AT&T & Apple

A federal judge has thrown down the gavel at Apple and AT&T allowing a class action lawsuit to proceed against the two companies. Here are our thoughts.

Full disclosure: I am a technologist, not a lawyer. I am an AT&T (wireless) customer (because the service at my home is great), and have been from back in the day when AT&T stood for American Telephone and Telegraph and they ran wires (yes, wires) to everyone’s home. And they provided the devices at the end of the wires…actual telephones.

One would think there would be some antitrust lawyers still hanging around AT&T (the name resurrected by Southwestern Bell¹), AT&T Wireless (formerly Cingular) and Apple because the current series of lawsuits makes it very reminiscent of the old days.

AT&T’s biggest saving grace may be it is a separate company from Apple, although words like “collusion” come to mind.

If you buy an iPhone, it only works on AT&T’s network. AT&T sells 2 year deals, and it’s our understanding there is a 5 year agreement between AT&T and Apple.

Apple is tightly controlling the applications on the iPhone. For a company priding itself on being open, they get a little persnickety when it comes to pesky competitors like Google using their device.

If your iPhone drops calls, is it the nifty new case antenna,

Or an AT&T network issue?

Or an AT&T capacity issue? One would think the production and sales forecasters at Apple would share projections with AT&T allowing AT&T to build out capacity on demand.

AT&T’s response is brilliant. Manage capacity by deploying wi-fi in congested areas (a good move), and raising prices.

Consumers have the ability to use other carriers is they are willing to carry extra devices. We’ve done this in our labs and it works fine….albeit with the drawback of needing a Tumi bag to carry all the accessories.

We’re not big fans of litigation and the associated costs. We are big fans of open markets.

So we believe the justice department may have some fun with this one. While separate companies, there’s a certain about of blending going on. Until the result is in years and years from now, we may be better watching “Will it Blend?” video, or using arguably less aesthetically appealing devices offered on other carriers. 

¹ AT&T was “broken up” following the 1974 U.S. Department of Justice antitrust lawsuit against AT&T, United States v. AT&T, leading to a settlement finalized on January 8, 1982, where “Bell System” agreed to divest its local exchange service operating companies, in return for a chance to go into the computer business, AT&T Computer Systems. Effective January 1, 1984, AT&T’s local operations were split into seven independent Regional Holding Companies, also known as Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs), or “Baby Bells”.

All logos and trademarks are the ownership of their respective companies. 

… but Macs don’t break

Let me begin by stating I have no bias as to what type of computer people want to use. For me, it’s about people having the right computer to do their jobs and to not have to ask me for support.

With that said, let me share a story of the first day at a new account. A colleague wanted to use his personal Macbook instead of the clients PC. The Macbook had MS Office and could easily connect to the client’s wireless network. The problems all started when the client provided us with a dedicated printer (HP LaserJet) for our use. After downloading drivers, the PC was able to fully able to use the printer while the Mac was unable to connect. This followed with the requirement of MS Project leading to the installation of Windows XP running on the Mac in order to run the application.

What was interesting were the number of people who thought I would be happy about a Mac not being able to perform the functions of a PC. Why do we still feel this way? Unless you are a support organization, what difference does it make?

These feelings stem from corporate PC support organizations. Over 20 years ago corporations began to purchase large numbers of PCs for their employees. Then, one day, someone brought in their Mac from home and wanted to use it in the office. They said it was much more productive for them and we (those providing PC support) were living in the Stone Age. The same thing happened when we selected BlackBerry’s as the corporate standard for PDAs. Within days from the announcement of the iPhone, users were asking why they had to use an antiquated device such as a BlackBerry.

So, why can’t establish desktop/laptop/PDA computing standards that allow multiple devices to be used? Progressive firms are considering allowing employees to “Bring Your Own Technology (BYOT)” to the office. Managing an environment of mixed hardware requires standards, processes, and support training designed to treat problems more in the abstract. The diagnostic process for resolving issues on any platform is the same. The problem is support people don’t follow the process. They tend to be so busy knowing how to solve the technical issue; they lose sight of the problem.

