Now this is what I call service
Don Pearce
them an email via the Contact link on the site. A pop-up ad was
covering part of the programme details. Here's the time line.
10:39 sent the email
10:50 got a reply asking for details of my system
10:57 I sent the reply, telling them the problem was only in Firefox
11:14 got a reply saying the issue had been escalated
11:18 I said thank you
11:39 got a reply saying it had been fixed - it had.
So exactly one hour covered the whole transaction. Anyone beat that
for service?
d
Iain Churches
"Don Pearce" <sp...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:4b1e618c....@news.eternal-september.org...
Don. This is wildly OT!
Gird your loins with sack-cloth and ashes immediately:-))
Good to hear that someone in the UK values customer
relations. Did you get a year's free subscription to RT
in appreciation of your interest? :-)
My personal experiences in ordering goods and services
from British firms are rather disappointing. They should
be cashing in on increased order book due to the weakness
of sterling, but they don't seem to care much.
Frequently, the order is incomplete, or items are sent
which do not appear on either the order or the invoice.
I refuse to pay the return postage for things I did not order:-)
Some time ago, I was involved in the purchase of
equipment for an audio post suite being set up by what
was then Scandinavia's largest digital production house.
There were two main sources for equipment, Germany and
the UK. It was interesting to note the difference in the way
that companies from those two countries do business.
The UK contacts are on first-name terms after 30secs.
The Gemans much more reserved, polite but formal.
The British promise you delivery in ten weeks. After twelve,
part of the consignment shows up, but the sales engineer in
the UK is unavailable, and there is no-one who knows
anything about the rest of your order. It is completed in
the fifteenth week - five weeks late.
You and your clients are disappointed.
The Germans promise you delivery in twelve weeks.
After only ten weeks, you get a call from the local transport
agent saying that they can now deliver, if you are ready to accept
the equipment.
You and your client are delighted.
Having said that, just a few weeks aho, I was looking at
a music score and noticed what I thought was a wrong note,
one semitone below what it should have been. A complete
section of the orchestra had the same error spread over a
five-part chord, which worked as an entity in itself, but not
with the rest of the orchestra.. I telephoned the retailer/publisher
in the UK from whom the score and parts had been bought.
I got through to a young lady, who took my contact details,
and said she would find the score take a look, and phone me back.
Sure enough., she did, after only ten minutes or so.
I pointed out the error, and she promised to pass my message on.
I imagined her screwing the piece of paper into a ball and tossing
it onto the wast paper basket as I put the phone down.
I thought no more about it.
Then, more than a month later; Postman Pat delivered a large
envelope from the publishers in Belgium, with a letter thanking me
for my comments. It was indeed an error which would be corrected
in the next edition. They asked me to accept another score and
parts of a different work by the same composer (value about UKP70)
to compensaste for any inconvenience, and as a token of their
appreciation!!
A customer for life? You betcha!
I have never bought anything direct from the USA, always
through a European agent. Once when I tried to order some
literature by telephone, I spelled out the comnpany name and
address, ending in Stockholm, Sweden S-W-E-D-E-N.
There was a long pause at the other end, and the bored voice
asked "what state?" Rather taken aback I told her it was a
country in Europe. She said (rather unconvincingly) "Oh, OK then".
The literature never reached me. Some unsuspecting soul
in Wisconsin may or may not have received an unexpected
packet in the post.
Iain
Don Pearce
<Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>> So exactly one hour covered the whole transaction. Anyone beat that
>> for service?
>>
>> d
>
>Don. This is wildly OT!
>Gird your loins with sack-cloth and ashes immediately:-))
No, not OT at all. It was the radio page and I was trying to see what
I wanted to listen to, a vital part of the audio experience.
d
Trevor Wilson
**Pretty impressive. I believe I can beat it.
Over the last dozen years or so, I've had around 10 ISPs. Whenever I've had
a problem, it has taken anything from an hour to a couple of days to solve
the problem. Usually, I end up speaking to someone in Mumbai. It can be very
frustrating. Early this year, I located a new, small ISP. I've had a couple
of problems. When I 'phone them, I am able to speak to a human being, rather
than a machine. That human clearly has English as their first language (they
speak with an Australian accent) and the problem has always been solved in
less than 15 minutes.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Don Pearce
Did the problem-solving involve them actually doing something, or was
it just a clarification thing?
d
Trevor Wilson
Keith G
"Iain Churches" <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote
> Don. This is wildly OT!
> Gird your loins with sack-cloth and ashes immediately:-))
Iain, that would be reet funny if it weren't so tragic! What we have in this
group atm is a pair of serious whiners throwing a megastrop because they
can't have it all their own way in here!
Which, in turn, would also be reet funny if it wasn't so symptomatic of the
increasing Nazism and daily erosion of civil liberties we seem to be
experiencing everywhere in the 'West' these days - I know you have the same
thing in Finland, having just read an account of the extraordinarily
diligent policing of the HD (Harley Davidson this time :-) European
Federation '09 Super Rally' which recently took place in Sein�joki....
