Showing posts with label annoyed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label annoyed. Show all posts

Saturday, March 15, 2014

Tale of 3 Telcos - Reliance, Airtel and Vodafone

Over the last two days, some Mobile telcos have reminded me of my opinions. This, despite me approaching them with an open mind and starting over afresh.


Reliance
Big daddy doesn't mind customer support that bosses over callers.

I had to call up, because my mother's phone couldn't receive incoming calls since morning. She had recently ported over to their GSM service, after having been with Reliance CDMA for ten years. She called 59059 to complete SIM activation in the morning, and when it seemed to work an hour later, thought all is well.

Reliance wasn't in the mood to let us experience simplicity this time either. 
Her phone could make outgoing calls, but calling her number would give us a recorded message, "Please check the number you have dialed." After an hour of trying solutions we could think of, there was no other way forward with incoming calls - we had to call customer service.

As usual, after a maze of IVR options and waiting 25 minutes to speak to a human, I had a voice saying hello (he didn't bother to introduce himself with a name until I asked). He went through his script, did all he could to declare that the problem was my mobile phone and the way I use it. Eventually, he was willing to admit that the problem could be at the network back-end, that something broke when porting to GSM which also involved a plan change. He took down a complaint, gave a 9-digit complaint number, and said issue should be resolved within 72 hours by the technical team. He was particular that today and those three other days will get no compensation in my bill, because, after all, they were going to fix the issue. (oh wow, you're my hero! /s)

Could he tell me what the problem could be? Well, he'd received two similar calls and resolved them, but would not say what could solve it this time. Would he (or a colleague) be willing to follow-up, and call us back once each day until it gets fixed? No way. Was it acceptable to leave a lady unreachable by phone? He had no opinion, had apparently done me a favour by taking down a complaint, and now I should just wait it out. Could I speak to a manager? After ten minutes of on-hold music, Arun, the 'floor supervisor' speaks to me, with an insouciant attitude of 'just be grateful'.

I'd had enough, this wasn't my first such encounter with Reliance's bossy customer support and uncaring stores either. I don't wonder anymore, about how Rcom's market-share heads in its current direction. Go right on, ignore funding of operations and support, pay employees poorly, but splurge on marketing - and then complain about the poor RoI.


Airtel
Keep on offering more non-offers to your customer base.

I walked into an Airtel store. The latest mobile phones from Samsung/Apple/Blackberry took pride of place at almost 50% of the area, as though Airtel was going to compete with a mobile phone sales store. A woefully inadequate "desk" exists to serve mobile service customers. At the very rear, screened off by a fake wall as though it's a shameful unwanted child, is a desk to serve land-line/DSL customers.

What I was exploring, was the probability of re-activating a land-line which I'd had for 14 years, and getting a prepaid SIM card. The store felt sleepy even at peak hours with lots of people. The employees were attending to cute girls out-of-turn. A long haired, bearded guy seemed to be the only one capable of handling work, with 11 others trying to appear busy and keeping customers engaged until beard-guy could get to them. My enquiries were re-directed to the Airtel call center (wait time 30 mins), or the area sales manager (who just wouldn't pick up his phone). There's lots more, but the ambience and the customer experience were terrible. The call center of course, played that accursed tune on a loop, which I've hated since my teenage.

Suffice to say it felt a lot like a government office. I kept telling myself to be calm. Beyond the first minute, every Airtel employee angered and infuriated me, in behaviour and speech. Thank you Airtel, for reminding me why I swore to never give you my business.


Vodafone
If you didn't exist, it'd have been necessary to invent you.

Every service provider runs into issues, but the way they resolve them makes all the difference. Let me talk about the last week alone. I walked into the Vodafone store, waited just two minutes. Had to see if I could save on my monthly bill. The rep said that there indeed was a plan priced at half of mine. Also, I hadn't activated the free CUG on my plan, would I like it now? I said yes to both. And walked out, a cheerful man.

Two days later, my outgoing calls weren't going through. Alright, a five minute walk to the friendly store was needed. I ask the rep to fix my issue. He smiles, turns to me and explains there was "CUG barring" at the back-end, a faulty plan-change that he admits to. He IM's a colleague who does have access to fix it, and also sends the formal email required by process. It should be fixed in two hours he said, but it actually was resolved in 20 minutes.

I saw a chance to reduce my Mobile Data plan cost, and he did what I wanted. Also in the past, Vodafone has been willing to follow-up on issues I face, so I don't have a trust issue with believing what was said. I breezed out of the Vodafone store again within a few minutes, cheerful. I wish I could say the same about Airtel and Reliance.

Friday, April 30, 2010

PC industry must use IEC standard for calculating storage

This joke stopped being funny a long time ago, so cleanup your act people!

