Version: 2008

August 17, 2007 7:16 AM PDT

Perspective: A summer garden of tech delights

See all Perspectives
Is it cheating if I indulged in a "catchall" column at the height of summer's dog days, when we're all fatigued from arguing over whether Barry Bonds will wind up in Cooperstown for his playing or behind jail bars for perjury (or maybe both)? If so, feel free to send me a nastygram. Meanwhile, here goes.

***

More tales from our disposable society.

Nokia orders a recall of 46 million Masushita-made cell phone batteries this week. In my corner of the world, the news came across the wire as I was replacing a third broken Nokia phone in the last two years. In brief, the screen on my first phone stopped functioning (for no apparent reason). This time around, the antenna on the replacement unit came loose after the plastic housing cracked.

If you're wondering whether I'm a congenital klutz, the answer is no. At least no more than the average Joe. I suppose that you can chalk it up to regular wear and tear taking its toll on a cheapo gadget. But three cell phones in two years? C'mon guys. At this rate, the odds are that I'll nail the hat trick before the ball drops in Times Square on December 31.

***

Speaking of expensive bits of metal and plastic that go bump in the night, why should a laptop computer crap out after one and a half years of moderate use?

Why some smart CEO hasn't realized the potential PR windfall that would result by extending the duration of its company's warranty guarantee remains a mystery.

This fact of computer life has long annoyed me. And I was reminded of how unfair it is when my much-aggrieved sister called last week to say her computer had given up the ghost with no warning.

I explained this more gently, but the tech industry's stingy warranty protection policy is simply the equivalent of a raised middle finger directed at the computer-using public. For the most part, it's a one-year grace period, and then you're on your own.

A brief postscript: A customer representative at Dell told my sister that the company was willing to check out the system, but it would cost a couple hundred bucks, sight unseen. And if my hunch is right, she's going to need a new motherboard, and that's going to cost another $300.

Is it any wonder, then, that there's a groundswell of disgruntled PC buyers? The University of Michigan reported earlier this week that customers want better product reliability and better customer service, according to the American Customer Satisfaction Index

Why some smart CEO hasn't realized the potential PR windfall that would result by extending the duration of its company's warranty guarantee remains a mystery. It's a golden opportunity to break away from the pack. You can't buy that kind of good publicity.

***

Scenes we'd like to see: Fake Steve Jobs interviewing the real Steve Jobs.

***

Five years after the courts shut down the original Napster song-swapping service, one could be excused for assuming that mainstream-content companies had since figured out how to deliver a product over the Internet to customers' satisfaction. Now a recent survey comes along from a market research firm called Parks Associates to debunk any such nonsensical notion.

The Parks report found that only one in five users is satisfied with the quality of the video content they download legally from the Internet. Among the highlights:

• 16 percent qualify the available selection as good.

• 13 percent say video downloads are sold at reasonable prices.

If the methodology is legit, it means that overwhelming majorities think the state of the art is simply pathetic. And this is for legitimate services! (If you steal content by downloading copyright material, I'm assuming that price outweighs any reservations you may have about the quality of the content you rip off.)

***

I've got to stop watching Jim Cramer's show on CNBC. Each time I watch, he works me into a sweaty rage, and I wind up hyperventilating about the sheer recklessness of this TV chrome dome.

Of course, Cramer's simply a showman. Maybe the best at what he does today. Like they were when they listened to Don Imus during that shock jock's heyday, listeners are left simultaneously laughing and stewing over Cramer's rapid-fire ruminations. With Cramer, I think that part of the attraction is wondering whether the man will suffer an embolism on live TV.

When it came to tech prognosticating, he's had some good calls. Of course, that was when the market was seemingly climbing each and every day. But after a market meltdown in which the Dow has lost more than 1,000 points in a matter of weeks, his golden touch has lost a lot of luster. To be continued. Meanwhile, the only (obvious) advice is caveat emptor.

Biography
Charles Cooper is CNET News.com's executive editor of commentary.

More Perspectives

See more CNET content tagged:
Parks Associates, public relations, Nokia Corp., CEO, cell phone

Add a Comment (Log in or register)
Re AT&T "censoring"...
by nhidealist August 17, 2007 8:52 AM PDT
Maybe I am missing something, but if AT&T streams content from one of its own web sites, why shouldn't they be able to edit that content? TV stations, radio stations, etc. screen out content they deem objectionable all the time. And last I checked, AT&T was not a government entity, so again, why shouldn't they "censor"? (Disclosure: I don't do any business with them)

Moreover, I think the word "censor" is overused. There's a big difference between state-sponsored censorship (like when Congress passes, the President signs, and the Supreme Court upholds a ban on saying a politician's name in an ad I buy sixty days before an election and back that ban with law enforcement and jail) and AT&T screening content, in which case I am free to go elsewhere for it, stop doing business with AT&T, and Pearl Jam is free to not work with this particular corporate behemoth (in fact I'm kind of surprised to see them so mainstream given their general attitude) in the future.
Reply to this comment
Finally
by dchasejra August 20, 2007 5:58 AM PDT
Finally someone gets it. For days after this happened (and honestly, Pearl Jam? Can you be less relevant in terms of decent music right now?) I had to wade through comments about censorship, the end of freedom, whatever, and just shake my head in disbelief that no one could recongnize a companies choice to display the content they choose (or screen said content) as well as the viewers option to BOYCOTT that company should they not agree with what they do and furthermore the performers choice to have their performance broadcast with a company who explicitly informs them no censorship is going to happen. The only reason Pearl Jam (or any of us) should have a problem with what happened is if AT&T told them no censorship would happen.
advertisement

Latest tech news headlines

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Dow Jones Industrials (0.00%) 0.00 10,520.10
S&P 500 (0.53%) 5.89 1,126.48
NASDAQ (0.71%) 16.05 2,285.69
CNET TECH (0.64%) 10.53 1,657.91
  Symbol Lookup
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right