AT & T Is Such A Cluster Fuck!

The way it is migrating older customers from the older network to the newer one on condition that they switch from the older AT&T “blue plans” to the new-fangled but more expensive ones, is showing all the signs of klutzy execution, made worse by corporate  hubris. The “our-way-or-the-highway” kind.

I will be short and sweet.  AT&T (formerly Cingular before it bought out the-then AT&T and decided to keep the name) has been trying to do this since May 15th of this year, 2011. When the switch was proceeding too slowly, partly because of spirited resistance from older plan customers, they postponed it to August 31, 2011 and sent letters to that effect.

Apparently that did not persuade the holdouts. Most customers ignored the two mailings urging them to switch. Catch for many older customers? A&T on top of letting them know they would be migrated from the older communication towers to the newer ones, let them know that they would have to choose a new AT&T billing plan which while offering more minutes plus a roll-over minutes component, cost about $5 a month more – which is a big deal for some customers, especially those on fixed incomes.

By mid-August 2011, with the stragglers still straggling, AT&T did something akin to Mafiesque arm-twisting, with call center operatives sounding the tough love note.

Without as much as a warning, AT&T started pulling the plug on customers and hot-wiring their calls to a call center that might have as well been headquartered in Brooklyn. FACTUAL: One customer trying to reach AAA for a tow, was temporarily left stranded on the side of freeway because of the summary discontinance of service. (Way to win friends and influence people Cingular, eehh AT&T! )

This unilateral decision to suspend service was more than infuriating – but the company rationale was that it did not want to be saddled with thousands and thousands  wanting to switch-over at the last minute. But AT&T was cutting off service on August 30th, instead of August 31st as the last letter announcing the rescheduled switch-over mentioned.

Why did something as basic as this turned out to be rocket science?

Is this what size does to a company?

Don’t answer that ……

The next time the name AT&T elicits a measure of deference in you, remember this one thing: The current AT&T are just a bunch of Cingular thugs in new corporate duds, one level up from the basement boiler-room from which they use to hustle for business. Once a thug …..

Please pass the word on.

BNSG on the customer service tip.

Key Links:

Service Termination of old AT&T blue plan customers      (Howard Forums)

Filed under: Consumer Watch, Tech, Uncategorized, American Telegraph & Telephone Company, AT & T, AT & T Is Such A Cluster Fuck, AT&T, AT&T is really the old Cingular under a new name, AT&T Sucks, At&T switch from the blue plan, August 31 - 2011, Cingular, Cingular thugs, Consumer Watch, May 15th - 2011, switching Cingular customers

Apple and the iPad 2: Gaming the Market and Customers …. But at what potential cost?

Beyond the pretext of improved utility, the  iPad 2 appeals to people’s weakness for things shiny, smooth and blingy.  And the people lining up to snap up this tablet are the worst ambassadors for its utilitarianism: gadget fiends, resellers and high schoolers who just have to have shiniest, newest toy to keep up.  The indisputable fact is that there was very little to justify the “upgrade” that Apple has been trying to sell since March 2, 2011.  The tablet should really have been released as a 1.5  upgrade with little or no fanfare. Steve Jobs should have stayed home for this one.

iPad 2 Bling - For what its worth, the black trumps the white hands down.

But the real bottomline is that Apple should  have skipped this iteration or, if it really had to, done the right thing by the customer; and that is issued an upgrade that had serious substance.  For one thing, the current specs do not justify selling  this bling-bling for twice the price of the iPad Touch.

“Ipad 2 stands for: Ipod Touch with 2 cameras.”   Mark_01 ZDNet, 11 March, 2011 14:34

While there may have been strategic rationale to keep its edge over the competition, one cannot help but think that the iPad 2 was also a strategic mistake. There are people who will not buy this tablet even though they had been waiting for a year. That is money Apple has left on the table inspite of the (apparent) runaway sales. The faux pas may have left an opportunity for the competition to counter-pounce – but you and I know that that will not happen. That motley crew is just not that organized a bunch.  (It lacks the technical and production wherewithal to pull this off.)

Within a year, Apple has created massive demand for a new product segment. As impressive as this is, it also illustrates the speed with which the next competitive threat can develop. The developments at industry participants like Best Buy, Dell, HP and others demand attention. Investors are right to praise Apple’s successes, but they should also view potential threats with an open and cautious mind. (Seeking Alpha)

As already alluded to, the decision to release the iPad 2 was clearly aimed at maintaining Apple’s edge over its competition with the market and an impressionable customer base. But was it worth the shrug of more astute customers who were were clearly underwhelmed by the iPad 2 offerings. Was it worth sending them a-looking at other offerings because they couldn’t wait for the iPad 3. Was it worth deepening the cynicism over Apple’s annual come hithers. The smart customer has learned from the iPhone/iPod upgrade cycle.

