Posts tagged ‘customer service’

Microsoft: if IE9 displays blank pages, it’s your own fault, so format your hard drive


You’ve got to hand it to some folks for discovering words in their “word-a-day” calendars and they feel compelled to use it.
   If you go to Microsoft Answers, there are dozens of people wondering why their Internet Explorer 9s don’t display anything. So, I decided to report the bug I have had since March, and which I have found exists again in Windows 7 on a brand-new machine.
   Here’s the dialogue with Microsoft:

   Injudicious isn’t the right word here. But he gets a real kick out of using it.
   There are some very basic things the chap missed. (1) Before any System Restores were done, the product didn’t work. And they don’t work on two out of two machines here, one of which has never had a Restore. (2) If those security patches were released mid-December and mid-January, they should have been among the updates done the first time, before the System Restore. (3) The essential advice here seems to be: how dare you use a feature that we supplied. You should never use it.
   Once he seized upon that and a rival product, that was it. We here at Microsoft are perfect. You should not use anyone else’s products. Bing is better than Google.
   And there’s the usual power-trip of needing to have the last word even when the customer has said he wishes to end the dialogue. I see he has discovered italics now, too.
   The strategy is to blame the customer, but, if you hunt around the web, this is a major fault with Internet Explorer 9—which explains, as usual, why the other browsers are getting larger and larger shares. Microsoft’s failure to acknowledge it means that folks will simply abandon a browser that, certainly before this latest version, is widely regarded as poor. I haven’t used it regularly since v. 5, when it had a noticeable advantage over Netscape.
   I don’t actually use IE in any case. But McAfee uses it for its HTML-based displays, and one Windows Gadget I use also employs it. The latter always will, but I can’t see the former remaining in this situation if already some people are reporting that they cannot see their McAfee anti-virus program.
   I decided to end the conversation because the issues being raised were irrelevant, he was dodging all the real questions about a faulty product, and there’s no point in telling someone where he messed up if the whole aim is to be unhelpful. Go through the Microsoft forums and there’s not one tech in any position who can go beyond the routine: it’s either deliver the stock answers, or play the blame game.
   Bit like Google, then.
   At the end of the day, it’s not even a product I use. Otherwise, as in the above link, I’d be quite prepared to fight on for half a year.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in business, internet, USA | 12 Comments »

Facebook removes my Limited Profile option


Those who know me know that I tend to break most websites.
   I’m the guy with a Blogger account where Google has held on to the data of one blog against its terms and conditions, but can’t tell me which blog it is. In fact, Google tells me that it’s one of Errol Saldanha’s blogs—on which I’m not an author. Either they’re BSing me, or they don’t know. After I told them they were wrong, they gave up investigating. They’re not very good at handling criticism.
   I’m the guy who doesn’t have a Google Buzz account or a Gmail, but, to this day, has seven followers whom Google won’t identify to me as part of its “transparent” Dashboard.

Google Buzz

   I’m the guy who (maybe until this week—I have yet to start a new service ticket, but I have heard back) could not follow up tickets on the Telstra Clear Right Now customer support service because of a corrupted profile.
   I’m the guy who had to wait two days for a compose screen to show up on the old—and argued with them for weeks till they discovered that, if signed in as me at Six Apart HQ in San Francisco, that they could not get it up, either. It was never fixed, and they eventually found it easier to close down than deal with all of its failures.
   And now, I’m the guy with no Limited Profile option in Facebook, despite having had it since the day I joined in April 2007.
   At first I thought it was a system-wide malfunction brought along by Timeline being opened up to Kiwis, although I’ve had Timeline since September 25.
   But after checking at a party tonight, others who use Limited Profile still have it.
   Among a group of my friends, it’s just me. Nice one, Facebook.
   Limited Profile cannot be selected as a friends’ list from the status update window and it no longer appears in any of the previous posts. I can type it, but the option either never appears, or it appears for a split-second before disappearing.

Facebook: no Limited Profile

It cannot be seen on the page of a friend who is on that list.

