Software Companies are as good as their Help Desk

After many years of using Windows PC software from both the giants and pygmies of cyberworld I have concluded that however good a product appears to be, the company who sold it to you stands or falls on the quality of its Help Desk.

I do not think we should be wasting our time and increasing our blood pressure by using anything that cannot be quickly resolved by an efficient and responsive technical help department each time one of our applications falls over or produces difficulties to the user.

If you go to a software company website and you have to dig deep to find any contact phone numbers, e-mail addresses or other useful methods of contact, then quite frankly they don't deserve to be receiving your hard-earned cash.

Two of my most recent frustrating experiences both relate to Anti-virus and Internet Security products.

For two years I used Symantec's Norton Antivirus product. For two years I was constantly frustrated by my computer working slowly and frequently seizing up completely. In addition it was hardly ever possible to close the PC down without manually closing a selection of small system applications first. The cause was a file called ccSvcHst.exe which is part of the Symantec product that beavers away in the background. Investigation showed that lots of other people were having the same problem and were reporting frozen computers caused by this application taking up 100% of their CPU useage.

Symantec's Help Desk certainly responded to my frequent pleas for help, but in the end it was a matter of them just going through the motions, since it seemed on investigation that they were well aware that ccSvcHst.exe was an issue. But rather than admit this they went through the motions of taking remote control of my computer on two separate occasions, turned it inside out, only to report back to me that everything was in order.

And so it was .. until the next time it froze.

In desperation I came to the point where I wiped every last vestige of Symantec's products off my PC and purchased an Anti-virus application from an alternative provider. (Kaspersky, since you ask.) I am now enjoying a computer that flies along without a hitch, and one that closes down properly when I tell it to. I look back with regret that all those months of difficult operation, calling IT consultants in, and wondering if something was wrong with my machine.

The other bad experience was with the Internet Security system on my employers' PC. Our subscription came up for renewal and we were invited to download the latest Internet Security package, which we did. Immediately after we had done that Internet Explorer would not connect with the Internet. So we tried our alternative Browser, Mozilla Firefox and this also reported that it could not connect. I downloaded the Google Chrome browser and that wouldn't work either.

If we disabled the Internet Security application we could connect, but then of course we were unprotected. We were damned if we could, and we were damned if we couldn't. We called in an independent IT consultant, who removed the offending application and downloaded a fresh copy, after which he was faced with all the same problems.

We phoned the Help Desk and couldn't get speak to a human being. We were invited by recorded message to send an e-mail (which we could have done if only we could safely connect to the Internet!) I sent an e-mail from my private address. We had a reply after a few days, suggesting a 5-step procedure. We followed it, but to no good effect. From this point on, we couldn't get any further responses via phone or e-mail. Our IT consultant completely removed the product and we subscribed to an alternative product. (Kaspersky since you ask!) Since then we have had no problems. We sent letters by snail-mail to the company's head office requesting a refund of our subscription renewal. No reply. We have now sent three letters, all yielding nothing. I actually managed to speak to a human being 2 months ago and he promised a refund. It didn't come, and when I spoke to another human being a month later he argued strongly against the possibility of a refund, but would take it further with his head office. Watch this space.

"What is this abominable product?" I hear you cry. Well suffice to say it survives on a diet of bamboo shoots.

Unhealthy Republicans

I was pleased when I read that President Obama's Health Bill had been passed (albeit narrowly) by the House of Representatives because I believe that all people should have access to good health care.

I was astonished that every single Republican Representative voted against it, and incredulous at the demonstrators outside holding up placards saying "Kill the Bill", and "No to big government".

What are these people saying? Are these slogans code for "We don't really care that 46 million Americans do not have / cannot afford / cannot get health insurance?"

And what's all this about "Big Government"? It's not as if a UK-style National Health Service is being created. It isn't.

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with "Big Government". Its virtue or otherwise depends upon the areas in which it is being imposed. For example, America could hardly have an Army, Navy and Air Force, and a Defence Strategy, without "Big Government".

I wish the Health Bill well.

Sgt. Kimberly Denise Munley

My congratulations to Sgt Kimberley Munley. She was the one who fired the first shot to bring down the crazed psychiatrist major who turned his gun on his own men at Fort Hood army base in Texas.

The phrase "Physician, heal thyself" comes to mind.

Fortunately, though incapacitated, Major Hasan was not killed. This means that someone (presumably some other psychiatrist?) might get some insight into this man's motives.

* * *

Remembrance Day

There is a group of people called the anti-war coalition who oppose the expectation that we

should all be wearing red poppies this month. Their reasoning is that they symbolise support for our military campaign in Afghanistan. This is, of course, quite wrong. They symbolise our communal remembrance of all those who have fallen in military conflicts since the 1st World War.