At the same time, I get pretty upset with support personnel who ask me 20 questions in order to understand what I could explain in one sentence. They are following a process in order to deliver a consistent set of information for problem resolution. Maybe I need to be a little more tolerant and practice what I preach.

Tradeoffs – Lessons for IT from the Gulf Disaster

Seeing a “Gulf Disaster – Tracking the Numbers” chart on CNN.COM this morning made me ill:

CNN.COM June 29, 2010, 9:00AM EST

As an engineer by training, and a lifelong technologist, I know there’s no good reason for the shortcuts taken by my fellow engineers on at BP.

And while the company is working feverishly to clean up their image, the Gulf area will take decades at minimum to recover:

BP Website

Think about systems in the rest of the world. In the following picture in a hospital ER room, there are

Picture by Author

a wide variety of systems working together in harmony and safely. There’s power, oxygen, vacuum, heart monitor, eye/ear devices, and the ubiquitous television (the TV is out of the picture, and the control is not.) And then there are mechanical systems (gurney, HVAC, structural, lighting, etc.) This picture was taken with a RIM BlackBerry, and sent to my hosted Microsoft Exchange email over the AT&T network.

By having solid designs and safeguards, these tools make the medical profession more effective and save lives.

When it comes to energy, we shouldn’t have to decide between oil or the environment. Engineers know how to do things safely. When shortcuts are taken (as is now being suggested in the Gulf), inevitably “bad” things happen.

Engineers are not infallible. Mistakes, or out of bound conditions do happen even to the best with disastrous results:

tokyo5.wordpress.com/2009/07/

As systems types, we are often “under the gun” to deliver things quickly. And with some planning, “just in time” philosophies, and some smarts, we can deliver!

When you are asked to make a professional compromise….consider alternatives to mitigate risks and achieve the objectives. And remember what can happen when risks are not mitigated.

Free WiFi – as a Public Service

Like the “all you can eat” buffet, wireless carriers are scrambling to change their menus to ala carte.

Soon, the one price covers all usage plans will be replaced with tiers offering a “pay as you go” approach.

Personally, I think this is subtlety devastating. Whether on a SmartPhone, PC or an “iWhatever”, the ability to capture large amounts of data to a remote device is on the increase.

I’ve been lured to watching the oil gushing from the bottom of the Gulf sea, waiting expectantly for the oil to stop leaking and hearing a neighborhood cheer in unison for the triumph of good over evil. And if one feed isn’t enough, BP offers 12 live feeds from their remotely operated vehicles: http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=9033572&contentId=7062605

That’s more content than I get at my local Cineplex.

So as AT&T, Verizon and others begin ratcheting up costs and reducing my ability to affordably stay abreast of current events (or watch YouTube), what are we to do? Reach farther into our pockets during a challenging economic time to help AT&T?

I respectfully submit there’s a better way, and the Town of Brookline, MA is the working model. In a unique partnership the Town of Brookline offers residents free wireless on a merged wireless/public safety network.

Announced in 2007 this program has been working successfully allowing residents full access.

http://www.brooklinema.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=275&Itemid=242

Here’s an example of a town well ahead of its time. Other towns are following suit (for example, parts of Boston are now “lit”.)

While a grass roots effort could be undertaken opening free wireless via home wi-fi, a coordinated approach would have better coverage and maintainability.

All towns should look into providing “free” wireless to their citizens as a value added service.

Robust Software

We use Microsoft Exchange as our email platform and purchase it as a service from a leading (and very large) hosting company. In general, it works well, but they do seem to have many small outages. Our clients also use Microsoft Exchange, but internally hosted. They do not seem to have as many outages.

As we see more-and-more people working from home (be they employees or consultants) we are challenged with maintaining a productive work environment. Downtime from telecom vendors and home PCs, software, and devices is high. All of those represent single points of failure and therefore a potential for outages. Consumers have accepted a lower standard of reliability than companies. How much time is wasted because software does not work properly?

Why should we be concerned with single points of failure?