Facebook: no Limited Profile

   The list still exists, and the privacy settings are preserved when “viewing as” that person, but I can no longer do anything with it.
   Should it show up—say after a language change—Facebook will not let me save my new settings. The following window will not go away unless I cancel it:

Facebook: no Limited Profile

   Odds of it being fixed? Somehow, I doubt Facebook is going to listen to one guy out of 900 million—even though I’m sure the problems can be traced to one of its coding problems.
   I’m blogging about it in the hope that someone else has this same issue. If you do, add your voice to Get Satisfaction.
   But remember, if they can’t keep the boss’s own private photos from being seen and saved by the public—in a security hole that was there for weeks which they ignored till Mark Zuckerberg was affected—what hope do the rest of us have?

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in internet, technology, USA | 2 Comments »

Contacting Right Now (a misnomer of a company name)


If there’s one employee I can never fault at Telstra Clear, it’s Daniel Borgshammar, who has been following up my case with my corrupted profile on the Telstra Clear support site since day one.
   Unfortunately, Daniel has his hands tied. He contacts the people at Right Now, the owners of, and keeps getting polite brush-offs. No ETA is given.
   So, after a year, I thought I’d just ask this American company if it responds to its clients. I wonder if I will get a reply in the promised 48 hours.

Hello there:

I’m not too happy. I’m a TelstraClear customer in New Zealand, and I can’t use In fact, I haven’t been able to use it for a year.
   It appears that, through no fault of my own, you’ve corrupted my profile. I push TelstraClear on this, and they tell me they push you, to get it fixed.
   A year down the track, we’re nowhere. I still can’t log in or follow up tickets. In fact, I have to send a fresh enquiry each time through its email system just to be heard. Its techs have a hard time following up on any query, since there are no service threads to speak of—just a long, long trail of email messages, as I paste in earlier dialogues each time so they know it’s an ongoing issue.
   Since a large telco can’t get a response or ETA from you beyond a polite brush-off, I thought I’d come directly, and just ask, as Joe Public: can you get this fixed, please?
   I think a year’s wait is long enough. I hope you’ll look in to it.


Jack Yan

   I see Oracle is going to buy this company. Good luck, folks. Hope you know what you’re getting in to, because there are people there who are put off for nearly a year.

PS.: Right Now eventually passed this message back on to Datum, which passed it on to Telstra Clear’s James Jacques, on December 5 NZDT. It was then remedied immediately: ‘I have tidied up your user profiles and made it so you now only have one login (There were 4 or 5 active in the system). I have sent a password reset request to this email address, please complete this and use this email address as your login ID and the issues should be resolved.’ (The multiple log-ins were created, I should add, by Telstra Clear, each time one failed.) Lesson: cut out the middle man!—JY

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in business, internet, New Zealand, technology, USA | 2 Comments »

The dystopian future has arrived, and it’s called Ryanair


Ryanair plane

This was too priceless to share only with my Tumblr readers. It’s an excerpt from a review of Ryanair, sent to my friend Nadine Isler, who has since published (with permission) on her site:

Entering the cabin, I was greeted by a blindingly bright yellow ceiling that would be more at home on the back of a poisonous tree frog or gay banana. Below stretched a farm of sterile blue plastic seats that looked like they were taken straight out of a Smurf porno. As if plastering the overhead lockers in tacky advertising wasn’t enough—we’re talking ‘buy buy buy, free free free, super extra premium gin rum vodka’—they had actually glued the safety information cards to the back of the seats, completing a scene that had all the ambience of a South Auckland brothel.