I am talking about vendors of PC secondary storage who calculate drive capacity in magnitudes of a thousand each. Technically, they are correct, because the SI system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_prefix) works that way. But computers do not use the decimal or SI system, they are binary and calculate data in orders of magnitude that had finally been defined and been given a new abbreviation about 10 years ago by IEC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix).

To illustrate, let us see what a storage vendor claims and what the OS actually sees.
Vendor - 1,000 (1 kilo) bytes = 1KB.  OS - 1024 bytes = 1KB.
Vendor - 1,000,000 (1 million or mega) bytes = 1MB. OS - 1,048,576 bytes = 1MB.
Vendor - 1,000,000,000 (1 billion or giga) bytes = 1GB. OS - 1,073,741,824 bytes = 1GB
Now the storage vendor or company is scientifically correct, because the SI system is decimal and states that <10 to the power of 6> or one million, qualifies for the "Mega" prefix. Similarly, <10 to the power of 9> or one billion units, qualify for the "Giga" prefix. In contrast, the OS looks at storage in binary, and thus <2 to the power of 10> or 1024 bytes is reported as one KiloByte. Similarly, <2 to the power of 20> or 1048576 bytes are one MegaByte, 2^30 = 1GB, and 2^40 = 1TB.

But because of the vendor using the SI system and the OS using the binary system, people who buy a hard disk drive (HDD) of a certain capacity feel cheated when they see the OS reporting less space. For example, here are a few commonly seen HDD capacities:
2.5 GB HDD = Actual formatted capacity of only 2.33 GB
20 GB HDD = Actual formatted capacity of only 18.63 GB
40 GB HDD = Actual formatted capacity of only 37.25 GB
80 GB HDD = Actual formatted capacity of only 74.51 GB
160 GB HDD = Actual formatted capacity of only 149.01 GB
250 GB HDD = Actual formatted capacity of only 232.83 GB
500 GB HDD = Actual formatted capacity of only 465.66 GB
1 TB HDD = Actual formatted capacity of only 931.32 GB (instead of the 1024 GB you would expect)
2 TB HDD = Actual formatted capacity of only 1862.6 GB

As you go higher up the capacity ladder, the bigger the "perceived" loss of space or the feeling of being cheated. An immediate example I could bring up, is that of a person with HDDs that total up to a claimed 9.5 TeraBytes of data storage capacity. But as far as usable drive space is concerned, this person only has 8.64 TB of space actually. So does that mean he has effectively been cheated of almost 900 GB, since that is the difference in numbers?

Not at all, the issue at hand is simply the logical result of the SI-prefix versus IEC-prefix problem. In an ideal world, people would use the correct representations, just as you would convert weight in kg (kilograms) to lb (pounds) using a set formula. The example to remember is "KiBiByte" (presumably standing for kilo binary byte which would translate to 1024 Bytes) represented as KiB (to prevent confusion with the "KB" which stands for only 1000 Bytes). Similarly you have representations such as MiB (MeBiByte), GiB (GiBiByte), TiB (TeBiByte) and so on, which is what IEC proposes you should use. Under the IEC system, you won't have the confusing situation outlined above and you (presumably) won't feel cheated if the units were shown to be distinct from one another. For example:
2.5 GB HDD = 2.33 GiB
20 GB HDD = 18.63 GiB
40 GB HDD = 37.25 GiB
80 GB HDD = 74.51 GiB
160 GB HDD = 149.01 GiB
250 GB HDD = 232.83 GiB
500 GB HDD = 465.66 GiB
1 TB HDD = 931.32 GiB
2 TB HDD = 1862.6 GiB

I was hoping Windows 7 (the latest Operating System from Microsoft) would change the prevailing attitude, by providing an option to show file/drive sizes in compatibility format (for those who want the current way) and then options for strict SI format (in the 10^3 form for KB) and for strict IEC form (in the 2^10 format for KiB). Apple's Snow Leopard and Linux Ubuntu 10.04 are already moving in that direction. If you want to convert file/drive sizes yourself without the drudgery of multiple steps, you could use this online calculator instead - http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/conversion/binary.htm

The other option is for the storage industry (such as Seagate, Kingston, etc.) to provide larger drives (:P). When I ask for 2TB, give me the full 2048 GiB capacity instead of only 1863 GiB which feels as though almost 10% of the drive (the difference in number is 185 GiB) has been withheld from the customer.



Addendum:
After all, secondary storage is the only place this sleight-of-hand deception is taking place - a person buying 8GB of RAM is given 8 GiB (or 8192 MB) of memory, fair and square. But then, the Internet bandwidth and networking industry has been benefiting from the SI prefix as well for a while now. This is in addition to their added benefit of expressing speeds in bits (thus being able to roll off large numbers) instead of actual data-transfer speed in Bytes (made of 8 bits) and not taking data packet transmission overhead into account.  To the layman, saying "I have a 256 kbps Internet connection" sounds more appealing than saying "I get transfer speeds of 32 k Bytes/sec" -- 256 is a larger number than 32, right?