally on the users. if a user can't figure out how to use it, then is this because it's impossible to make it easier? is it too expensive? or is it just because folks display an attitude that the people who buy our products will learn to use them by reading complex manuals.

i worked in military command and control systems engineering and operations for years and take great pride in helping to design one of the easiest to use systems ever fielded (airborne battlefield command and control center iii). we routinely heard comments from folks who had to use more difficult systems (awacs, joint-stars, compass call, etc) wondering why their own system couldn't be made more user friendly. the cost to them was mistakes in operation (how much does it cost when an incorrect utm coordinate is entered for a target? what if the incorrect number happens to be a friendly location?), and in extended training times (sure they could train their users--in about twice the time as we did and with significantly higher wash-out rates).

there's not a thing different between designing easy, user-friendly usability into consumer products, other than it's unlikely that someone's going to lose their life because the design is poor. i encourage any engineer worth his salt spend more than cursory time learning how the product will be used, then design it to be used that way.

mark d.

Security & software management

1. Security. This problem is so huge and so obvious that it deserves to be at the top of any list such as this. The industry as a whole needs to get off it's duff and figure out some real solutions. For example, every network provider needs to implement egress filtering - a rule that simply says that if a packet's source address doesn't match the network that it originated on, it is dropped. This would eliminate packet spoofing. Open mail relays and trojaned PC's need to be dealt with similarly.

2. Software management. This one drives me nuts. We need tools that can manage software over it's entire lifecycle - install, maintenance, troubleshooting, repair, upgrade and removal. It should also be able to do unattended installs of many software packages at a time, and keep them from conflicting with each other. For those of you out there that are thinking 'package management on Linux', you got it right, except we need the same functionality on Windows.

[reststop]

Software Product Management

Wow! You hit the nail on the head. Even system and network
security boils down to software product management, it's life
cycle and support.

Many companies think that you create a product and sell it like
widgets. You want the new and improved version, or the Pro
version, you buy another one. Software products have become
commodities. Companies (in general) no longer manage
products as though they had a life-cycle, and a customer base.
You find a bug, well, we'll fix that in the next release, and you
have to buy it, oh by the way.

I don't want to point the finger at Microsoft, because it's not
their fault. They certainly weren't the first or only company to
ignore users and not provide bug fixes.

In an interview several years ago, Bill Gates was asked about
bugs in their software or bug fixes. His answer (paraphrased)
was that Microsoft doesn't sell bug fixes, they sell features, so
each new version of software has more capability and user
features. If a bug is reported by a significant percentage of their
users is may or may not be fixed in a future release. Of course
you have to think, what is a significant number of users?

Now, if Microsoft can get away with saying that. Why should any
other company not be able to do the same.

Of course, that was then, and this is now.

City & State data entry - Why can't I just put in my Zip Code?

When filling in my address on a computer based system why do I have to manually enter my city and state when I can just put in my zip code and have the system look it up and fill it in!
The zip code should be the first thing in an address you enter not the last then I should only have to enter my street address and maybe correct my city and state if it is not correct.

You know, I did this once.

One of my instructors had the same compliant before, and I designed a program that did exactly this.

My guess is that companies don't want to maintain a file or database table for zip codes. I'm not sure how often new post office branches open up, so I'm not sure how often it'd have to be updated and how quickly inaccuracies might pile up.

The solution would be for the post office to provide a database in a consistent format, or make one web-based that a web site could just access as needed. But, I'm skeptical given the USPS's record with their tracking system. . .still, this is so much simpler--it seems like they'd be able to handle it, but those are often famous last words. :)

[reststop]

It exists! Really

I've used a number of forms that do this automatically. It's
available.

I'm not sure how easy it is to gain access, but in some form the
USPS has made that information available. This is a perfect
application for WebServices. Keep complaining about it, and
maybe enough companies will hear your plea and take action.

The true reason you don't see it more often is many companies
are just too plain lazy to be pro-active and user friendly. Or
they don't even know it exists. As US users we know about
USPS, but for similar postal codes in Canada, Mexico, Europe
and Asia, who knows where to get postal code information?

Why do you think they say this?

"Get a Mac". Not a panacea, but this is EXACTLY why folks say
this. Continue to buy and use the old same-o same-o and you
don't provide ANY incentive for those folks to improve.

There are other, better software providers, but you get what you
pay for, so quit whining.

[reststop]

Get a Mac?

Well, it may be true. I do think Macs are easier to use.

Two quotes that seem to ring true, one mine, one I see as a sig
every so often....

I tell people that if they WANT to learn all about how to use
computers and how they work, buy a PC. If they want to just
buy a computer and start using it, buy a Mac. It's True!

I tell my friends to buy Macs. I tell people that I don't mind
charging by the hour to buy PCs.


Someone comments that Macs and Linux/UNIX machines are
just as vulnerable as PCs are to viruses and worms.

It's true that the first computer worm was released on the
ARPANET/internet to UNIX systems. But that first worm took a
certain amount of skill, and oh by the way it wasn't supposed to
spread as quickly as it did. The programmer had no idea it
would be that bad. (Or so he claimed).

However, due to that incident networking and other flaws in
UNIX, Linux and Mac OSX by association have been worked on
for years to make them safer. So, today, they are the safest
systems to run for security and protection from malicious
malware. No doubt about it.