The whole piece is here, though I am at a loss on what a ‘gay banana’ is.
   Everything I have heard of the airline turns me off, though I have never flown it. I can tolerate some budget concessions, such as having to pay for your meals, but most (negative) stories are along the same lines as the review on Nadine’s site (though not as humorous). The taxes and inconvenience are sufficient turn-offs. As I was raised to believe that good manners should be free, the review indicates that Ryanair skimps on those, too. But you begin thinking what else they have skimped on. Aircraft servicing? Passenger safety? Pilots with sanity?
   I can’t criticize them for outright deception. It’s not as though the marketing tells you that the airline is comfortable when it isn’t. Everything screams budget, so it’s a case of caveat emptor. Naice airlines do not publish calendars with their air hostesses in swimsuits or nothing at all. If they’re willing to objectify their own staff, you’re not in much hope of getting a red carpet. (Meanwhile, this union has some concerns about the airline.)
   The plus side, which I’m sure Ryanair and other low-cost fliers would state, is that people can now get to where they want without too much cost. It wasn’t that long ago that jetting about would necessitate taking out a mortgage. I remember looking at an ad in 1980, where it was considered a “special” for a family to fly return to Hong Kong for NZ$3,000. That’s 1980 dollars, too.
   The Ryanair stories, nevertheless, remind me that the flip side can go too far. How much more toward the dystopian 21st century of last century’s films do we need to go? Is the rich–poor divide now so pronounced that Ryanair can even fioat the idea of standing on your flights, locked in à la Hannibal Lecter? The battery-hen analogy in the review suddenly seems more apt. Let’s make it as undignified as we can for those who didn’t pay for it. Let’s serve Soylent Green on the flight in a few years’ time (with an extra charge, of course).
   I know, I can easily get political from this point, and segue into water ownership or a similar issue. One rule for the rich and one for the poor. It jars with not only my social conscience, but all the ideas I developed practising and (many years ago) teaching design: that no one should go without good stuff.
   So my impressions of Ryanair are all second-hand. Still, they’re enough to keep me hoping that I don’t have to experience them first-hand.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in business, culture, humour, marketing | 3 Comments »

An answer, at long last, from Blogger about the Dashboard discrepancy


Not only did Buzz finally disappear from my Dashboard today, but Brett Wilkins at Blogger furnished a very simple explanation on why there was still one entry for his service there.
   Someone had added me as an author to his blog without my knowledge. It is one which I have never heard of, and which did not exist in my Blogger Dashboard at the time of the deletions.
   Bloody hell, I wish someone had told me this at Google nearly a year ago, when I began asking.
   But, there you are: if I didn’t contact Chang Kim, and if he didn’t put me on to Brett, we’d never have known. The help forums are about as handy as a kamikaze pilot’s helmet.
   I’m as amazed as you are that I’m getting answers, but it shows that the “official channels” do not always work. Blogger gets a lot of “fails” on the “help” forums. Like so many things—e.g. the British Government—you need to take things higher up before you get an answer.
   Still, I’m glad I did, and I have thanked Brett for his answer. I have also asked the errant blog’s owner, who is known to me, to remove me.
   This illustrates the foolhardiness of Google not permitting us to delete products we do not use from our Account and Dashboard. If it allowed this, it would have solved a lot of problems—and judging by the forums, I am not alone. Surely this would be better all round: we have peace of mind, Google stores less data?
   Now we just have to figure out the phantom Google Contacts contact. I also got a reply there, too: it seems Gmail has better forum people than Blogger. Unfortunately, the very kind chap who responded—a British journalist—doesn’t have an answer yet. It looks like another anomaly.
   On less positive news, I read that Google will make all profiles public by July 31, probably in advance of Plus being offered to everyone. If yours is secret at present, Google’s position is: too bad.
   As I discovered when I was playing around with Plus earlier this week, you can choose to make your profile invisible to the Google search engine. I do not know if this is through a robots.txt file, as it was one thing I didn’t investigate.
   I logged out at the time, and proceeded to visit my profile URL. It could be found. One only hopes that for those who want what little privacy they have left on Google, they can keep themselves out of search results. At this point, I am not 100 per cent sure. I imagine we will all find out, whether we like it or not, come July 31.
   Remember the words of Google’s previous CEO, Eric Schmidt: ‘If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.’

PS.: I’ve read a bit more into the Google Profile situation. If yours is private, it’ll simply be deleted—which is actually not a bad thing. So my concerns above about search engine visibility are unwarranted, though Mr Schmidt’s infamous quotation still doesn’t fully seem out of place.—JY

P.PS.: What a shame Brett’s explanation doesn’t seem to be accurate. The blog owner says I am not an author on his blog. And it doesn’t appear in my Blogger Dashboard, only my Google one. Back to square one and more Blogger-dissing.—JY

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in business, culture, internet, technology, USA | No Comments »

Google organized the web, Facebook our social networks; what does Plus do?