The relative cheap price of the iPad 1 and 2  is part of the problem. And to that I say affordability is the worst reason for buying something. (Rant Alert:  It is  the biggest reason our landfills are bursting at the seams, not to mention the giant garbage patch that is burning a hole in the middle of the Pacific.) Check out  this stock article which, among other things, highlights Apple’s ability to undercut most if not all of the the competition on product price.

Quick Impressions On-the-go

I was totally underwhelmed by my hands-on experience with the iPad 2. Summary Verdict: I will not buy it out of sheer principle.

The tech writers who drooled over it absolutely befuddle me.  A side by side comparison of the iPad2 with the iPad 1 failed to impress me as to its necessity. I was left scratching my head a bit about the distinctions between the two. The camera,  facetime, faster processor and ballyhooed thinness do not amount to a salable hill of beans IMO – but to each customer their own I guess. If you are one of those people who buys an iPad a year come rain or shine, suit yourself – but if you are one of those people who casts a fish-eye on Apple’s annual hawkfests, then welcome to the club.

Now my cursory impressions of the iPad 2:

• Go with the black version. The white version (while resonating with more traditional Mac esthetics) is a garish looking monstrosity which should not have seen the light of day along with the failed white iPhone 4.   The finish lacks the opacity that would give  it the nice silvery finish like the one you see on  Apple Cinema displays. Problem: Whey you try to paint glass with the current white finish you end up with a ghoulish translucency. Discriminating esthetes pick up on it right away.  What I noticed in the store was that there were bigger crowds around black iPads than their white counterparts.  And Craigslist resales seem to indicate that black iPads are selling more briskly than black ones. White iPads are so common that you could almost give them away for free at this point. My prediction is that unless the production processes improve, the white iPad may not see the light of day come iPad 3 time.
• The novelty and scarcity inflected frenzy for the iPad 2 is gonna die as quickly as it spiked. Give it about four months and  people will be thinkin’ iPad 3 in  another 8months! I know, I know, its pretty sad, isn’t it?
• Apple at this point has no choice but to make the iPad 3  (which will probably have a brand new name)  the absolute bomb.  Samsung and HP are looking to field real contenders, even if they end up not being  iPad killers.  There is also a crying need for a beefed up tablet for the road warrior: one that will double up as serious work horses the iPad 1 and 2 never hinted at apart from impressive battery specs.

BNSG on the technological tip.

© 2011 incrucible.net @ bnsg.wordpress.com

Key Links:

Apple is cheap, but stay cautious (Seeking Alpha)

The iPad 2 lines are ridiculous (Cult of Mac)

Five ways Apple botched the iPad 2 launch (Jason D. O’Grady, Applecore, ZDNET.COM)

iPad 2 ship date bleeds to april as iPad 3 plays iPhone 5 spoiler card (Beatweek Magazine)

Left turn: iPhone 5 could have more in common with iPad 3 than iPhone 4 (Beatweek Magazine)

iPad 2 Price List (www.thepicky.com)

Official Apple iPad 2 Price Page (apple.com)

Filed under: Tech, Uncategorized, Apple, iPad 1, iPad 2, iPad 2 pricelist, iPad 3, Mac, Steve Jobs, workhorse tablet

The iPad 2 and Apple’s dollar-driven incrementalism should give consumers cause for pause

For the discriminating consumer – the kind that doesn’t buy Apple products and then updates them  on cue with each  appearance of Steve Jobs –  there is little difference between the iPad 1 and new-fangled iPad 2. The software, hardware and cosmetic changes don’t amount to a salable hill of beans. (Check out the “Key Links” at the end of this post.) Obviously the person wanting to jump into the Apple river for the first time will want to  consider the iPad 2 for the faster 1Ghz dual core A5 processor processor and the  thinner/lighter form factor, but with the  iPad 3 promising to take the giant leap for technological mankind that the iPad 2 didn’t, the decision to buy or not buy the iPad 2 becomes more knottier.  And as if that was not enough, the prices of the original  iPad 1 have come down by about a $100, not to mention the used ones that are now selling on Craigslist for a song and a dance. (In the United States check the prices tumble from  coast to coast here in New York and here in the San Francisco Bay Area.)