Having said that, it has to be recognised that the anti-war coalition has a point, for the following reason: certain football teams are being required (even coerced) into wearing the Poppy "In support of our troops". There is a subtle difference between remembering the dead and supporting our troops. By all means support our troops if you want, but wearing the Poppy has nothing to do with it!

Nick Griffin (BNP) on Question Time

I watched the BBC's Question Time last night, with Nick Griffin (Leader of the British National Party) on the panel.

He was shown to be, and showed himself to be, pretty damned stupid. The anti-fascist protesters outside Television Centre trying to prevent him from appearing were wrong: the BBC did us all a great service.

He was no match for the other members of the panel who were able to show him up for what he is merely by the use of reasoned argument and the presentation of historical facts.

The audience (a political cross-section) allowed him to have his say, but made quite clear the contempt in which they held him. The more Griffin presented his own views the more he made himself look both disgusting and silly in equal measure.

Good job, BBC! Don't be put off by those who would stifle free speech.

British National Party

There is a great furore going on about the Leader of the BNP (British National Party) Nick Griffin being invited on to the panel of the BBC’s Question Time this evening. The BNP, however odious, has two elected Members of the European Parliament, and therefore are technically entitled to appear on such a programme.

This afternoon there were huge demonstrations by anti-fascist organisations outside the BBC TV Centre, and some managed to get inside the building – they were later ejected. At one stage it looked as though Griffin would not be able to get into the building, but this was eventually achieved by one of many back entrances in side streets. At the time of writing this it looks as though the programme will go ahead. It promises to be a somewhat stimulating debate, to say the least. No doubt the studio audience will become over-heated.

It seems to me that it is little good protesting at the BBC’s decision to invite Griffin on to the panel, since the BNP is a legitimate Party. My problem is that it should not really be a legitimate Party at all, and it should be up to the Government to proscribe it. After all, the Party’s Constitution states that membership is limited to the “Indigenous Anglo-Saxon and Celtic Folk” of Britain. To me, this smacks of Adolph Hitler’s dream of the pure Arian Germanic Race.

A recent Court Decision on the BNP’s Constitution requires the Party to open its membership to all. It remains to be seen whether they will make that change. Even if they did, I would be very surprised if any of our “non-white” community would ever wish to become a member! It is an openly racist Party.

I shall (as usual) be watching Question Time tonight, but with more than a little excited anticipation on how it will all turn out. Apparently Jack Straw, Secretary of State for Justice as agreed to be on the Panel, together with a senior MP from the Liberal Democrats. Should make for interesting watching.

This is an excerpt from the BBC Website – an article by the programme’s editor – which makes an interesting reference to the USA.

"There is something very British about Question Time.

Having just spent a sabbatical year in Washington - where politicians are in the most part astonishingly remote from their electorate - I am reminded that the programme represents a major investment in the democratic process by our political class

My American colleagues - some of them aides to top US politicians - would watch DVDs of the show in near disbelief, open mouthed.

This could never happen in the US, they would say, none of the senior politicians would be willing to mix with voters in prime time.

Yet back in the UK, that is exactly what happens, week after week.

Speaking at the weekend to mark the show's 30th anniversary, Harriet Harman said that Question Time can still make or break a political career - and it remains the most dangerous of political formats."

This is the link to the whole article.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/8271710.stm

Barak Obama's Peace Prize

I was a few days late in picking up on this bit of news; I'd gone away for a long weekend and was studiously avoiding the news.

Having had time to think about it I'm pleased he got it, though I can't help thinking it might be a bit premature.

Why was it awarded? Well, I have a couple of theories.

1. He was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for not being George Bush. (I'm still waiting for my own award, because last time I looked in the mirror I wasn't George Bush either).

2. The whole thing was an embarrassing typing error: after a remarkable year in the White House vegetable garden, Obama was nominated for the Noble Peas Prize.

Jeremy Paxman meets his Match

Jeremy Paxman, scourge of the Political Animal Kingdom, was reduced to laughter last night when he interviewed Boris Johnson at the Conservative Party Conference. Paxman, with his usual dogged persistence was trying to get a straight answer out of "Bo-Jo" on the proposed new European Constitution set out in the Lisbon Treaty, and whether a Conservative Government would still give us a Referendum on the matter even if it was ratified by the two countries (Poland and the Czech Republic) still remaining in the ratification process. It was noted that Ireland had now said YES in their recent referendum. (Our Labour Government had already ratified the Treaty without the referendum that they had promised us).

When pressed, Boris came up with the line that he was ".. only the Mayor of London - merely a toe-nail on the body politic". At this point Paxman gave up the unequal struggle.