I see the Google press machine has been switched on as the company pursues the Facebook social-networking market with Plus. Google, I’m betting, must hope that history will repeat itself. It wasn’t the first search engine, it simply did it better. Plus, in Googleland, it is a better proverbial mousetrap than Facebook.
   I might have been on Google’s case in the last few years, though I should remind folks that if they didn’t keep painting big red targets on all their properties, after drawing attention to the company through incompetent support people, I would have no complaints.
   Maybe it’s the anti-Google blinkers I don, but I’ve been thinking about something Stowe Boyd said recently. He recently blogged that Google succeeded with the original search engine because, at that time, someone needed to step in and organize the web. I’ve been around long enough to recall just what a revelation it was when it came out. And it’s the best organizer, according to Stowe, that can earn a few bob.
   Facebook was certainly not the first social network, to use the modern terminology, but it did things better than Bebo and the like. It had a wider targeted audience than LinkedIn, even if it started with a narrower one at Harvard. Facebook organized our social circles, so we can more easily find that tribe of 150 that we like associating with. Even for those of us with “friend” numbers in the four figures, Facebook has allowed us, quite easily, to set up different groups for them.
   Facebook isn’t perfect, not by a long shot. A browse of this blog itself would reveal that it’s severely lacking in many areas. Changing users’ preferences without their permission is one of a long line of Facebook errors over the years. So Google, I read, bets on the fact that it can do privacy better—a position which I found laughable, from the company that failed to put up a privacy policy for Buzz or hid from the public the futility of opting out of its Ads Preferences Manager (both since resolved). There just seems to be a pervading culture by these large Californian corporations of being callous with privacy, which not only reflects badly on them, but their entire sector, and even their country.
   As the brand has been damaged time and time again in my eyes, I began noticing a pattern recently. Nothing that Google has introduced in the last half-decade, or acquired in that period, really matters to me. I don’t use any that appear in my Google account:

Above: The Google services I don’t need are marked in red, though in some cases, I have to retain them due to clients or the Medinge Group. The ones that I was signed up to without my consent are marked in black, though Google Reader received a sneaky implied consent in the small print via Blogger.

Google is, instead, something that helps organize my information. I use Alerts, News and Webmaster Tools, all tied in to things that the company developed in the 1990s and early 2000s. Google does these things well. Google Translate one exception to all of this; and, of course, I have watched YouTube videos. I realize our sites carry some Doubleclick advertising—a consequence of whom our ad networks chose to deal with. (Because of that, we have been relegating those networks to a lower status.) If any of these disappeared overnight, there are substitutes.
   I’m willing to bet that Stowe is right, because Google is still tied to its original offerings, where it has at least been (on the surface) respectful of user privacy. As my colleagues and I wrote in Beyond Branding, people are going to continue demanding transparency—that much is not going to change. Brands that offer it, and aren’t hypocritical about it, will do better. Outside of search and a few other places, Google hasn’t played nice. In fact, I even have my doubts about Google search, despite having Web History turned off.
   Google Plus does not do anything new, and it does not (based solely on reviews I have read, though I do have a Plus invitation) offer greater organization beyond what I already have with Facebook. It has been introduced at a time when I already experience social-networking fatigue with both Facebook and Twitter (Tumblr is visually more stimulating and expressive for me, at the moment). Plus might be able to reignite an interest in social networking for some, especially with Facebook’s declines in membership in certain countries, but I think we’re on the tail end of this fad.
   Question: despite all this, do I go on it? It may not be unwise, for purely commercial reasons: to consider a potential market-place. Google’s marketing machine will draw some people, though my bet is that they will find their social networks are already sufficiently organized. It will last longer than the brief, early-2011 fascination with Quora, especially when it steps out of beta.
   I was on LinkedIn in 2003, Facebook in 2006, Twitter and Tumblr in 2007. But this time, if I join—and it is a big if—it would be a cold, calculated, almost soulless decision. I don’t, and wouldn’t, trust the bastards. It might prove to have all the allure of my MySpace account. I have no desire to see another Google product in my dashboard—I still have to delete a Buzz follower five times a week, despite not having a Buzz account.
   I have justifiably low expectations from this tarnished tech brand. I can just foresee contacts being visible to people who shouldn’t be able to see them. We already know that Buzz and YouTube have messed up, making things visible to people that users might not have expected. I could not willingly subject friends to privacy leaks like that, and Google has demonstrated time and time again that it’s as watertight as the Titanic.
   Who knows? Using it might bring so many disappointments and push me over the edge, after which I’ll write to clients to inform them that I can no longer be the host of Google products that they use, and close the whole bloody account. Sadly, that would include the 400 of you getting this blog through Feedburner. The silver lining, at the moment, is the faint possibility that it would encourage Facebook to be less of a closed system.

