Well, not in all cases. Probably more often tech support knows far more than I do about a given problem.
In too many cases, I get advice that is way off-base or misleading.
We are going to “cut the cord” soon and go completely wireless. Among other things, we have to change how we use our wireless printer. Rather than go through our modem/router, we will have to use a cable and switch the cable between computers.
I looked and looked at the manual for where the connections were. I found mention of using USB or Ethernet cables, but I could find no diagram showing where the connections were.
I sent email to tech support of the manufacturer and received a reply in less than 12 hours.
As usual, the flowery answer didn’t really answer the question. On first blush! The answer contained a diagram of the back of the printer. The diagram labeled the connections. Way in the middle of the side farthest from me were a USB port and a LAN port.
The USB port takes a connector different from the flat connector most of us are used to.
What’s a LAN port? I should know the answer but don’t. Look it up: Local Area Network! The cable for a LAN is an Ethernet cable! Smack me upside the head! I knew that! But, the directions never use the two terms together. What are poor non-techies to do with such a gap.
Before I got the answer from tech support, I tried printing with the modem’s phone line disconnected. It worked! Ah ha! The modem is the router, not the Apple Time Machine. So, we have to keep the modem when we “cut the cord”. However, if the modem conks out, then I know how to use the Ethernet cable.
What amazes me is that nobody would hire me in my 60s for this problem solving ability. Now in my 70s, I too often know more than tech support!
What amazes me even more is the people who complain about government inefficiency never consider the rampant inefficiency in too many corporations.
Showing posts with label corporate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label corporate. Show all posts
Thursday, July 30, 2015
Monday, June 22, 2015
Who does “snail mail”?
For almost three decades it has been “cool” to refer to postal mail as snail mail. I’ve always thought that this was unfair, because in most cases the U.S. Postal Service was getting mail in 1-3 days between any two points in the United States and less than a week to foreign countries.
Today I had a case where “snail mail” beat email. I ordered some merchandise last Thursday. It was shipped Friday. I received it about nine this morning. I received an email after three this afternoon with the tracking number. The message was sent by a “fourth party” on the request of the shipper.
Even the supposed “instantaneous” email is not so swift. I often receive a notice of sent email five or even fifteen minutes after it was sent.
But the worst case is an auto dealer that sends needed service notices after I have the service done. Almost two weeks ago I took my car in for an oil change. After noon today I received an email that I was due for an oil change! Come on! I didn’t drive 3,000 miles in two weeks. What’s this about corporate efficiency over government inefficiency?
Today I had a case where “snail mail” beat email. I ordered some merchandise last Thursday. It was shipped Friday. I received it about nine this morning. I received an email after three this afternoon with the tracking number. The message was sent by a “fourth party” on the request of the shipper.
Even the supposed “instantaneous” email is not so swift. I often receive a notice of sent email five or even fifteen minutes after it was sent.
But the worst case is an auto dealer that sends needed service notices after I have the service done. Almost two weeks ago I took my car in for an oil change. After noon today I received an email that I was due for an oil change! Come on! I didn’t drive 3,000 miles in two weeks. What’s this about corporate efficiency over government inefficiency?
Thursday, April 16, 2015
Do we really have a five-party “system”?
Many commentators write about the “two-party system” as if it were enshrined in the Constitution. Actually, the writers of the Constitution feared factionalism. They thought their document would bring about a system of considered deliberation and reasoned arguments.
Unfortunately, factionalism reared its ugly head quite quickly. John Adams, a signer of the Constitution, and Thomas Jefferson, a non-signer, soon fell into animosity about the direction of government. They did reconcile their differences in their elder years, but their dispute lingered in the Whig and Democratic parties.
The Whig party went into decline when several Whigs formed the Republican Party, partly because of opposition to the extension of slavery and partly because of support of modernization. Ironically, one of the Republican slogans was “Free Labor” as opposed to slave labor.
