Fasthosts and Microsoft up a tree, K.I.S.S.I.N.G…

Click image to view ad in PDF formatI was reading a magazine at work this morning when I came across an advert for Microsoft Windows Server 2003. The advert is one in a series of ads that Microsoft has been running which aim to promote companies who have chosen Windows Server over Linux because it is more reliable.

Now, admittedly I am a Mac user and obviously this taints my perspective on all things Microsoft ;) but I have to admit I was a bit irritated by the advert. The headline of the advert is, ‘FASTHOSTS CHOOSES WINDOWS SERVER FOR WEB RELIABILITY‘, with a strap-line of ‘Reliability is key in the "Web Hosting Market"‘ (not quite sure why ‘web hosting market’ is in quotes!??).

Now, I’ve been a Fasthosts customer for over 6 years, and although I did host a few sites on Windows going back a few years, almost everything I have running now is on Linux. I use both a basic reseller package, which allows both Windows and Linux hosting, and also a dedicated server running Fedora Core 5 Linux. My annoyance with the advert is that I thought it gives the impression that all of Fasthosts runs on Windows Server 2003 when in reality they offer both Linux and Windows options for all their hosting packages, it’s just their Control Panel and website that runs on Windows Server 2003.

Not so fast…(hosts)

If I was Fasthosts I would be wary of the impression these adverts give out, it could potentially appear as if Fasthosts were not a very pro-Linux host, or even that Fasthosts don’t do any kind of Linux based hosting at all. Of course Fasthosts are the UK’s largest Microsoft hosting partner (and apparently the world’s largest Windows 2003 Server host) so I guess this kind of promotion is to be expected. But, Fasthosts, don’t forget there are plenty of people who prefer Linux over Windows.

When it comes to developing sites using open source software such as MySQL and PHP then the LAMP platform is undoubtedly the best for the job. Windows Server 2003 may be the best, most reliable way to run Windows technologies such as ASP.net etc but you need to choose the right tool for the job. I think in this particular case it was that Microsoft technologies made it much easier to create a system for Fasthosts to use to administrate the setup process for their domain registrations and web hosting. That’s not quite the same thing as saying the Windows Server is more reliable than Linux though.

Ok, rant over. I guess my main points are:

  1. Fasthosts don’t just provide Windows hosting.
  2. Linux is very, very reliable, despite what Microsofts marketing campaign might say.
  3. I prefer Linux to Windows.
  4. Don’t believe everything you read in adverts.
  5. I am, in fact, a fairly happy Fasthosts customer, despite this here rant.

~Rick

iAmSorryButIDidn’tUnderstandYouPhone

This post is not about a certain mobile phone that comes out this week, although I have to admit that I would be very interested in getting one if it was being released in the UK as well.

Track-and-Trace phone system = Lock-and-Load

I needed to use track and trace for a Western Digital NAS hard drive that I was getting swapped for a standard desktop version (due to it being sslloowweerr than a snail stuck in molasses). I tried using the website but the tracking code wouldn’t work either on Royal Mail or ParcelForce websites. This meant I had to call them up and get someone to check it for me.

Unfortunately I found that there was no human at the end but instead one of those lovely automated systems that wanted me to read the tracking code out character by character. I’d had a bad experience trying to use one with UPS before so I wasn’t hopeful.

My lack of hope was well founded as this system totally sucked too. It was completely incapable of understanding me, and I was speaking as clearly as possible! I spent about 25 minutes trying to make the system understand me and each time it went something like this:

Phonebot: Please say your tracking code one character at a time by only saying the letter or number required. For example: N S 1 2 3 4 5 and so on. Please say your tracking code now…

Me: C P 3 5 7 8 3 1 5 0 0 0 M A

Phonebot: Thank you, I will now read back the code as I heard it. If it is correct say ‘Yes’, if it is incorrect please say ‘No’: E P 3 5 7 8 3 1 5 0 0 0 M A.

Me: No.

Phonebot: Please say your tracking code again one character at a time by only saying the letter or number required. Please say your tracking code now…

Me: C P 3 5 7 8 3 1 5 0 0 0 M A

Phonebot: Thank you, I will now read back the code as I heard it. If it is correct say ‘Yes’, if it is incorrect please say ‘No’: C B 3 5 7 8 3 1 5 0 0 0 M A.

Me: No.

Phonebot: Please say your tracking code again one character at a time by only saying the letter or number required. Please say your tracking code now…

Me: C P 3 5 7 8 3 1 5 0 0 0 M A

Phonebot: Thank you, I will now read back the code as I heard it. If it is correct say ‘Yes’, if it is incorrect please say ‘No’: E P 3 5 7 8 3 1 5 0 0 0 M A.

Me: No. (…gggrrrrr….)

