Yesterday, for no reason I can fathom, my tablet PC decided to require ‘activation’.

‘Activation’ is Microsoft’s way of ensuring that your copy of Windows is licensed.  I know my copy is licensed because I installed it myself, and I put in the license key from my MSDN subscription (valid for 5 PCs simultaneously, currently running on 3).

I did this installation nearly a year ago – around the 4th January 2008.  I waited a few days to make sure the installation was sound, then I activated it over the internet.

I’ve added no new hardware or drivers lately (although there were quite a few Microsoft Updates recently).  I’m really baffled why it has started requiring activation now.

But it gets worse.  It wouldn’t activate over the internet.  This is the normal no-hassle (or at least minimal-hassle) way, but it refused to work for me.

So today I followed the instructions for activating by phone.  I phoned the 0800 number, went through lots of button pushes, got to the stage where I had to enter the installation ID, then had a problem.  All I could see for the installation ID was 123456789, very spaced out.  So when it asked for the first 6 digits of the installation ID, I entered 123456.

It didn’t like that, and told me I’d made an error.  And to try again.  (Pompous bloody software – I’m not the one that made the error.)

So I did.  And again.  Eventually it offered me the opportunity to speak to a CSR.  I’m guessing that’s ‘customer service representative’.  So I selected this option and got to speak to a bloke in India.

I tried explaining the situation to him.  He said unfortunately their servers were down, so he couldn’t help me right now.  I should phone back in 30 minutes.  I asked for a direct number to call instead of the directed rigmarole I got through the normal number.  He gave me an international freephone number to call that would take me straight to the correct group.

I phoned back in half an hour.  The international freephone turned out to go through the exact same rigmarole as the original freephone number.  The Indian girl I spoke to said their servers were down and I should phone back in 30 minutes.  I said I was told that last time too.

Both were wonderfully apologetic and utterly useless.

I phoned back in another half an hour.  This time their servers were up!  Hooray!  And then I found out that they still couldn’t help me!  Boo!

I inferred from this new Indian bloke I eventually spoke to that there was supposed to be a long ‘installation ID’ underneath the spaced-out 123456789 numbers.  On my tablet it’s completely blank.  I have no installation ID, and I have no idea why.

To make matters even more ludicrous, the new Indian bloke also said that no-one there had been trained to handle this situation and that I should phone the tech support helpline.  It’s an 0870 number (so Microsoft profits from it the longer I’m on), and it’s not open.  It’s a Monday-to-Friday service.

So, I can’t use my legitimately-purchased operating system purely because of a problem with their anti-piracy measures.

Bastards.

I’m really quite annoyed about that.

Well, now that Amazon have released their iPhone app, I know why they turned down my application.

And as I said then:

Given the choice between having multiple applications competing to provide the best user experience (and Amazon getting all the sales), and just having their own version and Amazon pocketing the commission themselves, they've gone for the latter.

I’m sure mine would’ve been better.

Gits.

It seems it’s time for U.TV’s regular spam.

So, they’re still spamming me.

Also, they still claim I’ve “expressed an interest in receiving news updates from u.tv - either by specifically requesting this newsletter or registering online and choosing to receive news updates”.

And I’ve still no idea how they got my email address…

But on the bright side, someone somewhere kicked the dead server, and dumped the broken CAPTCHA system, and this time the unsubscribe claims to have worked. Yes, it said the joyous, magical phrase “You have been successfully unsubscribed.”  And that was to the “no UTV email communications” unsubscribe, not just the stop-sending-me-this-particular-crap one.

I suppose I’ll have to wait a while now to see if the damned thing actually worked, or if they’re just toying with me.

Amazon have replied to my reply to their reply about my complaint about them spamming associates and not giving any way to opt out.

This reply does seem to have come from someone who has a clue (by which I mean someone who read and understood the complaint – an increasingly rare species these days).

Here’s the relevant part of the response:

While I cannot unsubscribe you from these mailings or make this change for you personally, I've also passed your feedback along to the appropriate department for consideration.

I understand that you are upset, and I regret that we have not been able to address your concerns to your satisfaction. Unfortunately, we will not be able to offer any additional insight or action on these matters.

It’s not going to get fixed, but at least Amazon have acknowledged the problem.  Well, at least Amazon have acknowledged that I think it’s a problem.  And that’s a start.

It’s nice to know that, even with the Credit Crunch, there are still bargains available at Tesco.  This is one that was available in our local Tesco tonight:

Yes, that’s £1 per bottle, or £4 for 3 bottles.  I wonder if 4 bottles are £4 or £5?