Over time, the parties’ basic tenets changed with changing times. The Republicans essentially became the party of Big Business and the Democrats became the party of the People. But these were not fixed ideologies. The parties adjusted their ideas to the times. Republicans put forth ideas that favored a “government for the people” and the Democrats put forward ideas that were corporate-friendly or status quo. Many commentators referred to the two parties as “big tent” parties; that is, all were welcome if they held loosely to a few basic tenets.
Then somewhere in the eighties or maybe even earlier, the Republicans morphed into a hard-nosed, doctrinaire party. The days of the RINO (Republican in Name Only) began. Some very stellar Republican politicians who got things done for the greater good were no longer welcome. The Republicans also drew in many evangelicals who knew exactly what God wanted; just the kind of religious influence that the signers of the Constitution worried about. The signers were very aware of the differences among denominations and didn’t want to favor one over the other.
The result of all these changes have left many would-be voters, and even regular voters dismayed. As the parties have hardened in their stances, many people see government as dysfunctional and more partisan than deliberative. Remember that phrase describing the U.S. Senate as “the greatest deliberative body in the world”? I’ll agree to the “deliberate” part, “deliberate” grandstanding for minor electoral advantage.
Back to the signers of the Constitution: I think they had in mind a constituency who knew the men they were electing, if not personally, at least by reputation. Now we know our candidates by the slick literature they send out and the amount of TV exposure they get. Unfortunately, third parties spend millions smearing the candidates based on private interest, not the public good that the candidates may promote.
My solution to all this mismatch of ideas and actions is either all candidates are independents selected on the merits they project or candidates are loosely organized into parties that reflect their own interest.
My choices for parties would be Libertarian, Business, Evangelical, Charity, and Common Good.
The Libertarian Party would be almost anti-government. To them, the individual is primary, government just gets in the way of freedom. Taxes are just stealing money. Laws are for other people.
The Business Party would be all in support of large corporations with a bit of a sop to small businesses. Taxes and regulations just get in the way of corporations “returning value” to their shareholders.
The Evangelical Party would be Bible-centric and would pass laws pushing for more religion in government and for how all should behave, both in public and private.
The Charity Party would take up the causes of those groups who they feel are disenfranchised by government or society. This Party is difficult to criticize because there are many people with problems that they did not create. On the other hand, many people in a given group have managed without the Charity Party’s help.
Finally, the Common Good Party is my party (if I were to cease being a Party of One). This is the party that takes seriously “General Welfare” and “Common Defense” in the Constitution. The Common Good Party is concerned with infrastructure, safety regulations, commercial laws, and many other laws and expenditures that help promote a prosperous society.
The Libertarian Party ignores how much it depends on government. What if a libertarian had been defrauded. Would that person depend on a tax-supported court to seek reparation? Or would the Libertarian have it out with six-guns on the streets of Laredo?
The Business Party is similar to the Libertarian Party with the emphasis on large organizations rather than individuals. But would a modern corporation survive without public schools to train a large number of people in increasingly complicated skills, without roads to move its goods around, without police and courts to seek redress for those who would harm the corporation?
The Evangelical Party seems to pick and choose what Bible verses to use. Two that it seems to me that they ignore most are “Be not like the hypocrites who pray in public to be seen by men…” and “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” One could also say the writers of the Constitution were all to familiar with the picking and choosing done by various sects; that’s why they wanted “no religious test”.
The Charity Party’s hearts are in the right place, but the number of problems is so large that many people can’t put their hearts and souls into all those the Charity Party thinks are important. Government does need a few members of this party just to keep some of issues on the table.
We probably will never have a single Common Good Party because people never agree on the priorities. This gets back to the Constitution which didn’t really define “General Welfare”. We do need to have more people who run for office speak out for the common good rather than promote a private interest.
Mel keeps wishing for a majority government, but he keeps seeing a minority voting.