Note: Stowe actually likes Google Plus, calling it ‘a giant step forwards’, but for different reasons.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in branding, business, culture, internet, marketing, technology, USA | 4 Comments »

A minor McAfee bug report continues to bug, while (breaking news) Google acts professionally


I have to hand it to McAfee for their courtesy and even their tenacity, but phone calls at weekends (and then failing to call at rescheduled times) are getting ridiculous.
   When I file a bug report, I like an acknowledgement that things are being worked on, and that’s great.
   But considering I’ve spent over an hour doing this for McAfee over a really tiny issue, you’d think they’d have enough information.
   Oh, no:

Thank you for contacting McAfee Consumer Online Support.
   We have been trying to contact you on [phone number], however we were unable to reach you. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience caused.
   We have received few suggestions from next support level, which we would like to perform in the computer. We would like to contact you at a time that is convenient for you. Please respond to this email letting us know if and when we may call you tomorrow (29th June, 2011). Also provide us any alternate telephone number.

My response:

As I have mentioned on numerous occasions prior, this was merely a bug report. I really don’t see why you need to do anything on my computer.
   Most software companies allow users to file bugs so they can update their successive versions. The bug does not affect the operation of your program: it is an æsthetic issue. However, it is one that I would have thought McAfee would like to remedy in future.

   And, surprise, surprise, good news from Google.
   I wrote to Chang Kim, who appears to have succeeded Rick Klau as product manager of Blogger. I’ve asked him about the ongoing issue with Google Dashboard reporting that I have one blog with them, when I know I have none. Are they holding on my data, in contravention of their terms and conditions?
   Like Rick, Chang’s responded immediately. He’s checked out my record and found nothing there, though he has cced one of his colleagues to see if he can assist further.
   We haven’t remedied it, but I have this question: why are the Blogger product managers so proficient, courteous and professional, while other parts of Google, and at least one volunteer on the forums, work on the “biggest dickhead” theory?
   It’s guys like Rick and Chang that make you wish more Googlers were like them.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in business, culture, internet, technology, USA | 3 Comments »

A much more famous blogger found her Blogspot deleted


I didn’t know the politics of Prof Ann Althouse before tonight, but I see her blog, which is far more widely read than mine—with readership into the eight figures—also got pulled by Google-owned Blogger recently. Her experiences mirrored mine, except she had some of her readers join in the forum, which, admittedly, didn’t help things too much. Still, there was plenty of snark, interestingly, from the same forum bloke that I encountered. It was back within days, so it was easier than the six-month fight I had to get Vincent Wright’s Social Media Consortium restored.
   You can have a read of her experience here, while conservative blogger Patterico has some interesting comments when he reported the matter. Readers there, and those who commented on my case, have similar thoughts.
   Prof Althouse had it easy. And even though I dealt with Google over six months, the company took nine months to sort out this lawyer’s blog. Wonder whatever became of this lady’s blog, detailed in this thread.
   Of course, telephone-number readers are nothing like a single Reuter blog post.
   Moral of the story: avoid Blogger like the plague, unless you personally know Felix Salmon at Reuter. (And here is the opposite argument, out of fairness. The comments, for and against, must be considered for anyone wishing to start a blog.)