Businesses invest a large amount of money in high availability to eliminate single points of failure. They do this to avoid user impact from a hardware or software failure. I fully appreciate the need for redundancy for hardware failures, but I can’t understand why we should have to pay for software companies’ inability to build software that will not fail.

Why build robust software?

I would postulate that software companies are not incented to prevent software from failing. We have come to accept a level of failure from all software and have also come to accept our software vendor’s weaknesses. We also accept that we should pay software vendors an annual maintenance fee (around 20%) to fix problems in their software. Shouldn’t they incur the cost of fixing those problems? Is it that they don’t make enough money?

In addition to maintenance fees, we (as buyers) are not willing to pay for more robust software, but we are willing to pay for more features. If you are a software company, where are you going to invest?

What can be done?

This is a wide-open question and one that is very difficult. In many areas quality standards are high or there is regulation protecting us. You don’t hear (too often) about medical devices failing or having bugs. That would be bad. There is now talk of more rigid testing standards for on-board computers in cars (post Toyota debacle). This is a good thing.

Software defects are only tracked internally by vendors. Wouldn’t it be great to see the count posted on their web site? Wouldn’t it also be great for software companies to admit when they have a problem? When was the last time Microsoft admitted it had a bug in a product. I remember working for a hardware vendor (years ago) where the acceptable level of bugs for release of an operating system was 10,000! Bringing transparency and awareness to the issue will help to make software companies accountable.

As consumers, all we can do is vote with our dollars. Unfortunately, our choices are limited. There is little, real, competition in the software industry.

There is one solution, Linux. Linux software is very robust, efficient, and functional. The reason for this is simple. Development and selection of features is a community process driven by consumers. Who wouldn’t put robustness, efficiency (small footprint), and cost as high priorities. They can’t be captured in a screen shot, but they make our lives more productive.

Back to Basics

The battery in my backpack sprayer doesn’t seem to hold a charge any longer. Trying to spray for weeds with a battery operated device with a non-functioning battery is a problem! Ordering the replacement exposed one IT organization’s weak customer focus.

Recognizing the battery was on charge over night and just wasn’t working any longer, I sat down for lunch on the deck at a favorite restaurant Saturday noon and did a quick Google search for a SHURFlo battery pack using my trusty BlackBerry 9700. Sure enough, one of my suppliers where I have free shipping has the battery in stock!

As much as I love the BlackBerry, I’ve used the browser enough to know it’s never a great experience trying to order over the browser. It’s not about security, it’s about the BlackBerry browser tending to be rather limited…and inevitably not working quite right (Apple has it right on the iWhatever, RIM isn’t in the same league.)

In any event, I decided to call Gempler’s and place an order by phone. After all, lunch hadn’t arrived, and I was heavy into multi-tasking.

After an extended hold (odd – it’s a Saturday), the representative from Gempler’s gets on the phone.

“I’m sorry sir, our systems are down for an upgrade. We can’t tell you pricing or availability.”

Hold on, the website shows the price as $42. Why can’t you see that?

“I’m sorry sir, I can’t see pricing or availability.”

At this point, getting an order through becomes sport. “Can you take an order?”

“Yes, I can’t tell you pricing or availability.”

“So, hold on. I can see pricing and availability (at least for quantity one) on the web. You can take an order and can’t tell me pricing or availability. We can work as a team to get through this, right?”

Pause. “Ahhhh, yes, I can take an order, I can’t tell you pricing or availability.”

We now know the back end processing for Gempler’s is separate from the web interface. We also know the IT staff at Gempler’s hasn’t planning for concurrent maintenance, instead preferring to take the production environment down for an upgrade.

I’m not in the business of selling “work stuff” like Gempler’s, and somehow a weekend in May sounds like a reasonable time to have an upgrade. What is unclear is how the IT staff could leave customer service so incapacitated.

There are many ways to avoid a situation like this. Upgrade the Disaster Recovery environment first, then use it as production. Let the Customer Service people use the web interface. Freeze one environment, and apply changes after the fact. Do the upgrade “after hours” or during a holiday when customer service is otherwise unavailable (Gemplers understandably doesn’t offer 24 hour live customer service.)