Unfortunately, factionalism reared its ugly head quite quickly. John Adams, a signer of the Constitution, and Thomas Jefferson, a non-signer, soon fell into animosity about the direction of government. They did reconcile their differences in their elder years, but their dispute lingered in the Whig and Democratic parties.
The Whig party went into decline when several Whigs formed the Republican Party, partly because of opposition to the extension of slavery and partly because of support of modernization. Ironically, one of the Republican slogans was “Free Labor” as opposed to slave labor.
Over time, the parties’ basic tenets changed with changing times. The Republicans essentially became the party of Big Business and the Democrats became the party of the People. But these were not fixed ideologies. The parties adjusted their ideas to the times. Republicans put forth ideas that favored a “government for the people” and the Democrats put forward ideas that were corporate-friendly or status quo. Many commentators referred to the two parties as “big tent” parties; that is, all were welcome if they held loosely to a few basic tenets.
Then somewhere in the eighties or maybe even earlier, the Republicans morphed into a hard-nosed, doctrinaire party. The days of the RINO (Republican in Name Only) began. Some very stellar Republican politicians who got things done for the greater good were no longer welcome. The Republicans also drew in many evangelicals who knew exactly what God wanted; just the kind of religious influence that the signers of the Constitution worried about. The signers were very aware of the differences among denominations and didn’t want to favor one over the other.
The result of all these changes have left many would-be voters, and even regular voters dismayed. As the parties have hardened in their stances, many people see government as dysfunctional and more partisan than deliberative. Remember that phrase describing the U.S. Senate as “the greatest deliberative body in the world”? I’ll agree to the “deliberate” part, “deliberate” grandstanding for minor electoral advantage.
Back to the signers of the Constitution: I think they had in mind a constituency who knew the men they were electing, if not personally, at least by reputation. Now we know our candidates by the slick literature they send out and the amount of TV exposure they get. Unfortunately, third parties spend millions smearing the candidates based on private interest, not the public good that the candidates may promote.
My solution to all this mismatch of ideas and actions is either all candidates are independents selected on the merits they project or candidates are loosely organized into parties that reflect their own interest.
My choices for parties would be Libertarian, Business, Evangelical, Charity, and Common Good.
The Libertarian Party would be almost anti-government. To them, the individual is primary, government just gets in the way of freedom. Taxes are just stealing money. Laws are for other people.
The Business Party would be all in support of large corporations with a bit of a sop to small businesses. Taxes and regulations just get in the way of corporations “returning value” to their shareholders.
The Evangelical Party would be Bible-centric and would pass laws pushing for more religion in government and for how all should behave, both in public and private.
The Charity Party would take up the causes of those groups who they feel are disenfranchised by government or society. This Party is difficult to criticize because there are many people with problems that they did not create. On the other hand, many people in a given group have managed without the Charity Party’s help.
Finally, the Common Good Party is my party (if I were to cease being a Party of One). This is the party that takes seriously “General Welfare” and “Common Defense” in the Constitution. The Common Good Party is concerned with infrastructure, safety regulations, commercial laws, and many other laws and expenditures that help promote a prosperous society.
The Libertarian Party ignores how much it depends on government. What if a libertarian had been defrauded. Would that person depend on a tax-supported court to seek reparation? Or would the Libertarian have it out with six-guns on the streets of Laredo?
The Business Party is similar to the Libertarian Party with the emphasis on large organizations rather than individuals. But would a modern corporation survive without public schools to train a large number of people in increasingly complicated skills, without roads to move its goods around, without police and courts to seek redress for those who would harm the corporation?
The Evangelical Party seems to pick and choose what Bible verses to use. Two that it seems to me that they ignore most are “Be not like the hypocrites who pray in public to be seen by men…” and “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” One could also say the writers of the Constitution were all to familiar with the picking and choosing done by various sects; that’s why they wanted “no religious test”.
The Charity Party’s hearts are in the right place, but the number of problems is so large that many people can’t put their hearts and souls into all those the Charity Party thinks are important. Government does need a few members of this party just to keep some of issues on the table.