Thus:
**Zere vill be no posts hier if zey do not meet viz our approval!!**
and, for the bikers:
**Iff you heff been trinkink even leetle bit, ve vill lock you oop!!**
@:-))
(Still with the fluffy syrup you will notice!!)
Brian Gaff
place..
Brian
--
Brian Gaff - bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Don Pearce" <sp...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:4b1e618c....@news.eternal-september.org...
Don Pearce
<bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>Well, one of course wonders why nobody tested it with Firefox in the first
>place..
>
>Brian
Well, the latest release of Firefox was supposed to be an "industry
standard compatible" one. I suppose there are always fuzzy bits round
the edges that show the differences though. Maybe to do with the need
for speed in loading a page.
d
Jim Lesurf
<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> Early this year, I located a new, small ISP. I've had a couple of
> problems. When I 'phone them, I am able to speak to a human being,
> rather than a machine. That human clearly has English as their first
> language (they speak with an Australian accent) and the problem has
> always been solved in less than 15 minutes.
Similar for my current ISP (except for the accent). As above, they are a
small company so you can phone and get one of the two people who run it,
and they promptly sort out any problems. Most recently, they changed DSL
when I contacted them about the problems with listening to the iPlayer that
I also recounted in a recent column.
Slainte,
Jim
--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Jim Lesurf
<bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Well, one of course wonders why nobody tested it with Firefox in the
> first place..
TBH as someone who has written many webpages and created a number of
sites, I've mostly wondered why people haven't simply followed the basic
W3C recommened approach.
This is to use the simplest possible W3C compliant HTML for any task so
that you don't *need* to have to keep wondering if it will render with all
the browsers you've never heard of, let alone tried. The basic point of
HTML is that it indicates the logical status of the content items and the
relationship between them as structured content. It is then up to the
browser and its user to decide what to do with it.
The problem, I guess, is that many companies and website builders are
obsessed with 'eye candy' and fancy presentation rather than conveying
useful content. And tend to assume that their main aim is a site that looks
impressive on the machine their boss will use to view it. Who cares if the
customers can't make head or tail of it if the person who paid for it was
impressed. :-)
And others keep trying to force webpages to behave like printed text where
the producer has rigid control over layout and appearance. When the
strength of HTML is that each user should be able to set what layout, etc,
suits them.
Hence all the sites which come out with tiny dark blue text on a black
background, 'require' javascript, flash, etc, etc. In effect, putting as
many barriers as possible in the way of getting at the content in a form
that each user could otherwise tailor to their personal preferences/
situation.
Parallel here with the way TV programmes are presented. e.g. Horizon
documentaries with flashing lights and wobbly camerawork, etc...
Don Pearce
When all you have to present by way of content is a list of radio
programmes, you have to dress it up somewhat. Obviously they make
their revenue from the ads, so these need to be prominent and eye
catching; a little too much so in this case.
As to the TV programmes, have you noticed that it is only scientific
subjects that are treated this way? Anything else they can deliver
more or less the straight goods.
d
Bill Taylor
No, it's almost any programme with content that's slightly
intelligent. Recently watched the first of a series about Venice,
complete with steadicam swoops around the presenter and pointless
mocked up historical re-enactments done in slow motion blurry wobbly
vision. Likewise a series on the Victorians had a new (to me)
variation on rostrum camerawork. Point the camera at a picture at an
angle then move and zoom at the same time to produce a rather
disturbing effect which adds nothing to the programme or the picture.
Don Pearce
wrote:
>>When all you have to present by way of content is a list of radio
>>programmes, you have to dress it up somewhat. Obviously they make
>>their revenue from the ads, so these need to be prominent and eye
>>catching; a little too much so in this case.
>>
>>As to the TV programmes, have you noticed that it is only scientific
>>subjects that are treated this way? Anything else they can deliver
>>more or less the straight goods.
>>
>
>No, it's almost any programme with content that's slightly
>intelligent. Recently watched the first of a series about Venice,
>complete with steadicam swoops around the presenter and pointless
>mocked up historical re-enactments done in slow motion blurry wobbly
>vision. Likewise a series on the Victorians had a new (to me)
>variation on rostrum camerawork. Point the camera at a picture at an
>angle then move and zoom at the same time to produce a rather
>disturbing effect which adds nothing to the programme or the picture.
You're dead right. And have you watched any of Andrew Marr's mega
embarrassing historical efforts (BBC last night, 9pm for instance).
d
Keith G
Oh, good oh - factor in the Jehova's Witnesses weirdness and the Mithering
Old Lady's whining about computers (or whatever it was) I saw over Desperate
Don's shoulder and I think we can safely say all this screaming about
*non-audio OT* horseshit has been shot up the arse!
Rock on! :-)
(Bothered to hear about the Andrew Marr progs though - I've got at least 3
recordings stacked ready to go!! Maybe it's not as bad as they make out? ;-)
Jim Lesurf
<sp...@spam.com> wrote:
> As to the TV programmes, have you noticed that it is only scientific
> subjects that are treated this way? Anything else they can deliver more
> or less the straight goods.