“For the iPad 2 don’t get your hopes up too high. That’s all I’m going to say. They’ve had a number of problems along the way, and the third-generation iPad is the one to make a song and a dance about.” (Mystery Apple Staffer – Cultofmac.com)

You Need This Advice – Dang It: And that includes all the nerdy tech writers writing under the influence of Apple’s dang voodoo. Never has the time to think clearly and be a smart customer been so pressing.  Apple will press your buttons on cue because that is what they do.  Springing into action everytime Steve Jobs beckons is neither healthy for the head nor the pocket book. The astute Apple customer is an inverterate leap-frogger –  leaping one or two generations of the same product before purchasing or re-purchasing. The advent of the iPhone and the  iPod touch was very instructive of what Apple does to early adopters and reflexive purchasers. Hint: the first version is always a crapshoot regardless of the novelty factor and first adopters always pay dearly for that novelty relative to the substance of second or third generation iterations.

The new flagship white iPad 2 debuts at the Yerba Buena Center in San Francisco co-starring Steve P. Jobs. Will the bling that resonates so much more with traditional Mac esthetics camouflage the fact that there is little new here? To the perceptive this will remain nothing but a blingy toy with everything but a powder puff mirror at the back. Road warriors need not apply; at least not right now (Photo: Apple Inc)

Advent of the iPad – (The power and the glory of “iTouch” writ large):  The iPad 1,  which conceptually pre-dated the iPhone, broke major ground in April of 2010 through a combination of technology and timing. The tech ecosystem was ready for this kind of product and Apple hit the bulls-eye with the original iPad by combining the magic of multi-touch with superior software/hardware and ….. drum-roll:  ground-breaking battery life. Eight to ten hours of  battery life was unheard of at the time. Combining this power with portability was the technological sound barrier computer makers had failed to break for eons.  Nobody until Apple had had the smarts and wherewithal to break it with something as beguiling as the iPhone/iPod Touch writ large – the iPad 1.

So for this innovation Apple deserves all the accolades. However with the iPad 2, Apple’s marketing driven incrementalism began to show its glassy eye again.

From a smart consumer’s perspective, there is no reason why the iPad 2 should still have come with

• A crappy 2 mega pixel still image camera vs the  5 mega pixel for the iPhone 4,
• A paltry 64 gb of storage (This is dang ridiculous!)
• A paltry 256 mb or RAM (the same 256 mg of RAM that is choking the iPad 1 to death)
• Non-retina display
• Absence of a USB port

“The iPad is the breakthrough that will lead us to the cloud because of its shortcomings, specifically its lack of space for placing documents, music, photos, videos, books, etc.” (Ronen Mendezitsky, Weekly Poll)

That this 10 inch tablet should have the same memory as the eenie-weenie iPod touch boggles the mind kind of the same way it did the first time around with the advent of the Ipad 1. A paltry 64 gb for music, video, documents, photos and other things people may want to put on their iPad? If Apple is setting people up for its cloud and streaming services then they are potentially alienating a significant part of the market that doesn’t take kindly to being tethered around the Apple lamp post.  All these slights and omissions represent negatives that the hitherto  disorganized competition may exploit to their advantage.

Meanwhile Steve Jobs has just given some of us Luddites reasons  to hold onto our Flintstone tablets,  netbooks and laptops  for another 12 months or so.

BNSG on the technological tip.

Key Links:

Five reasons not to buy an iPad (Will Grunwald, PC “World)

What Apple hopes you didn’t notice about the iPad 2 (Chris Taylor, Special to CNN)

iPad 2: And underwhelming top dog (Matt Hartley, Financial Post Tech Desk)

Analysts underwhelmed as Jobs unveils faster iPad (Roundup) (Andy Goldberg, M & C Tech News)

Apple iPad 2: What we wanted vs what we got (Stuff, Middle East)

Just how bad is the iPad 2 camera (Charlie Sorrel, Gadget Lab)

Five things the iPad didn’t get (Josh Lowensohn, CNET)

What you need to know about the iPad 2 (Computerworld)

Why the iPad 2 display didn’t get an upgrade (Peter Pachal, PC World)

iPad 3 is the one to make a song and dance about (Leander Kahney – cultofmac.com)

How to resist your iPad 2 craving (David Carnoy, CNET Reviews)

Filed under: Consumer Watch, Tech, Uncategorized, Apple, Apple cloud computing, Apple marketing, Apple's dang voodoo, Apple's dollar driven incrementalism, Craigslist, iPad 1, iPad 2, iPad 3, iTouch, Steve Jobs, streaming, used iPads

The Unblinking Eye of FaceBook and Your Eroding Privacy

Mark Zuckerberg, Founder and CEO, Facebook: Does he get it? The gist of the privacy debate that is. (Photo –  Associated Press)

As unsurprising as the story is, there is still something intestinally disturbing about reports that Facebook is  mulling over resurrecting plans to share Facebook users’ personal information with third parties.  The fact that Facebook has been down this path before makes it a particularly galling. Is this gonna end up being a case of Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook ending up doing what Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook want? Check out this Yahoo story and the accompanying video at the end:

It’s been a while since we’ve had an uproar over Facebook’s handling of its users personal information, so we suppose the time is ripe.