We probably will never have a single Common Good Party because people never agree on the priorities. This gets back to the Constitution which didn’t really define “General Welfare”. We do need to have more people who run for office speak out for the common good rather than promote a private interest.
Mel keeps wishing for a majority government, but he keeps seeing a minority voting.
Thursday, October 09, 2014
Programmer, heal thyself
The New York Times recently had a link to the Wired story, “Why the New Obamacare Website is Going to Work This Time” by Steven Levy, originally published in the June issue of Wired. Levy almost gushes how the Ad Hoc team, a small group of young programmers from Silicon Valley and President Obama’s election campaign, greatly simplified the Website. “[T]hey worked 80-hour weeks to salvage the botched creation of thousands of technocrats employed by 55 different contractors,”
Duh! A small team can make breakthroughs that a large group cannot. Think of the original Macintosh team, much smaller and squirreled away in a small building away from all those working on Apple II software.
IBM trumpeted it had a thousand programmers in seven cities on OS 360. We in Univac smirked that we had less than 40 programmers working in one city on EXEC I. Even then a contractor built a leaner OS (EXEC II) to build and test the FORTRAN and COBOL compilers they had contracted to build. EXEC II was much more popular among customers than EXEC I and even its successor EXEC 8.
Making deadlines? Hah! We were always shifting ship dates later.
What I wonder is if these same programmers from private industry are so great, why are software “user community” boards so filled with questions, often unanswered? If these programmers are so great, why are reviews often mixed, some love the program, others hate it.
Way back in the 80s when the Macintosh was the latest “hot thing”, I was eager to get the latest version of the software and found the enhancements great. Thirty years later, I am reluctant to move up to a major new release. To often things that worked fine are changed to something that is more difficult to use or doesn’t even work anymore.
With each generation it seems that programs run slower and slower. Maybe it’s because I’m using a three-year-old Mac with one-year-old software. I have found suggestions for “cleaning up the system”, but they involve a whole day of backing up data and then another day of creating a “clean install” disc and actually running it.
Consistency of design often seems to be lacking. If my iPhone is asleep and I get a call, the screen only gives me the option of swiping to accept the call. However, if my iPhone is active, the screen gives me the choice of accepting or rejecting the call. Buried in the instruction manual, or was it in the “user community”, in the first case I can reject the call by holding the sleep button and the home button at the same time. Only a bureaucracy would allow different actions for the same result.
In one of the recent releases, certain buttons may or may not appear for starting and stopping a podcast. The intent is to have a right-pointing triangle to start or resume a podcast and a double bar to momentarily stop it. When these symbols suddenly started disappearing, I was glad that I knew where they were supposed to be. And I have no idea why these buttons sometime appear and sometime don’t.
I have a new problem to research: why does the return button no longer work on my Logitech Solar Keyboard folio for my iPad? I’ll have to set aside some time to check out the Logitech community about this.
I love all this technology because of all it does for me. I can write this column on my laptop and email it to the Reader. I can keep notes and to-do lists on my laptop, phone, and iPad and keep them synched. I can call my wife from the grocery store to remind me what it was she wanted. I can use my iPhone as a hot spot at our cabin to write and email this column.
BTW, I’m not writing this at our cabin as planned because another simple technology became an irritation. Our smoke alarm started going off randomly. Sometimes it would beep and beep, sometimes it would only give off one set of beeps. I had a lousy night Saturday night! Could it be too much moisture in the small tight cabin? Well, I brought the alarm home, closed the battery compartment, and put it on the bed. Within twenty minutes it gave off a single set of beeps. We bought the seven-year warranty alarm in March!
Much is made about about government bureaucracy and corporate efficiency, but corporate bureaucracy in GM led to many deaths because of faulty ignition switches.
To err is human, but to really screw up it takes a computer. Humans and computers are both in corporations and governments.
Mel considers himself perfect; he never makes mistakes. Oops, the computer won’t let him misspell mistakes as “misteaks!
