t 'n t luoma

Dear Stupid Television Programmers:

Stop it. Just stop it.

I’ve had enough of your stupid games with the start and end times to your shows.

Continue reading "ABC vs TiVo: Can't we all get along?" »

Posted by at 11:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

My brother writes:

Just had to share this with you, after all your posts on this and related subjects (feel free to share this, if you like, special guest post?).

Continue reading "More Shipping Nightmares... this time, UPS!" »

Posted by at 1:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Now this is really useless. It’s 11:40 p.m. on Friday the 16th, and here’s what USPS.com says about my package:

Current Status

You entered 9102 0012 0693 2242 1290 05

Your item was processed and left our CINCINNATI, OH facility on September 14, 2005. Information, if available, is updated every evening. Please check again later.

Certainly something has happened in the past two days. Cincinnati is 3 hours from here. Two days with no updates? Come on.

Posted by at 11:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Ok, so now this morning there’s an update. But it’s just as useless as always.

Note the estimated delivery date line is gone. Why is that important? Well, because it also says “On vehicle for delivery” ... but does that mean that they are going to try and deliver it today?

My guess is that the answer is no. Based on my previous experiences with FedEx.com, I know that what this really means is “Your package has been loaded onto the delivery vehicle, but it won't go anywhere until Monday.”

How could this be improved? It’s so simple I don’t understand why I have to explain it.

1. Keep the “Estimated Delivery” line. If it said either ”Sep 10, 2005” or ”Sep 12, 2005” that would be helpful.
2. Give a more truthful status line. “on FedEx vehicle for delivery” is probably technically true but is misleading. As it is, they have provided (probably) accurate-but-unhelpful information.

FedEx.com needs a link under the “Status” line “What does this mean?” If someone clicked on that link it would explain all the various lines in the “Activity” column. The explanation for “On FedEx vehicle for delivery” would explain that does not necessarily mean that the package will be delivered today.

The page would also explain what other updates to expect, and the last status line before delivery should be clear and unambiguous: “Left FedEx facility for delivery.”

Update: As Bill noted below, I was wrong about my guess and I did receive it on Saturday. I've meant to post a followup, so I'm glad that he reminded me. I would have posted a comment instead of editing the post, but I wanted to include the screenshot of the delivery notice:

And here’s something that FedEx did really well: you’ll notice that the time of delivery is 6:06 p.m. At approximately 6:10 p.m. I had received a text message that the package arrived.

I had signed up for their package status subscription and it worked perfectly and in a very timely manner (the sign up information is right below the tracking information, so once you have tracked a package there are the fields you need to fill in to track, it asks for format (HTML, Text, or Wireless) and gives it to you all on the same page. (If you click on the image just above you will be taken to the tracking page and can see for yourself. Note: link will open in a new window.)

So they did deliver on Saturday, which surprised me.... which underscores the problem with the site: “On vehicle for delivery” has, in the past, meant “but not today”... they need a status update of “Out for delivery” or some such to make it more clear.

Here’s something a little strange... the contents of the package were damaged (I do not think it was FedEx, I think it was shipped that way) and the company gave me a return label... using UPS. So the story continues... I guess now I’ll have a chance to test their tracking from the other direction.

Posted by at 1:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Sigh.... once again FedEx.com is useless.

Useless as in the wrong information and not updated in anything approaching a timely fashion.

(For those who can’t see the image, the estimated delivery is September 9th and the current date is September 10th, and the last update is 5:30 a.m. “Arrived at FedEx location”)

For those of you who are in the business of providing time-sensitive data: it is useless if it isn’t kept up to date. Don’t tell someone ”It will be there by “X” and let “X” pass without some sort of an update. At that point, no information would be better than wrong information... but my guess is that your job sorta depends on providing that information, so it had better be right. Otherwise... what is your job again?

Posted by at 12:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I get a lot of crazy emails, mostly either messages offering to enlarge things or make them happier or offer me a RRolex or informing me of major winnings in foreign lotteries (M'LABAM'ATOWO! I’m still waiting to hear back from you!!!).

But I think this one beats them all. And it’s real. From MLB.com:

Continue reading "Soil Yourself" »

Posted by at 5:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

CNet reports that the music labels, desperate to slit their own throats, are trying to find ways to separate themselves from the best thing that’s happened to music since the CD, which they also hated until they figured out they could jack up the price (Q: why haven’t CDs come down in price? A: Because people were willing to pay more, so they kept the price artificially high.)

While iTunes is designed to propel the sales of iPods--more than $1 billion worth in the last quarter alone--the labels complain that Apple's policies are insensitive to their goals and limit their ability to grow their digital business even faster....They want to sell older titles at a discount--like the $9.99 CDs available in most record stores--and charge more for popular songs to take advantage of market demand.

They want to make more money, and they resent the fact that Jobs was able to succeed where they had not only failed, but where they were unwilling to go.

Should Apple open up FairPlay? I don’t know. Why should they? They’re the ones who invested all the R&D to get it to work, they’re the ones who provided for the structure to make it happen, they are the ones who host it. Shouldn’t they be allowed the reap the reward of not only being able to see what the labels couldn’t (that the Internet isn’t the enemy) but also delivering a system that works?

Make no mistake, what the labels are upset about is the fact that you no longer have to spend $15 to buy a CD with 1 or 2 good songs on it. If it were up to them, the good songs would be $5 each. And you’d have to buy a copy for your home, one for your car, and one for your iPod. Preferably by monthly subscription.

Posted by at 4:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I hate using FedEx.com. Their tracking information is slow, it took most of the day Monday for them to even report they had picked up my package. Instead it looked like this:

All day long. As far as I knew, they hadn’t done anything with it.

Then finally, sometime after midnight, they updated to this:

Now I have to admit I did laugh at the originally shipping date since I ordered this on Saturday the 9th and they listed the 8th as the shipping date. Apparently they had shipped it before it was even ordered!

But the inexcusable thing, to me, is changing the delivery date so quickly. What changed from the morning to the night that made it impossible to keep their original estimate?

This is not the first time this has happened, not by far. I’ve often had packages that were scheduled for delivery on a specific day (according to the website) and even had their website list the status as “Out for Delivery” and then had it change to “Not Due For Delivery” or (and this was my least favorite) they claimed that there was no one here when I waited around all day and posted a sign on the delivery door that I was there.

Whenever I can, I choose UPS. Their website has some flaws, but the information is accurate and I’ve never had them pull this sort of stunt where they just change the information on me with no explanation.

Posted by at 11:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (14)