For me, one advantage of the iPlayer is that it has made it easier to
listen to the science programmes on BBC radio. These are often far better
than the ones on TV. More diverse and often willing to treat listeners
seriously and assume they aren't all utterly illiterate when it comes to
science and technology.
Don Pearce
<no...@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <4b1c99e1....@news.eternal-september.org>, Don Pearce
><sp...@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> As to the TV programmes, have you noticed that it is only scientific
>> subjects that are treated this way? Anything else they can deliver more
>> or less the straight goods.
>
>For me, one advantage of the iPlayer is that it has made it easier to
>listen to the science programmes on BBC radio. These are often far better
>than the ones on TV. More diverse and often willing to treat listeners
>seriously and assume they aren't all utterly illiterate when it comes to
>science and technology.
>
Radio is better, but not perfect. The Material World for example.
Every moderately serious piece is more or less obliged to finished
with an extremely weak joke from Quentin Cooper.
d
Jim Lesurf
As someone who is used to teaching undergrads I'm happy enough with the
idea of including occasional jokes, etc, as a way to keep an audience. :-)
And I was pleasantly surprised by the 'monkey cage' programme. I thought
I'd find it annoying, but actually enjoyed it overall.
I just wished someone had pointed out to the Minister that being able after
the event to decide that some 'social and economic impact' had stemmed from
some scientific research did not mean you could reliably predict this in
advance as a way to 'choose winners' to optimise the benefits of those
kinds. All too often the work with the largest long-term benefits showed no
sign that would be so *before* the work was done. So attempts to force
scientists to say in advance what 'impact' their results would have is a
recipy for work that has minimal new value. The point of 'research' in
science is that you *don't* already know what the outcome will be. If you
do, you don't need to do the research!
Iain Churches
"Keith G" <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hf76o3$2rsq$1...@energise.enta.net...
>
> "Iain Churches" <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote
>
>> Don. This is wildly OT!
>> Gird your loins with sack-cloth and ashes immediately:-))
>
>
> Iain, that would be reet funny if it weren't so tragic! What we have in
> this group atm is a pair of serious whiners throwing a megastrop because
> they can't have it all their own way in here!
>
> Which, in turn, would also be reet funny if it wasn't so symptomatic of
> the increasing Nazism and daily erosion of civil liberties we seem to be
> experiencing everywhere in the 'West' these days - I know you have the
> same thing in Finland, having just read an account of the extraordinarily
> diligent policing of the HD (Harley Davidson this time :-) European
> Federation '09 Super Rally' which recently took place in Sein�joki....
Finland is much more of a police state than perhaps it should be, but
the normal citizen is unaffected.
There have been "scuffles" in past years at motorcylce gatherings, with
riders carrying firearms, and the police were determined it had to stop.
It has. When the motorcyclists show that they can behaive themselves,
they will be accorded different treatment.
But this is not the first time that the police here have over-reacted.
Personally, I am very much against the police, or anyone else for
that matter, carryting guns, but I do approve of law and order taking
a firm hand.
The splendid old-fashion concept of "softly softly" policing, is unique to
Britain, and probably changing there too.
Iain
Keith G
"Iain Churches" <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:SC3Sm.47806$La7....@uutiset.elisa.fi...
No, make that 'soft twat' policing and it's worse than ever - the simplest
encounter with the police seems to involve them calling everybody 'mate' and
exacerbating every situation, however trivial, into an ultimately inevitable
flare up! Absolute tossers!
Swim Bo (Moira to you) has bought me another maggie* (she reads them on the
train) and there's yet again more stuff about Finland and Finnish
bike-builders in it! I make that three in a row now!!
(Finland must be hoaching with Harrrleees!! :-)
*All tits and bikes - oh, and pix of scantily-clad girls here and there!!
:-)
Iain Churches
>
> "Iain Churches" <Iai...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
> news:SC3Sm.47806$La7....@uutiset.elisa.fi...
>> to
>> Britain, and probably changing there too.
>
>
> No, make that 'soft twat' policing and it's worse than ever - the simplest
> encounter with the police seems to involve them calling everybody 'mate'
> and exacerbating every situation, however trivial, into an ultimately
> inevitable flare up! Absolute tossers!
Well. I have memories of fair and honest policing in the UK when I lived
there.
> Swim Bo (Moira to you) has bought me another maggie* (she reads them on
> the train) and there's yet again more stuff about Finland and Finnish
> bike-builders in it! I make that three in a row now!!
>
> (Finland must be hoaching with Harrrleees!! :-)
Yes. They are a lot of them. although a bit thin on the ground
during the winter months. Finland probably has the lowest density
of traffic of any of the EU countries, so riding/driving can still be a
great pleasure.
Iain
Keith G
>
> "Keith G" <k...@moirac.adsl24.co.uk> wrote
>> (Finland must be hoaching with Harrrleees!! :-)
>
> Yes. They are a lot of them. although a bit thin on the ground
> during the winter months. Finland probably has the lowest density
> of traffic of any of the EU countries, so riding/driving can still be a
> great pleasure.
Whereas here, even with (supposedly) better weather and really quite
excellent roads, traffic densities are so high riding/driving is a PITA at
anything other than 'after the rush'!!