Also published in the Reader Weekly, 2014-10-09 at http://duluthreader.com/articles/2014/10/09/4191_programmer_heal_thyself
Duh! A small team can make breakthroughs that a large group cannot. Think of the original Macintosh team, much smaller and squirreled away in a small building away from all those working on Apple II software.
IBM trumpeted it had a thousand programmers in seven cities on OS 360. We in Univac smirked that we had less than 40 programmers working in one city on EXEC I. Even then a contractor built a leaner OS (EXEC II) to build and test the FORTRAN and COBOL compilers they had contracted to build. EXEC II was much more popular among customers than EXEC I and even its successor EXEC 8.
Making deadlines? Hah! We were always shifting ship dates later.
What I wonder is if these same programmers from private industry are so great, why are software “user community” boards so filled with questions, often unanswered? If these programmers are so great, why are reviews often mixed, some love the program, others hate it.
Way back in the 80s when the Macintosh was the latest “hot thing”, I was eager to get the latest version of the software and found the enhancements great. Thirty years later, I am reluctant to move up to a major new release. To often things that worked fine are changed to something that is more difficult to use or doesn’t even work anymore.
With each generation it seems that programs run slower and slower. Maybe it’s because I’m using a three-year-old Mac with one-year-old software. I have found suggestions for “cleaning up the system”, but they involve a whole day of backing up data and then another day of creating a “clean install” disc and actually running it.
Consistency of design often seems to be lacking. If my iPhone is asleep and I get a call, the screen only gives me the option of swiping to accept the call. However, if my iPhone is active, the screen gives me the choice of accepting or rejecting the call. Buried in the instruction manual, or was it in the “user community”, in the first case I can reject the call by holding the sleep button and the home button at the same time. Only a bureaucracy would allow different actions for the same result.
In one of the recent releases, certain buttons may or may not appear for starting and stopping a podcast. The intent is to have a right-pointing triangle to start or resume a podcast and a double bar to momentarily stop it. When these symbols suddenly started disappearing, I was glad that I knew where they were supposed to be. And I have no idea why these buttons sometime appear and sometime don’t.
I have a new problem to research: why does the return button no longer work on my Logitech Solar Keyboard folio for my iPad? I’ll have to set aside some time to check out the Logitech community about this.
I love all this technology because of all it does for me. I can write this column on my laptop and email it to the Reader. I can keep notes and to-do lists on my laptop, phone, and iPad and keep them synched. I can call my wife from the grocery store to remind me what it was she wanted. I can use my iPhone as a hot spot at our cabin to write and email this column.
BTW, I’m not writing this at our cabin as planned because another simple technology became an irritation. Our smoke alarm started going off randomly. Sometimes it would beep and beep, sometimes it would only give off one set of beeps. I had a lousy night Saturday night! Could it be too much moisture in the small tight cabin? Well, I brought the alarm home, closed the battery compartment, and put it on the bed. Within twenty minutes it gave off a single set of beeps. We bought the seven-year warranty alarm in March!
Much is made about about government bureaucracy and corporate efficiency, but corporate bureaucracy in GM led to many deaths because of faulty ignition switches.
To err is human, but to really screw up it takes a computer. Humans and computers are both in corporations and governments.
Mel considers himself perfect; he never makes mistakes. Oops, the computer won’t let him misspell mistakes as “misteaks!
Also published in the Reader Weekly, 2014-10-09 at http://duluthreader.com/articles/2014/10/09/4191_programmer_heal_thyself
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Efficiency is not dependent on organizational form
I emailed the following to the Reader Weekly 2013-10-10. They published it on 2013-10-17 as "People make mistakes! All the time. Everyday." It is also available at http://duluthreader.com/articles/2013/10/17/2270_party_of_one-1.
Some people are using the glitches in the Affordable Care Act exchanges as proof that government is inefficient. Duh, how often have you updated software on your devices with version x.0 and then within a week or two received a notice of the release of version x.0.1?