Earlier this year I said:

“Tesco are another company like that - they often have three-packs of items that are more expensive than the buying the 3 individual items, just because it's become ingrained in us that buying in bulk is cheaper.”

But highlighting it as a yellow-tagged special offer?  That’s just taking the piss.

Well, Amazon.com got back to me about my complaint.

It wasn’t a helpful response…

I’d like to say that they came up with a lucid argument for why drivel about linking to them wasn’t actually spam, but they did nothing of the sort.  All they really said was:

I'm sorry for any concern with the e-mail messages you've received. As a member of the Amazon Associates program, you'll receive monthly payment reports, and occasional announcements regarding Associates policies, tools, and features. This information is needed for continued participation in the Associates Program, and for this reason it is not possible to unsubscribe from these mailings.

If you prefer that we close your Associates account, please write back and we can take care of this for you. Note that once your account is closed, you will no longer earn referral fees.

If you listen closely, you can hear the sound of my point wooshing over their heads.

So, I’ve replied back:

That is quite simply not true.

There is no way that drivel like 'More Ways Than Ever to Link to Amazon.com' is 'needed for continued participation in the Associates Program'.

It's spam - pure and simple.

It's not necessary, it's not requested, and it's not wanted.

I don’t hold out any hope of them wising up though.

I wrote a couple of years ago about Amazon ignoring requests not to be emailed.  They felt their spam was ‘transactional’, so felt free to disregard any communications preferences you’d set.

They became so annoying (I even went as far as specifically filtering them via Postfix) that that was one of the reasons I left the DVD subscription scheme.

Well, they’re at it again.  This time their spam is shit like “More Ways Than Ever to Link to Amazon.com” and other similar drivel.

But the annoying thing is that they won’t let you opt out of it.  (OK, really they should explicitly require you to opt in to it, but not allowing you to opt out is a real no-no.)

No, when I go to my Communications Preferences, I see that I’ve unchecked the crap like “Promotions”, “Merchandising Tips”, “Newsletter Highlights”, and all the others.  The only unchecked item is “Amazon Associates Network Updates”, and it’s only unchecked because the gits won’t let me uncheck it.

They say it contains:

Important announcements regarding associates policies, tools, and features. It is not possible to unsubscribe from this category. These messages contain critical information for continued participation in the Associates Network.

My arse it does.

I’ve used the feedback form to try and convince them that I really don’t want this stuff. For posterity, here’s what I said:

Stop sending drivel like this without giving us a way to opt out of it.

I have removed everything I can from the email preferences.  All that's left is "Amazon Associates Network Updates".  You won't let me opt out of that, saying it's for "important announcements", but the spam you send really doesn't count as important.  It's drivel.

Please stop.

    Geoff

I don’t hold out much hope.

A lot of people are worried about Google and the way it's been encroaching further and further into markets that aren't related to search.  It's becoming such a dominant company that folks are scared it'll turn nasty, even though its slogan is "Don't Be Evil".

Google doesn't scare me.  I have a small amount of trust in them, and I generally have a backup plan for if/when they decide to change things I'm reliant on.

But no-one really talks about Amazon.  Amazon have also been slowly moving into unrelated areas.  For instance, they provide really cheap online storage that some tools use to provide a reliable off-site backup.  Or you can use that really cheap storage to provide really fast downloads for your podcasts.  Or many other things.

Amazon also provide the badly-named 'elastic compute cloud'.  You need to be a real nerd to understand that name, but basically you can rent a computer from them and run whatever you want on it. Some folks use this instead of a regular dedicated server from an ISP, and this use is only going to increase when they allow your rented computer to run Windows instead of Linux.

In fact, the number of techie services available from Amazon is truly surprising.  They have moved into so many more arenas than just delivering books.

Which is why it's sad that they won't let me develop an iPhone application.  I thought I could just create a slick iPhone application that would use the Amazon Associates web services to download the data and images, allow people to buy via this iPhone application, and pocket the commission on the sale - just the way some web sites do.

(Aside - there would have been a good bit more to the application than that.  I had a few ideas that would have been tricky but would have made it quite unique...)

But I can't.  It seems Amazon want the whole handheld market to themselves.  Because, although you can use their web services from a web site, the terms and conditions say this:

"You must obtain advance written consent when using Amazon Associates Web Service in connection with any handheld, mobile or mobile phone application."