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in business, internet, media, politics, USA | 3 Comments »

Progress at TelstraClear; not sure if you could call it that at McAfee


While I still can’t get into TelstraClear’s support site, one tech has been responding to my feedback-form messages and following up—so I don’t have the difficulty of the telephone, where I have to start from scratch with people there.
   And, because Daniel Borgshammar at TelstraClear is a intelligent guy, he’s managed to get to the root of the problem: an out-of-house system, which has its own techs. He’s contacted them to get the low-down on what is locking me out.
   Thank goodness for continuity, because I seem to be often unique in discovering problems—whether it’s Google Earth failing to place the White House at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC, or Google Ads Preferences Manager lying to consumers, or Google not having terms and conditions or a privacy policy for Buzz. Funny, they’re all about Google. Hmm.
   And remember how I had spent nearly an hour with McAfee just to file a bug report? It’s now up to tier 2, and I’ve now been called to follow up on a bug report. And it’s such a doggone tiny bug, too. Can’t they just take it at face value and build it into their next update? Does it have to involve another 20-minute phone call? I’m grateful they’re being so courteous, but do they need me to hold their hand at every turn on this? It’s a bug report.

Speaking of Google:

Google Buzz

Google Buzz

I have been through this many times before. So sick of it recurring—especially as I do not have a visible Google profile, in which case gaining Buzz followers is, according to the company, impossible. Evidently it is not impossible.

Google Reader

Google Reader

   The above is also impossible, if memory serves me correctly. I do not use Google Reader and have nothing in there, yet Google claims I have five items. I’ve also gained a follower, but how could I, if I do not have a Google profile that enables me to be found for Google services?
   Now I see I have gained a contact on a service I do not even use:

Google Contacts

Google Contacts

   Unfortunately, there are client and Medinge things stuck to my Google account, all started at a time when Google was not so callous about privacy and didn’t do so much evil. Otherwise, I’d be out of there.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in business, culture, internet, New Zealand, technology, USA | No Comments »

Fifty minutes to file a bug report at McAfee


Being a helpful netizen costs too much sometimes.
   I found a very tiny bug in McAfee’s latest version. In Eudora, instead of ‘McAfee Anti-Spam’ in the menu bar, the latest update has caused those words to read ‘%COMPANY_NAME_NEUTRAL%Anti-Spam’.
   To be a helpful netizen filing a bug report (and I am used to that taking two minutes all up), here’s the process I followed today.

11.30 a.m. GMT: Search for McAfee Support in Duck Duck Go.
11.30: Arrive at
11.33: Unable to log in, despite being a McAfee customer.
11.35: Unable to create a new account, because it has asked for a ‘Grant number’. All the guys called Grant that I know are asleep.
11.35: Go to the ‘Contact Us’ page to give feedback and find a link to I click on that.
11.36: I select the affected product. McAfee offers me the choice of ‘Free Technical Support’.
11.36: McAfee insists I download and run the McAfee Virtual Technician. I do.
11.48: McAfee Virtual Technician has completed its scan and claims all is well.
11.49: I am taken to the FAQs where I have to search for my error.
11.50: After finding that none of them fit the bill, McAfee presents two options: ‘Click the Continue button to go to Chat, or Finish to close this session.’ I select the former, as the matter is not concluded.
11.52: McAfee prompts me to enter my country and language.
11.52: McAfee gives me the options of chatting or emailing. I chose the former as it says the wait time is 2 minutes, versus 24 hours, plus the 11.50 a.m. prompt said the option was to ‘Chat’. I enter the bug report into the comment box, and expected a tech would get back to me within two minutes to confirm receipt.

Below is the transcript of the next 20 minutes, with one edit made for privacy reasons.

GoToAssist (11:54:29):
Thank you for contacting McAfee Consumer Support. An agent will be with you shortly.

Customer (11:55:11):
Hi there: I don’t actually need to be walked through anything. I wanted to make sure you got the bug report I just filed. The only button available after writing my report was ‘Chat’, so I pressed it.

Sangeetha (11:55:45):
Jack, thank you for contacting McAfee Online Support Center. My name is Sangeetha.

Customer (11:55:55):
Hello Sangeetha.

Sangeetha (11:56:23):
Your Service Request Number for this chat session is 700641817.
Sangeetha (11:56:33):
Is this your first contact with McAfee Technical support in this week, including today?

