Boydo's Tech Talk

Not all electronic devices are created equally and sometimes, due to poor manufacturing or lack of testing, product recalls are necessary to correct these defects. Companies may take out newspaper ads, attempt to contact customers based upon their product registration details and perhaps even television ads (if they are brave).

Anyway, there is something you can do to keep on top of product recall announcements.

You can visit the Product Safety Recalls website here on a regular basis but unless you can remember to keep swinging by all the time it’s probably not the most effective way to keep tabs on what is going on. The best thing I could recommend is subscribing to one or more of the RSS feeds here so that you can browse through the lists as they trickle through.

I think it’s perhaps better to skim over listed recalls that may not necessarily affect you, your family or friends in order to find out about hopefully the very few product recalls that do end up affecting you and those around you.

A few nights ago my wife turned on her Kindle only to find that the top half of the screen would remain stuck on what had been on the screensaver while the lower half would refresh (apart from some minor glitches).

Screen Saver on an Amazon Kindle with Screen Glitches

Password Unlock Screen on an Amazon Kindle with Screen Glitches

We both didn’t have a good feeling about it and numerous attempts to switch it on and off and even full reboots were unable to recover the screen back to its former state. I could only conclude that maybe the hardware that makes the screen work might have suffered a partial failure causing the garbled image.

There was a lament that this device had gone to heaven and a replacement device would have to be purchased. An anxious call to Amazon was placed to try and fix the problem but that didn’t work which seemingly left us the options of paying for a repair or buying a replacement device. As options were explored it became apparent that Amazon was happy to ship a replacement device at no extra charge so long as the sick/dying/dead device was sent back within thirty days.

Admittedly, the device still had a few days left on its warranty (as it was received on this day last year) so we probably didn’t have to be too worried but it seems like Amazon have been lenient even for devices outside of the warranty period. With Kindles becoming super cheap to buy it could perhaps be in their best interests to keep people happy with working hardware so that they can continue to read (and buy) new books.

The device took roughly two days to arrive and everything is back to normal (although we still need to return the old Kindle).

Anyway, this was pretty good support and fulfillment on the part of Amazon and perhaps something to bear in mind if you find that your Kindle has gone to heaven prematurely.

This news may take a little while to trickle through to regular consumers but I wanted to draw attention to the fact that Western Digital and Seagate are going to alter the warranties offered with their hard drive around the end of this year.

In short, Seagate will be slashing the five years warranty down to just one year for most of  its desktop and notebook hard drives while others will be cut down to three years from December 31st, 2011. Meanwhile, Western Digital will cut their warranty from three years to two years for its Caviar Blue, Caviar Green and Scorpio Blue lines from January 2nd, 2012. External hard drives offered by either company will not be affected by these changes.

So what’s the big deal?

A lot of people (rightly or wrongly) perceive the warranty as a form of insurance of not only the hard drive but also, to an extent, their data. The presence of a warranty also tends to imply confidence in a product and similarly the lack of a warranty is construed as a lack of confidence. Whether or not this is the right perception of a warranty is up for debate.

Anyway, this is not the first time hard drive warranties have been altered. One such case occurred back in 2002 while warranties were extended again in 2006. Whether the reason behind these changes be for cost cutting, market stimulus, an underlying confidence of a maturing development process or the need to support an immature design change to hard it really does not excuse the fact that there’s no substitute for backing up your data.

If you maintain regular, comprehensive backups a drive failure will only set you back the physical drive which can be replaced (perhaps with some inconvenience in sourcing an interim drive until the replacement can be organised). From my anecdotal experience I have found that hard drives tend to fail early in their lives (usually within a few months of spinning up for the first time) or endure for many years.

Don’t get me wrong, warranties are great for covering the cost of a replacement drive should a drive fail unexpectedly. That said, I think people tend to use it as an excuse not to backup their data and then complain when a drive does fail or, in the case of shorter warranties, not to buy drives supplied with short warranties at all.

In Australia, we’ve been lucky enough to have a Do Not Call Register legislated to hep reduce the number of telemarketing calls received on personal landlines, fax numbers and mobile numbers. People have experienced  varying effectiveness from a remarkable reduction in the number of telemarketing calls to little effect at all.