Government is run by people. Corporations are run by people. People make mistakes! All the time. Everyday. In every way. Government screws up. Corporations screw up.
For examples of corporate screw-ups and non-response to customer complaints, take a look at the customer “support” message boards. All the support comes from other customers who spent hours trying to figure out how a product really worked. If they are lucky, other users mark their responses as helpful and they get “points”, whatever those are worth.
I’ve seen some issues go on for two or more years.
Let me give you a short summary of some customer service issues I’ve had this year.
I think it was late spring when we had several days of windy, rainy weather. Our DSL service was erratic. It would be slow then normal then nothing at all. The DSL light on our modem would go out. I called CenturyLink and spoke with a tech in Idaho. She said that our service had been throttled back from the nominal 7Mbps to 3Mbps. She did some resetting and things were better.
The bad weather continued and our DSL service became erratic again. I made a call and sent some emails, but this time I was told that it was my modem and that I should buy a new modem. I checked online for the current CenturyLink modem, and guess what! One customer had left a message that he bought that new modem and was having the exact same problems as we were! Two months before my search!
I didn’t buy a modem and a few weeks later our modem was doing just fine. Our service now runs about 6Mbps. Could it be that CenturyLink had some line problems that customer support was not told about?
I bought a solar light for the outhouse at our cabin. It worked fine and then it would not turn on until it had been off for about an hour. I sent email to the customer support and received back a request for my address, phone number, date of purchase, and a scanned copy of the receipt. I said “Phooey” and figured out that I had drained the batteries by leaving the light on. Replacing the batteries improved the performance. It looks like the first line of customer support is only screeners who have no access to problems and solutions. Now this dumb customer left the light on again and it wouldn’t turn on again.
We replaced our cabin landline with a wireless home phone base. The answering machine now gave a time an hour later than the time of call. Consumer Cellular replied it was my answering machine. With a bit of web searching, I found out that the wireless home phone base is passing the wrong information and that a firmware upgrade fixes the problem. The upgrade is available only from the original manufacturer and only can be installed with Windows software. When I relayed this information back to Consumer Cellular, they replied they could not help me and implied it wasn’t even their responsibility! This from a company that is rated highly in customer service.
The keyboard and keypad on my laptop would not respond. I tried the various reset tricks from Apple support boards but none worked for long. I took my laptop back to Best Buy where I bought it, but everything worked fine for the Geek Squad. It worked fine for a while at home and then… “Dead” again. I figured out that it was Microsoft Outlook that I always have on that was the problem. The techs had closed all my apps before their tests. I reorganized Outlook's database and the keyboard has been working fine since. If only I could make the fingers hitting the keys work as well!
But we should also look on the bright side. Corporations have done a great job of making our cars more reliable and comfortable. If we take some reasonable precautions they start every time and get us where we want to go safely. We have all kinds of extras that weren’t on my first car, a 1940 Chevy. Turn signals, windshield washers, side view mirrors, power steering, power brakes, anti-skid, ABS, air-conditioning, and accurate speedometers.
Ah! Accurate speedometers! I had a 1969 Fiat that said I was going 70mph when I was actually going 63. I had a Ford Escort that said I was going 55mph when I was actually going 47 mph! The Ford dealer blamed it on the tires and wouldn’t do anything about it. I found it was a wide-spread problem; when I compensated for the error I passed many Ford Escorts driving well under the speed limit.
If the dealer was right about the problem, the tires would have to be about 15 percent smaller than “standard” to have that speed disparity. For a tire that was about two feet in diameter, that would work out to over an inch of tread wear. The grooves on a auto tire are not even that deep! What was it that Adam Smith said? “Those who live by profit deceive and oppress the public.”
In the favor of those who live by profit, our latest cars do much better on speedometer accuracy – 30 mph on the speedometer at 30 mph and 71 mph at 70 mph! Oh, and we have one domestic car and one foreign car.