Customer (11:56:42):
Yes. I wonder if you received my bug report just now.

Sangeetha (11:57:07):
McAfee will communicate with you through the email … please confirm if this email address is valid.

Customer (11:57:16):
It is correct, thank you.

Sangeetha (11:57:33):
Thank you for confirming.

Customer (11:58:07):
Is there anything else you need from me to complete the report?

Sangeetha (11:58:10):
As I understand, you have sent the bug report and it prompted to chat?

Customer (11:58:25):
Yes, that is correct. I just want to make sure the report arrived there.

Sangeetha (11:58:30):
Thank you for confirming.
Sangeetha (11:58:38):
I apologize for the inconvenience caused. I will be glad to assist you with this issue.
Sangeetha (11:59:02):
May I know when you got the bug report?

Customer (11:59:19):
I sent it immediately before this chat session.
Customer (11:59:34):
I imagine that was 11.50 GMT.

Sangeetha (11:59:50):
When did you get the bug report?

Customer (12:00:06):
No, I didn’t get a bug report. I sent one.

Sangeetha (12:00:29):
Why did you send the bug report?

Customer (12:00:50):
To be helpful to McAfee so it could remedy it for its next update.

Sangeetha (12:01:44):
Did it prompt you to send the bug report while updating McAfee?

Customer (12:02:19):
No. I found a bug in McAfee. I then went to your website to tell your company about it. I simply want to make sure you received it.

Sangeetha (12:02:45):
May I know if you are using the same computer to chat with me?

Customer (12:02:50):
Yes, I am.

Sangeetha (12:03:00):
Okay, I would like to obtain system information from your computer. Please accept my request and grant me access to this.

Customer (12:03:12):
Sangeetha, I am not sure why you need to do this.

Sangeetha (12:03:34):
I just to check your system information.

Customer (12:04:00):
I think we have to stop there. I do not believe this is relevant to whether or not your company received a message from me.

Sangeetha (12:05:52):
You might have sent it to McAfee engineering team.

Customer (12:06:46):
I may have. I used your website and entered in the issue at:
Customer (12:07:11):
It is the only place where I could enter anything to report a bug, after the FAQs revealed nothing.

Sangeetha (12:08:53):
I would request you to send the report through email instead of chat by logging in to the same website.

Customer (12:09:31):
What is the correct email address?

Sangeetha (12:12:01):
There is no particular email address. likewise you did the chat.

Customer (12:12:14):
OK, how do I send this email to you in that case?
Customer (12:12:25):
Is there a web link that takes me to an email form?

Sangeetha (12:12:52):
Instead of chat you can select email option.

Customer (12:14:43):
I will look for it now.

Sangeetha (12:14:59):
Is there anything else that I can do to assist you with your McAfee products today?
Sangeetha (12:15:24):
You can contact us back if any issues further.

Customer (12:16:00):
Thank you, Sangeetha. Have a nice afternoon.

Sangeetha (12:16:32):
You may receive an email survey asking for your comments on this chat experience. Your feedback will help to ensure that I’m providing the highest quality service possible.
Sangeetha (12:16:38):
For all of your Customer Service and Technical Support needs, please visit Thank you for visiting McAfee Online Support Center. Have a great time.
Sangeetha (12:16:44):
Thank you for choosing McAfee. We appreciate your business and your feedback. Have a great time.
Sangeetha (12:16:53):
Good bye…..

Customer (12:17:19):
Good bye.

   I found the email link, and maybe I should have opted for that to begin with. I can’t fault Sangeetha for being polite and helpful—it has come a long way since the beginning of the century, when McAfee had pretty rude forum techs—but surely it can’t be too hard to give us an easy-to-find bug report form that would take a minute to fill in? All this nonsense with grant numbers, downloads and Virtual Technicians (which, I might add, does work quite well when there is a set-up cock-up) makes little sense, especially as all software has bugs and there should be room to report them.
   I want my 50 minutes back.

PS.: The email response has come from Nagaraj. Sounds he has exactly the same script as his colleague. Here we go again. What is the bloody point?—JY

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in business, India, internet, technology, USA | 2 Comments »