At home, our single telephone is only really connected from time to time to test the line for noise (as we have an ADSL connection that shares the line). However, we have received a number of telemarketing calls when we have been home (which then prompts us to disconnect the phone again) but me being me I’m still not satisfied that telemarketers are calling our number.

So, what should you do when you receive a telemarketing call on a telephone service whose number is registered on the Do Not Call Register?

There are some key pieces of information that you need from the caller (or faxer), specifically:

1. the name of the company,
2. the contact details of the company (so phone number, address, website),
3. the number of the company calling (if displayed),
4. the relationship you have with the company contacting you (or the lack thereof),
5. the time and date of the contact,
6. the products being offered.

Perhaps hard to believe but the blog has been up and running for a full year and many things have happened over the course of the last twelve months. At times, it has been a bit of a challenge to do a daily entry particularly with the demands of full time work as well as completing my university degree via correspondence in addition to logistical challenges associated with being on the other side of the world on holiday and keeping to schedule.

Anyway, some of the notable events of the last year include:

• ongoing pressure on state and federal governments to agree upon and ratify the R18+ classification for video games,
• the failure of the legal challenge launched by AFACT against iiNet for the copyright infringements incurred by customers of iiNet,
• the Prius brake recall saga,
• the freak storm down in Melbourne in March 2010 that turned the CBD into a swimming pool,
• the toxic subject of the net filter that seems to have fallen off the radar,
• Google caught capturing Wi-Fi network information whilst capturing data for its Street View service,
• the release of the Apple iPad and iPhone 4,
• the Microsoft KIN being withdrawn seven weeks after launch (and then relaunched and recancelled),
• the public release of the Firefox 4.0 Beta (now in its tenth beta since then),
• introduction of 1TB and unlimited internet plans (AAPT didn’t last long after its customers were acquired by iiNet),
• the cliff hanger of the Australian Federal Election and the unprecedented level of online coverage,
• Xmarks declaring their forthcoming closure (but later saved by LastPass who bought them out),
• the iPhone 4 antenna saga,
• ongoing scams involving people posing as Microsoft and other companies under the guise of helping to fix non-existent computer problems,
• FireSheep and its security implications on open Wi-Fi networks,
• Google changing its policy on automatic refunds for applications bought through the Android Market.

I’ve also had opportunities to get hands on with a stack of gadgets including the Panasonic Viera Plasma 3DTV, Blu-ray player and home theatre system over the year and hope that I will be able to continue doing so for the year ahead. For those of you patiently waiting for the review I am releasing my review of the 3DTV tomorrow.

At any rate, things have been going really well with the launch of the dedicated Facebook page and YouTube channel which has clocked up 3,500 video views since December 2010.

As always, thanks for your support of the blog!

Just a quick tip for tonight.

Looking at those end user license agreements (or EULAs) every time you install a new piece of software can be very time consuming exercise. Of course, EULAs are there for a reason but the fact that they can run into thousands of words in length its not surprising that a lot of people just click “I Agree” without reading them. However, with increasing concerns over privacy of data and particularly personal information over the last few years you may be making an agreement that could see you coming off second best.

However, if you like to get a better idea of what might negatively impact you in a EULA you can use a tool called EULAlyzer from Javacool Software. In simple terms, you point it at the window containing the EULA or copy and paste it into EULAlyzer and the software will scan the EULA for words and phrases of interest that may involve aspects of how your information is used in marketing, the behaviour of the software or the installation of additional third-party software amongst other things.

EULAlyzer Home Screen

Of course, you could probably achieve the same thing by copying and pasting the EULA into Microsoft Word and attempting to search for various words phrases but the folks who have developed EULAlyzer have done the leg work for you. Individual results are grouped into categories including:

• advertising,
• promotional messages,
• third party,
• website addresses,
• events that can occur without notice.

EULAlyzer License Agreement Analysis (Google Chrome)

There is also a paid “Pro” version that will over additional features such as automatic update notifications, free updates for your licensing period and automatic detection and analysis of EULAs when they appear.

Whilst EULAlyzer is a nifty little tool it must be noted that it isn’t a substitute for legal advice or gaining a full comprehension of the entire EULA particularly for commercial entities where terms of use for software can differ from those for personal users. However, it’s great for drawing attention to those areas that may be of potential interest or concern for individuals and companies alike.