Some people are using the glitches in the Affordable Care Act exchanges as proof that government is inefficient. Duh, how often have you updated software on your devices with version x.0 and then within a week or two received a notice of the release of version x.0.1?
Government is run by people. Corporations are run by people. People make mistakes! All the time. Everyday. In every way. Government screws up. Corporations screw up.
For examples of corporate screw-ups and non-response to customer complaints, take a look at the customer “support” message boards. All the support comes from other customers who spent hours trying to figure out how a product really worked. If they are lucky, other users mark their responses as helpful and they get “points”, whatever those are worth.
I’ve seen some issues go on for two or more years.
Let me give you a short summary of some customer service issues I’ve had this year.
I think it was late spring when we had several days of windy, rainy weather. Our DSL service was erratic. It would be slow then normal then nothing at all. The DSL light on our modem would go out. I called CenturyLink and spoke with a tech in Idaho. She said that our service had been throttled back from the nominal 7Mbps to 3Mbps. She did some resetting and things were better.
The bad weather continued and our DSL service became erratic again. I made a call and sent some emails, but this time I was told that it was my modem and that I should buy a new modem. I checked online for the current CenturyLink modem, and guess what! One customer had left a message that he bought that new modem and was having the exact same problems as we were! Two months before my search!
I didn’t buy a modem and a few weeks later our modem was doing just fine. Our service now runs about 6Mbps. Could it be that CenturyLink had some line problems that customer support was not told about?
I bought a solar light for the outhouse at our cabin. It worked fine and then it would not turn on until it had been off for about an hour. I sent email to the customer support and received back a request for my address, phone number, date of purchase, and a scanned copy of the receipt. I said “Phooey” and figured out that I had drained the batteries by leaving the light on. Replacing the batteries improved the performance. It looks like the first line of customer support is only screeners who have no access to problems and solutions. Now this dumb customer left the light on again and it wouldn’t turn on again.
We replaced our cabin landline with a wireless home phone base. The answering machine now gave a time an hour later than the time of call. Consumer Cellular replied it was my answering machine. With a bit of web searching, I found out that the wireless home phone base is passing the wrong information and that a firmware upgrade fixes the problem. The upgrade is available only from the original manufacturer and only can be installed with Windows software. When I relayed this information back to Consumer Cellular, they replied they could not help me and implied it wasn’t even their responsibility! This from a company that is rated highly in customer service.
The keyboard and keypad on my laptop would not respond. I tried the various reset tricks from Apple support boards but none worked for long. I took my laptop back to Best Buy where I bought it, but everything worked fine for the Geek Squad. It worked fine for a while at home and then… “Dead” again. I figured out that it was Microsoft Outlook that I always have on that was the problem. The techs had closed all my apps before their tests. I reorganized Outlook's database and the keyboard has been working fine since. If only I could make the fingers hitting the keys work as well!
But we should also look on the bright side. Corporations have done a great job of making our cars more reliable and comfortable. If we take some reasonable precautions they start every time and get us where we want to go safely. We have all kinds of extras that weren’t on my first car, a 1940 Chevy. Turn signals, windshield washers, side view mirrors, power steering, power brakes, anti-skid, ABS, air-conditioning, and accurate speedometers.
Ah! Accurate speedometers! I had a 1969 Fiat that said I was going 70mph when I was actually going 63. I had a Ford Escort that said I was going 55mph when I was actually going 47 mph! The Ford dealer blamed it on the tires and wouldn’t do anything about it. I found it was a wide-spread problem; when I compensated for the error I passed many Ford Escorts driving well under the speed limit.
If the dealer was right about the problem, the tires would have to be about 15 percent smaller than “standard” to have that speed disparity. For a tire that was about two feet in diameter, that would work out to over an inch of tread wear. The grooves on a auto tire are not even that deep! What was it that Adam Smith said? “Those who live by profit deceive and oppress the public.”