Needless to say, that written consent was not forthcoming:

"Hello Geoff,

Thank you for your recent inquiry about developing a mobile application using Amazon Associates Web Services. At this time Amazon is not generally allowing the use of Amazon Associates Web Services for mobile device applications, and we are not prepared to approve your request to develop the service you outline below.

We thank you for your interest in Amazon.

Regards,

Luke
Amazon Web Services"

This has left me a little sad - nay, annoyed - nay, pissed - nay, utterly fucked off.  Apparently they've been turning down (or revoking) permission for mobile applications since August last year.

They either want to develop their own mobile applications, or drive everyone to their own (fairly poor, in the grand scheme of things) iphone-specific web site.  Given the choice between having multiple applications competing to provide the best user experience (and Amazon getting all the sales), and just having their own version and Amazon pocketing the commission themselves, they've gone for the latter.

Google isn't scary.  Amazon is.

Here's another case of business processes actively preventing the very business they're supposed to support.

Yesterday I wanted to buy the Sunday Times.  (Don't snigger - I buy it every week, and I think the Money section is often good for a few laughs.)

Yesterday was Sunday, by the way, so there's little unusual in all this.

OK, the one bit that was maybe a little unusual was that it was half past ten at night.

So I went in to the petrol station to buy the paper.  I don't know what hours this station keeps these days, but it's open to midnight at least.  And I walked past all the Sunday newspapers neatly stacked by the door.  And I told the Pimply Faced Youth that I'd like to buy a Sunday Times.

He said I couldn't do that.

I pointed at the stack of papers.

He repeated that I couldn't do that.

He smirked a bit, just to show how clever he was at being able to prevent a purchase.  I didn't punch him.

I did ask why I couldn't, whenever it was clear that:

1. I wanted to buy they paper, and
2. They had the paper, and
3. They're in the business of selling papers.

He said they'd already been 'recorded' so couldn't be sold.

I'd already guessed that was what was going on, but I think the PFY was expecting me to ask what he meant so he could tut, roll his eyes and show once again how clever he was by explaining newspapers and their no-sale collection processes.

Since logic and reasoned debate obviously weren't working I could have tried asking for the manager, or pleading.  I did briefly consider asking once more, politely, and explaining that, while I knew it was late, I'd just travelled a thousand fucking miles, and really, I'd got to the petrol station as fast as I could.  I hadn't even got home yet.

Instead I just left, cursing the staff for being such lazy fuckers that they wanted to close up early, and damning any customers who had the gall to want to buy something.

So, Milestone in Carrickfergus (for that was the petrol station), in a time when Tesco is undercutting you in every single area including petrol (except the face-pimpling quotient, which you seem to have cornered the market in), do you really think it's wise having staff that'll actively turn away customers?

The Right Thing To Do would have been to sell me the paper and then - since they phoned in the no-sales numbers - phone in an amended no-sales number.  Yes it's a hassle, but it serves the lazy PFY right for slacking off trying to close up early.

A better solution would have been not to have phoned the no-sales numbers in so early in the first place.

Pimply faced git.

I'm getting more and more annoyed at sloppy journalism.  These days reporting seems more 'rewriting press releases' than 'finding out what's going on and then telling people'.

Which brings me to this gem at the BBC - 'Mobile tracking reveals spending'.

"UK company Path Intelligence has proved that the longer people spend in shops, the more they spend.

...

"They found that for an increase of 1% of time spent, shoppers spend 1.3% more on purchases.

...

"No access to the mobile networks themselves is necessary, so the information that they glean is specific to a user, but completely anonymous.

...

The TMSIs [Temporary Mobile Subscriber Identities] can only be associated with a number by the mobile operators and Path Intelligence encrypt the TMSIs that they acquire as an added level of security."

The question I'd love the 'reporter' to have asked is: If the information is anonymous, how do they know how much the person spent?

I mean, it's obvious that they have access to how much the person bought in order to know how much more was spent by the shoppers who took longer.  So why repeat all the PR nonsense about the anonymity of TMSIs when that's only one of the ways they were gathering the information?  It serves only to give a false veil of anonymity over the company's tracking of people.

And that's before I start on the idea that it takes longer at the till to pay for more things, so naturally the person will spend more time there.  And on the lack of a causative relationship between them taking more time in the shop and them spending more (you could lock them in so they spend more time in the shop, but it doesn't mean they'll give you all their money).  Or why they're storing the TMSIs at all, instead of just replacing them with anonymous GUIDs of some sort.  Or even - most important of all - whether this kind of tracking is a good idea at all.