Phonebot: I’m sorry, we can try that one more time, please say your tracking code again one character at a time by only saying the letter or number required. Please say your tracking code now…

Me: C P 3 5 7 8 3 1 5 0 0 0 M A

Phonebot: Thank you, I will now read back the code as I heard it. If it is correct say ‘Yes’, if it is incorrect please say ‘No’: E P 3 5 7 8 3 1 5 0 0 0 M A.

Me: Aaaaaarrrgghhhhhggggrrrrrrr!!!!!!!

Phonebot: I’m sorry, a tracking code is required in order to track the status of a parcel, please make sure you have your tracking code and then call back. Click.

Me: What? It hung up on me? Huh??!!!?!!??!!!

I then repeated this whole thing about three times over! Eventually I tried another number and got a human being, but only after being faced with yet another automated system which made me try a few times again. But at least that one put me through to a human!

These kind of automated systems are supposed to save time, but all it did was waste 25 minutes of my time which was then dealt with by a human in about 30 seconds. These systems should at least send you to a human if it fails to recognise the code after a few attempts, not just hang up on me!

~Rick

I don’t know who I’m annoyed with most, Virgin Media or Sky…

Recently Virgin Media and Sky have been having an ongoing disagreement about the amount that Sky want to charge Virgin Media for receiving the standard Sky TV channels such as Sky One, Sky Two etc. It’s basically now come to a head and Virgin have refused to pay what they perceive as the excessive amount that Sky want to charge for these channels. As of midnight on the 28th of February, Sky’s basic channels stopped airing on Virgin Media.

Between a rock and a hard place…

I’ve been aware of this impending stalemate over the last few weeks. From my point of view as a consumer I feel like I’ve been used like a pawn in a big power game. On one side there were the ads on the Sky channels saying that Virgin Media (or Telewest/NTL as they were still known at the time) were threatening to allow the removal of all Sky channels, they were asking for people to call and petition Virgin Media not to get rid of the channels. On the other side there was Virgin Media saying that they want ‘Fair play’ and that the reason these channels have gone is because Sky wanted too much money for these channels.

Now, I’ve no doubt that Sky by doubling the amount of money they wanted for these channels was imposing a pretty big price hike, no one likes raises in prices. However, there’s one very big, important fact that Virgin seem to have overlooked here:

The Sky channels were one of the few that actually contained anything worthwhile watching. Period. End of story.

I’m of course not including the standard terrestrial channels here, BBC etc. If you’re not familiar with the offerings on Cable TV then perhaps these lyrics of the Bruce Springsteen song (n.b. I’m not a Springsteen fan, I just remembered this song and thought it appropriate) will help:

“Man came by to hook up my cable TV
We settled in for the night my baby and me
We switched ’round and ’round ’til half-past dawn
There was fifty-seven channels and nothin’ on…”

Basically most of it is just rubbish, really terrible rubbish, repeated frequently. If you’ve got 57 channels of mostly rubbish and you take away the ones that are at least half decent, what do you have left? Not much of value.

Virgin Media, why the free TV then?

What I can’t understand is that Virgin Media actually offer a free TV package, as long as you have broadband and phone then you can get a basic package for free. I basically have this free TV package as the only other non-standard terrestrial channel on it that I watch was included with this package. Which channel was that? Sky One. And what was so special about Sky One? It is the channel that is now showing Series 3 of Lost, 24 as well as Battlestar Galactica and the Simpsons!

I think that Virgin are grossly undervaluing two things here: the value of these programmes to their customers, and the value of their customers themselves. These four shows above represent some of the most sought after shows on TV, regardless of the channel. They’re just pretty hot property in many people’s eyes. I think this is what Sky realises and this is what they’re wanting to be paid for.

All is not Lost?

Forgive the bad pun. Sky plan to drop their basic channels from the terrestrial Freeview service as well, but with this there’s a faint glimmer of hope as the end of the article talks about Sky’s plans to potentially offer subscription channels over Freeview from this Summer. Although there is no indication as to whether they would include Sky One and the aforementioned shows at all. There’s only one problem with that for me. I can’t get Freeview where I live, despite it being a highly populated area. Don’t get me started on that issue either! It’s one of the other reasons I went with Virgin in the first place as I had no other choice, it was either them or Sky, and at the time they were cheaper!

End of Transmission

There’s an article on the BBC News website ‘BSkyB channels taken off Virgin’ where another Virgin user echoes my own thoughts:

…I’m really angry about the whole situation. I signed up with NTL for the package, largely based on Sky One because I’m a big fan of all the American shows…

That kind of sums it up, I signed up for the service based on the shows I could get, I wanted to get the various channels I couldn’t get for free due to the lack of Freeview coverage and there was the added channels such as Sky One that were of interest. Since Sky picked up Lost Series 3 instead of Channel 4 it just made it all the more an essential channel for me to watch.

Virgin Media, I’m afraid I think you’ve underestimated the value of these shows to your customers. I think this is now a dealbreaker since Sky are offering a good deal, and I’m probably going to take them up on it.

End of rant.

~Rick