Full disclosure: Gempler’s is a good company I’ve otherwise regularly used happily. GEMPLER’S® is a division of GHC Specialty Brands, LLC (whomever they are.)

The Gemplers’ IT staff forgot Gempler’s is in business to service customers. The reason Gemplers’ IT exists is NOT to do upgrades during the day.

And imagine the irony when calling on Monday morning to check the status of my order (it is not showing up on-line) when the person at the other end of the call was…the same customer service rep! Yes, your order is placed! Great team effort.

Interpersonal Communications - an argument for Desktop Video

Here are my communications preferences in order:

• Face to face
  
• Video
  
• Telephone
  
• Email
  
• Text
  
• Social Media (Twitter/ Facebook)
  
• Snail Mail
  

Call me a “high touch” kind of guy…and I personally value the ability to judge the non-verbals.

For years, business has been conducted face to face, telephone and email (for memorializing EVERY statement for latter retrieval instant retrieval.) Video was reserved for use in conference rooms, with very expensive equipment.

And not that long ago I had a Tandberg desktop video system…very pricey, great quality, and super for my calls to Hong Kong (where my friend William would enjoy breakfast as I was munching on dinner….obviously an arrangement suitable when people are comfortable with each other.

Today, I use Skype all the time. Skype allows simple low cost (free if you use an existing connection, and you’ll need a camera (standard in many laptops these days and speakers) video communications. What could be simpler?

By working remotely, yet staying in touch with Skype, a basic tenant of work mobility is attained.

With video, the non-verbals are apparent (my partner Matt does an expressive eye-roll easily seen on video…and conversely he can observe me staring out the window as I think about a comeback for something I’m reacting to….)

Skype is now in Beta for group video (a function competitor ooVoo already offers.) Group video allows a small team to work together and hold meetings. Desktop video offers a virtual alternative to having to be there for the staff meeting.

It also drives home the importance of a recent survey by Plantronics, the company producing the headsets used in many companies, about the adoption of Unified Communications, systems bringing together the full suite of communications, from online chat to Voice over IP to mobile technologies. The survey found the biggest companies already have Unified Computing strategies, with only two percent of the Fortune 1000 not considering it.

What often gets in the way is security. The Data Security people need to engage early and acknowledge cutting off the network may not be the BEST security profile. To the contrary, they need to understand how to allow advanced technologies in a secure manner.

Also, desktop video is a great way for keeping up with the kids at college. While their preferred method of communications is texting, checking in with video is a way to see how they are adjusting in college…or being Dr. Mom/Dad if the student has a cold.

Plug and Run 2

Why don’t software and services just work?

My friend Matt has decided to use Microsoft SharePoint as a collaborative tool in his business. The companies’ email provider offers SharePoint, but at a price far in excess of a large, well known company (did I say Network Solutions?)

Matt likes working weekends. It is his down time….and a perfect time to implement SharePoint.

Here we are Monday afternoon and it is still not working.

Why?

Matt is a sophisticated user. He can write code (sometimes the bane of my existence), and is very, very patient (a trait I want to learn!)

Matt has been on the phone with Network Solutions through the weekend. Their support clearly has scripts to follow, and sadly doesn’t seem to understand when the request is silly.

For example:

• “What browser are you using?” IE 8.
• “Please try a different browser.” Huh? Why? Does this make any sense?

Matt patiently searches the Microsoft site, applying knowledge base patches seeming to match. Network Solutions is on the hook to call back…and hasn’t so far.

Why is this so hard?

Personally, I wouldn’t have the patience…it should just work out of the box. Matt is paying for this service; it is not “free.” Obviously there is some subtle set up issue somewhere…

Is it possible Matt is the first to use SharePoint on Vista or Windows 7? Not likely.

Between Microsoft, who ultimately owns SharePoint, and Network Solutions, who is offering this a service, the code should just work.

Skype works this way… Oh yeah, it’s free. Maybe that’s Matt’s mistake.

Plug and Run

I want software to plug and run. Plug and play wastes my time. Too many times I find myself having to play to get things to work.