So cue the online outrage: Facebook announced today in a letter to Congress that the social-media platform is moving forward with plans to give third parties access to user information, such as phone numbers and home addresses.

In a letter to Reps. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Joe Barton (R-Tex.), who both expressed concerns over Facebook’s plan to make such data available, company officials reiterated their now-familiar pledge to leave it up to users to decide whether they want their personal contact information to go out to app developers and outside websites. Markey has previously said that “Facebook needs to protect the personal information of its users to ensure that Facebook doesn’t become Phonebook.”

The company, meanwhile, sounds as though it has no plans to trim back its information-sharing ambitions.

“We have not yet decided when or in what manner we will redeploy the permission for mobile numbers and addresses,” the letter states. “We are evaluating whether and how we can increase the visibility of applications’ request for permission to access user contact information. We are also considering whether additional user education would be helpful.”

Facebook has incited user revolts in the past by arbitrarily re-calibrating its privacy settings and then making it difficult for even the most seasoned web geeks to figure out how to reset them. And once again, anger is roiling among tech industry observers.

“Facebook is the slowly warming pot of water and we, my friends, are the frog. By the time we noticed our peeling skin, another hunk of our privacy is long gone,” MSNBC tech writer Helen A.S. Popkin wrote about the latest move. “This is how Facebook rolls: Strip away a huge chunk of your privacy, cry ‘Our bad!’ and roll it back when users and/or privacy advocates complain. Then wait awhile, and do whatever it is Facebook planned to do anyway. Voila! Boiled frog.”

Or as Facebook VP Elliot Schrage bluntly (if less colorfully) put things in the midst of a similar uproar last year: If you don’t want Facebook to share your personal information, don’t share your personal information with Facebook.  (Brett Michael Dykes, Yahoo)

The consumer as frog in boiling water analogy is priceless. But the truth is really verisimilitudinal when it comes to Facebook and or  the way personal information has been handled in this society.  The leakey-faucet stratagem goes beyond what Facebook does.  (An trip to the local county detention center, in another realm, can trigger a stream of solicitations from local lawyers wanting to defend your “case”.)

The Prize: Personal Information and Personal Cell Phone Numbers:

Beyond residential addresses, phone numbers, especially cell phone numbers have become the digital equivalent of an ID – and one that has the ability to bestow upon people talismanic powers to reach out and touch you in the cyber- infomercial realms.  Think Wall Street marketers. Think texters.

So think about this. The next time a business asks you for your phone number, what he or she really wants is your cell phone number. A landline can be ditched as easily as a new e-mail address. Cell phone numbers (with the exception of newer IP-based alternatives) are for life – potentially. They are national and international and their shelf-life is  determined only by your personal whim or paranoia.

So think about this before Facebook gets  its grubby little hands on your cell phone numbers and passes them out to  third parties.  When Facebook does this,  it is compromising you in ways more than one.

Facebook will do what Facebook has to do. And we, on our part have to do what we have to do – namely choose how much of our information Facebook can have and or use. Voting with our feet should always be an option. Counting on politicians to stem this tide is dang foolhardy.

Background to the Facebook controversy:

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/65903008/

The Youtube Snippet:

BNSG on consumer watch patrol.

© 2011 incrucible.net @ bnsg.wordpress.com

Key Links:

Facebook Pauses Work on Instragram Kids After 44 States Reaction (Steve Dent, Yahoo/Engadget)

Facebook’s Desire to Watch Its Users Through Their Smartphones (Social News Media 24)

Facebook’s Social Balance in the Red (AXIOS)

Flocking to Google+  (John C. Dvorak, PC Magazine)

Facebook Traffic Plummets in the US  (Andrew Couts, Digital Trends)

Face Book sees traffic drops in US and Canada as it nears 700 million users worldwide  (Eric Eldon, Inside Facebook)

Face Book Traffic is Down – Do You Have Facebook Fatigue?   (Kate Ward, EW.com)

Senators Push Facebook To Rethink Privacy Policy (Amy Lee, Huffington Post)

Facebook hires same Republican-leaning lobby firm as Apple (Dustin Weaver, The Hill)

Facebook grapples with privacy issues (Jessica E. Vascellaro, Wall Street Journal)

Facebook friend, foe or frenemy? (Newsweek)

Filed under: Tech, Uncategorized, cell phone numbers, commercialism, Facebook, Facebook privary debate, John C. Dvorak - PC Magazine, Mark Zuckerberg, marketers, personal information, phones, privacy, third parties