Not to be a Microsoft-basher, just like UNIX in it's early years, it
was not so much an issue of security and protection from
crackers and other delinquients, as it was adding capability.
However, Windows came AFTER, and it was irresponsible for a
company with such a large market share NOT to design the
system with security and protection in mind. Sure, other
vendors, Sun Microsystem (in particular) shipped systems with
most of the security features turned off, or configurations that
should have been more secure. But they LEARNED fairly quickly
that enterprise customers wanted that security and stability.

Windows HAS gotten better. But I find Microsoft irresponsible
again, for not doing more, and doing more more quickly. They
(Microsoft) have an obligation due to their market share to put in
the time and effort to make their systems safer. And as the
majority leader they have failed miserably in that obligation with
their customers bearing the brunt of their failures. Microsoft
has put making profits ahead of providing good products. In
the capitalisting market this is great, but huge profits at the
expense of it's customers is apprehensible, and I think most of
thier current problems stem from that behavior.

OOPS! Sorry... who put that soapbox there for me to stand on..
uh, sorry... <gets down off of soapbox> ...

Dialing 1, or not dialing 1 before the number...

...so we need to dial an area code for every number, sometimes with a number 1 prefix and sometimes not. For received calls,we receive caller ID information. Sometimes the caller ID information has the 1 prefix, and sometimes not. When we attempt to call from the caller ID information we receive that annoying alarm noise, followed by the useless message "you do not need to dial a 1 before calling this number.." then the switch disconnects you. Alternatively you receive the equally annoying " you need to dial a 1 before calling this number". If the switch knows that it is needed, or not needed as the case may be, why does it not just dial the number? This is the most incompetent deployment of technology on the planet, and a great example of ignoring customer need.

[reststop]

We Don't Have To Care, We're The Phone Company

Actually it's worse that you think. It all depends on which switch
your're talking to, which telephone provider and what area of the
country!

I used to live in one of the "test" areas in the Baltimore -
Washington corridor. It was great. You dialed a local number
just fine. If you had to dial the area code, even if it was your
same code, it meant it was a toll call. If you had to dial "1" it
was a long-distance toll call. You KNEW that a 7-digit number
was local and you wouldn't be charged extra.

But it became a moving target. Every few years after the Bell
breakup the algorithm was different. And, thanks to technology
AND regulations (or was it de-regulation?) it has only gotten
worse. Many places have to dial 10-digit numbers to call next
door. And it is silly. If there are overlaying area codes, fine you
have to type 10 digits when it's different, but the phone
company decided that its customers are not smart enough to
recognize that, and there would be many many wrong numbers
that people would want credit for mis-dialing, so they make it
harder on everyone.

It's the dumbing down of the entire population, and making the
technology just as dumb. Unfortunately the line keeps going
through my head from an early "Saturday Night Live" skit, where
Lilly Tomlin says, "We don't have to care, we're the phone
company"!

<sigh>

10 most inexcusable failures

Want to see me rabid? Give me a Linksys problem. Any problem will do. Internet providers like Comcast often refuse to do any troubleshooting unless you first disconnect from Linksys. Linksys claims to be compatible with many other products but doesn't provide necessary information on how best to use Linksys with that other product. Their automated online diagnostic tool doesn't work well with older technology, particularly non-Windows XP stuff. If you communicate with them via email, you are required to click on Reply, scroll down to their original text, and type within a specific box. Otherwise, their automated technology does't work. Note, you can not include attachments of any kind. Their box won't accept them and their technology deletes anything not appearing in that box. But that's not the real killer. If you don't contact them within some odd number of hours like 361, you get this automated message telling you that because YOU have not contacted them within this amount of time, they are automatically closing your ticket with a status of "solved". It doesn't matter that the Linksys staff never solved anything. Further, Linksys staff don't seem to be able to close tickets manually. They told me they would close my ticket, but I keep getting messages. I'm kind of curious about this because I design trouble ticketing systems for a living. So, I type silly things like "Linksys sucks" in the box. How long will they permit my ticket to age before closing it manually? Do managers even pay attention to metrics? Apparently not. So, this little experiment has gone on for a couple of months. I believe that Linksys is a subsidiary of Cisco. You'd think they would have slicker technology, particularly for their customer service features. But they don't. I'm fairly comfortable with technology and I've usually got friends who know how to do whatever I don't know. A friend helped me solve my Linksys problems. I feel sorry for the non-technical user. Their experience with Linksys from the moment they opened the box until infinity could have been totally miserable. Keep in mind that each time they change their network, they get more problems. My mother's printer will die soon. I can hardly wait. I may force her into a new printer next time I visit just so I can avoid Linksys problems while I'm away. Why are we paying for this again?

Windows update reboot

After years of hearing that Windows might actually create a way to update itself without a reboot, I've given up. In our security conscious world, software is installed on computers to automatically apply all software patches. What gets my goat is that in 95% of the cases, the update requires a reboot. Some packages let you finish your work before rebooting but others just do it automatically. The update software at work will give you 30 minutes warning of an automatic update and if you don't do it manually in the 30 minutes, it will do it for you and reboot the system. So if you walk away from your computer... say for lunch... and you've been working on that critical document all morning, you come back to find the computer rebooted and your work lost. With all the Microsoft patches coming out, the longest you can keep a computer running today without a reboot is about 2 weeks. So much for server uptime. So frustrating!!