I recently upgraded the Counterpath softphone software on my Windows 7 PC. The old version (2.5) didn’t uninstall, the settings didn’t come over (even though I accepted the option to do so) and the software couldn’t connect to the PBX server. After emailing the vendor for support for this (paid) product, I have time to shoot off a Curriculotta on the topic since I can’t make or receive phone calls.

This is after spending 40 minutes today getting a “Plug and Play” router to work (a Verizon Novatel “MiFi” device.) In the end, the software had to be installed twice, the promised process to set up an account never appeared, and I had to hunt around to get it to work. Once set up it has worked fine. Technical skills needed to get this to work were 1.5 on a 1 to 5 scale. Why didn’t it work immediately?

And how about McAfee with their most recent virus software update prompting infinite reboots?

After all these years of writing software, why can’t we make it work seamlessly?

I contend we can. Those Apple people have it good. Apple understands most humans don’t want to look under the covers at the bits and bytes. Humans want software to install easily, configure instantly, and work. Apple shows we know how to do this.

Companies need to understand most humans don’t want to do configurations. We want the software to work. We want it to install silently. We don’t want to reboot. If a product needs to be brought down, and back up, then just do it. Don’t involve us in your software upgrade process.

Windows 7 took me 7 hours on the phone with Dell support. My HP 8500 multifunction printer works perfectly on XP, and chokes on Windows 7 (even the Mark Hurd executive escalation group failed at getting it to work.)

iTunes updated on my PC today. It politely asked if I wanted to upgrade, then worked quietly in the background. My iPhone upgrades similarly, although I can’t take out of the cradle during an upgrade. (One could argue Apple takes advantage of their generally silent upgrade process by sending a large number of large updates.)

My Verizon FiOS cable box upgrades silently (I’m normally asleep during the upgrade.)

As professionals and consumers, it’s time we raise the bar on what we produce and accept. Shoddy install and upgrade processes need to be escalated as issues…companies do respond to squeaky wheels, and as a community we can be vocal.

That said, it starts with us. When was the last time you wrote software silently installing or upgrading?

Editors note: 24 hours later and the SoftPhone still is not working. An article on vendor support models (including email support) will appear later!

Help Desk Value

“You know all the problems; you’re going to run operations.”

Those lofty words from the company VP of Systems 25+ years ago launched a career into Operations

and sealed my commitment to the help desk as an integral part of any IT Operation.

Not having a clue of what a help desk was didn’t deter me from accepting the assignment, and along with the role came Cindy, a particularly no-nonsense person with great tenacity, and my first managerial report.

ITIL was just being borne in the UK, and hadn’t made its way across the pond. Fortunately, IBM had a process model we were able to use, and some software we could use to track “calls.”

We printed labels for every telephone in the company and with their application the Help Desk was open. By following some very simple processes, such as tracking every ticket until closed, making sure the Help Desk phone was always answered 24x7, producing reports of every problem type and every resolution type we were able to begin to form analysis of how we could best work to prevent calls in the first place.

This led to the publication of a Help Desk guide…a sort of User Manual for folks to consult for self service prior to calling in to the help desk.

And once we knew what all the problems were, and were able to address them, we were off and running expanding the Help Desk to take calls for telephone communications and some building maintenance items.

Over the years the Help Desk has become a more formal part of each IT organization, and with a variety of process models to choose from (ITIL, ISO 20000, HDI), organizations can select and implement processes comfortable and effective for their organization.

Help Desks also frequently do first level support, accessing PCs remotely and performing trouble ticket resolution. Whenever support can be provided at the first tier, client satisfaction is raised and the service is provided at a lower cost.

Telecommunications technologies make it easy to queue calls, and implement work from home and/or follow the sun models.

Analysis of root cause is still an important factor in help desks. By understanding root cause, the real underlying issues can be addressed.

There’s an adage that the more things change the more they stay the same. The sophistication of Help Desks and Help Desk tools has increased substantially. The basic tenants of customer service remain – be helpful, take all calls, follow through, keep the customer informed.

Cindy is a Principal IS Technical Analyst for a major retailer.