In the favor of those who live by profit, our latest cars do much better on speedometer accuracy – 30 mph on the speedometer at 30 mph and 71 mph at 70 mph! Oh, and we have one domestic car and one foreign car.
Sunday, April 07, 2013
Limerick of the day - Corporate accountability
Poor decisions don't merit praise,
Just a compensatory raise,
Corp Directors deserve
A big raise for their nerve,
In weathering wan woeful days.- Larry Eisenberg, a comment to "Little Accountability for Directors, Despite Poor Performance", Steven M Davidoff, New York Times, 2013-04-05
My comment to this article was:
"I read once that most of the stock in many companies is held by mutual funds and other financial institutions. They vote with management because of policies of 'fiduciary responsibility'. Individual shareholders who vote against overpaid management are just a minor nuisance."
Sunday, April 17, 2011
More examples of corporate inefficiency
I know and you know that many corporations are not perfect; after all, they are run by imperfect people. I know and you know that many governments are not perfect; after all… However, because there are so many commentators who forcefully state the second statement and deny the first, I feel the urge to provide examples of the first.
In addition to the "Star Tribune can't live within its means", I found that the Star Tribune is very inefficient in collecting its money. Over two weeks after raising its price 33-1/3 percent, it still has not fixed its boxes to reflect the price increase.
Every morning I go out with seven quarters for the Duluth News Tribune (still 75 cents for its few sheets) and for the Star Tribune. Every morning I come back with one of the quarters because the Star Tribune box still says 75 cents and still opens when I put in 75 cents.
Hewlett-Packard, with its multi-million dollar CEOs (see "Talk about boards with conflict of interest"), can't seem to write documentation that matches its products.
For years, my printer periodically makes horrible ratcheting sounds as it feeds paper. For years, I've looked in vain on the HP site for a solution. The only references are a cleaning kit for PCs (not Macs) and pictures and directions that don't look like my printer.
Today I gave another try at finding a solution. Yay! I found a page that tells about using the HP Utility for OS 10.5 and 10.6. It lists:
Paper Feed Cleaning : If the product is not picking paper correctly, this procedure cleans components inside the product to improve paper picking.
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c02019145&cc=us&dlc=en&lc=en&jumpid=reg_R1002_USEN
Boo! "Paper Feed Cleaning" is not in the items displayed in the HP Utility window on my computer!
Ah! The fine print at the bottom of the web page says, "NOTE: The availability of these features depends on the product model."
But, I found this page by searching the Hewlett-Packard website with the model number of my printer.
Go figure!
In addition to the "Star Tribune can't live within its means", I found that the Star Tribune is very inefficient in collecting its money. Over two weeks after raising its price 33-1/3 percent, it still has not fixed its boxes to reflect the price increase.
Every morning I go out with seven quarters for the Duluth News Tribune (still 75 cents for its few sheets) and for the Star Tribune. Every morning I come back with one of the quarters because the Star Tribune box still says 75 cents and still opens when I put in 75 cents.
Hewlett-Packard, with its multi-million dollar CEOs (see "Talk about boards with conflict of interest"), can't seem to write documentation that matches its products.
For years, my printer periodically makes horrible ratcheting sounds as it feeds paper. For years, I've looked in vain on the HP site for a solution. The only references are a cleaning kit for PCs (not Macs) and pictures and directions that don't look like my printer.
Today I gave another try at finding a solution. Yay! I found a page that tells about using the HP Utility for OS 10.5 and 10.6. It lists:
Paper Feed Cleaning : If the product is not picking paper correctly, this procedure cleans components inside the product to improve paper picking.
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c02019145&cc=us&dlc=en&lc=en&jumpid=reg_R1002_USEN
Boo! "Paper Feed Cleaning" is not in the items displayed in the HP Utility window on my computer!
Ah! The fine print at the bottom of the web page says, "NOTE: The availability of these features depends on the product model."
But, I found this page by searching the Hewlett-Packard website with the model number of my printer.
Go figure!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)