EULALyzer is available for Windows 2000 through to Windows 7.

Whilst this news is a few weeks old I thought it was still important to bring to the attention of those of you with Android devices.

In conjunction with an update to the Android Market application for the platform, Google also changed the arrangement when it came to automatic refunds for undesired applications. Originally, Google allowed up to 24 hours for a consumer to remove an application from their device after initial purchase to qualify for an automatic refund. In my mind this was a great benefit over Apple’s App Store via iTunes which required a user to grovel to Apple and hope for mercy.

Unfortunately, Google has wound back the grace period of 24 hours down to a relatively small 15 minutes. In most cases this may still be fine for those tiny applications with narrow or limited functionality that come down in under a mute or two giving you about ten minutes to work out if it was what you expected. However, more elaborate or complex applications and those that are physically larger will have less to little opportunity (if at all) to fully test the application within fifteen minutes from the time it was bought.

The real problem here is applications that weigh in over the 50MB limit enforced on the Android Market. At the moment, software developers that need to exceed this limit execute a separate download process upon the first launch of the application. Depending on how much time this takes it can easily chew up the 15 minute grace period (even on Wi-Fi). This is further exacerbated when a user finds out that their device is incompatible with the software (either due to an older OS on the device or hardware limitation).

Personally, I think Google can find some sort of compromise. Of course, developers should be paid for their work and consumer should have an easy mechanism to return a purchase should it not meet their expectations. If I had a say in the matter, I reckon twelve hours would be sufficient so as to allow people time to download the application, look after other things that might be going on in their life (or even have a nap) and then work out if the application was what they imagined. It’d also save Google paying employees to manually process refunds for these instances (after all, Google is in this game to make money and not fritter it away on operational overheads).

Come on Google, you should know better – don’t be evil. Trifling with consumer rights with respect to digital goods is not a step in the right direction.

Even when it isn’t Christmas, shoppers are always on the lookout for a bargain which usually comes in the form of sales be it for the purposes of  stocktaking, liquidation or closing down (rug industry anyone?) amongst others. You might also get special deals with store cards such as interest free arrangements (like David Jones) or maybe even further discounts on the goods purchased.

One thing that doesn’t tend to factor into the equation for bargain hunting shoppers is the option of an extended warranty (unless it is thrown in for nothing). More often than not the existence of an extended warranty remain unknown until the decision to purchase has been locked in. Understandably, shoppers may think that the store or the manufacturer is attempting to erode or claw back the saving on the goods and, as a result, turn down the option of an extended warranty.

In one mind I don’t blame them. Today, we had our Prius serviced and after I had handed over the keys at the reception area I was asked if I wanted the wheels balanced and realigned as well as the air conditioning system cleaned and disinfected. Despite not having either of those things explicitly undertaken as part of a scheduled service or conducted elsewhere I felt like this was a last minute revenue generation activity. This was despite the obvious benefits of having the work carried out given that they had not been done before (more so the wheel balance and alignment in my unprofessional opinion).

On the other hand it would seem ludicrous not to obtain extended especially on more expensive goods such as televisions, home theatre systems, computers or higher end smartphones. Especially when some of these devices come with just twelve months warranty (which many may expect as the period of time in which a fault is most likely to occur).

Have you bought something and had it fail just outside the standard factory warranty period? Perhaps you’ve had problems with a lemon within a short period of warranty?

What it all boils down to is whether or not a consumer accepts the risk and cost of repairing or replacing a faulty device outside the warranty period. In my mind, it’s a simple choice even for quality goods – an extended warranty is a relatively small investment to protect your ongoing use of a device after the standard factory warranty has expired. It can’t hurt to give it some consideration as part of your next major device purchase as it could save you major pain later on.

These days, many people reckon the banks are giving the regular person a raw deal with bank fees and mortgage interest rates all while record profits are being raked in. That aside, people have an expectation to be able to access their money at a time and place convenient to them.

The wife and I have a bank account with the National Australia Bank (NAB) but were lucky enough not to be caught up in the issues experienced by many others across the country (primarily because we had already withdrawn enough money before hand for our regular spending and our wages had already been paid). I could only imagine the angst that people and family experienced with impaired access to their funds and delayed payments that could have caused issues with late fees, overdraw fees, interruptions to services or the inability to buy the bare essentials (for those doing it tough).

Like any major commercial entity, there are probably lots of customer impacting issues that get dealt with quietly behind the scenes with little notification to affected customers (if anything, customers call up to report problems which then prompts a given company to investigate and correct the problem). Some problems are more complex than others but usually head towards some sort of resolution.

Of course, there will be high profile issues such as the one experienced by NAB that will get extended media coverage (and rightly, so in my opinion). After water, electricity and gas I believe that banking is a utility service of sorts (along with access to the Internet). In an age where more and more is being done online or through digital transactions it is unacceptable that there is any sort of prolonged outage or inability to access funds or financial information.

Mind you, I am not an economist, a banker or an expert on the feasibility on law or regulation. I am merely someone with an interest in my bank accounts, credit cards and superannuation account. What I believe, as a regular consumer, is that there should be some sort of minimum service level supported by legislation or regulation to prevent further instances of what has happened over the weekend to reoccur. It’s not as if the banks are cash strapped for capital investment in their own systems.

Whilst it may be popular to “bank bash” over interest rates and computer glitches I think there is cause for concern for a lack of service level definition and enforcement. In the land of telecommunications, landline services are covered by the Service Level Guarantee (CSG) which stipulates the timeframes for a service to be installed and provided (either the originally requested service or an acceptable interim equivalent) to a customer with financial implications for the telco should they not meet the SLA. This framework is fairly mature and prescribes a clear level of service to be expected by customers of their chosen telco.

Computers fail, files corruption occurs and backups don’t always work – these things are a fact of life. Contingency planning and disaster recovery tests go some way to mitigate against these issues but the banks won’t do the best they can unless minimum requirements are legislated with ongoing support from the industry ombudsman wielding a big stick in the form of legal and/or financial penalties. Whilst the big four banks deal with billions of dollars everyday chasing a profit they are also dealing with the livelihoods of many, many people entrusting their money to them who may rely on a few hundred dollars just to survive. This needs to be put into perspective for the benefit of the Australian people.

Particularly over the last decade, we have witnessed convergence of technology at any increasing rate. Ten years ago, mobile phones did little more than make and receive calls and SMS. MMS was later introduced while camera and video functionality started to appear as entry level features. Mobile phones have also turned into mobile broadband modems and even Wi-Fi hotspots as we now look towards Long Term Evolution (LTE) services on the horizon. GPS and location based services are fast becoming a staple in smartphones.

We’ve also seen a transition from dialup modems to broadband and Wi-Fi has become fairly commonplace. Many households would have a router modem, wireless router or wireless router modem to share their broadband connection. We have a great deal of other converged devices like clock radios, games consoles (which also play DVDs, Blu-ray in amongst general media centre functionality) and multifunction devices (MFDs that print, fax, scan and copy) with wired and wireless network connectivity.

I think it’s amazing how much functionality can be squeezed into one device these days. However, one has to question if converged devices are necessarily better than standalone ones?

In terms of benefits, converged devices may help you save space particularly for larger devices like printers and scanners. Also, depending on the converged device you are purchasing, you could potentially save money compared to buying devices to cover all of the composite functions. Otherwise, you could afford to pay for a converged device with higher specifications.

Unfortunately, the downside is if your converged device fails for whatever reason you will lose all of that converged functionality instead of one device with specific functionality. Furthermore, if a converged device fails outside of the warranty period, you could be up higher repair costs depending on the extent of failure. Another downside with some converged devices is that they attempt to be a jack of all trades but end up doing a really crumby job. As always, it pays to do your research on product reviews and even get a look at the device up close and personal at a major store (like Dick Smith or Officeworks here in Australia).

Personally, I favour converged devices where practical and I don’t hesitate to spend a little more to obtain the quality that I expect from my purchases. I will also spend a significant amount of time comparing specifications, reviews and price before I commit to a decision. To further protect the converged devices I do purchase I make sure they are surge protected (which I have covered in a prior blog) either by a surge protection power board or a UPS.

So there are positives and negatives in both cases but I hope I have given you some food for thought to help you make up your own mind.