Bad Delivery Service Destroying Amazon Credibility

I recently ordered a badminton racket for my son from Amazon UK. Delivery time was suggested to take around 4 working days.

I received an email telling me the item had been dispatched 3 days later - so far so good.

After a further 5 days had passed I decided to contact Amazon to find out what had happened. Finding a phone number for Amazon UK wasn't easy but for those who are interested, the Amazon UK Free Phone number is 0800 279 6620. Press option "8" for a human!

The human in question kept telling me not to worry and the item would be with me in another 7 days time.

I pointed out in an increasingly frustrated tone that I was already worried because I know of no delivery service within the UK that spends 12 days driving around looking for a particular address!

I demanded to have the tracking number and details to investigate myself and eventually found out what is going on.

Apparently, the item is passed to the Amazon contracted courier, in this case TNT. They then spend 3 days "processing" it and then take a business decision whether they are prepared to actually deliver it or not.

If they decide not to deliver the package they will then arrange to have it passed onto the Royal Mail which from their point of view is "dispatched". In actual fact it took another 2 days to get to the Royal Mail.

Royal Mail then schedule this as a standard parcel delivery which they state takes 3 to 5 days from posting.

The conclusion of all this lark is a ridiculous wait for your product and no customer support to speak of. Short term gain for Amazon profits, long term loss of reputation.

Whole Of The Moon

...I was listening to a CD of Celtic Songs the other day called Best Of Celtic Woman and was suddenly struck by one particular track called "Whole Of The Moon" sung by a relatively unknown artist called Rachel Earwicker.

The song was previously released by The Waterboys but this was her own version of that track. Its a lovely version and she has a great voice and it makes you wonder how many artists there are out there with stacks of talent but have never had that lucky break.

Anyway, if you like, have a listen and let me know if you think its nice, or if I am starting to slowly go off my rocker and perhaps should be put out to graze...

The link is above, then click on the Listen To Sample Icon. The clip loads fast but is low quality.

Download hangs on local http server

..I have been to hell and back over the last week trying to solve a stupid problem on my windows XP Pro machine.

It started when I noticed my IE7 freezing when I tried to access my own website on my own local web server over http. It was random but got a lot worse the larger the page or file size. I decided to set up a 10Mb file test and try downloading this from my web server to my local PC but this was impossible to complete without freezing up.

At first I couldn’t understand this effect because downloading 100Mb over the internet from a remote website on the same PC worked perfectly. First impression was to blame the web server, but this could not have been responsible because I have 8 other PCs and laptops that were perfectly able to download the same 10Mb test file without any problem.

I eventually solved the problem, but on the journey, learned some useful information especially from a great helpful guy called Bob Konigsberg with whom I made contact through the ITKnowledgeExchange website.

I have documented the facts here and hope that you might also find the steps interesting, so I will list the steps I took and the final result...

THE PROBLEM DEFINED

If I try to download a big file or serve a largish page locally from my web server to my development PC over HTTP using any browser I am experiencing a random freeze.

Example:-
I try to download a 5Mb zip or mp3 file via HTTP from my server to my problem desktop PC.
I enter the http address in the browser, I am then offered the open or save window...
I select save, the download reaches anything from 5% to 30% complete but then freezes and sits there forever "downloading".

This can happen on any file type including html files, but if the file size is small then it isn’t noticeable as all works OK 95% of the time. Occasionally, I get a blank page served, but if I make a refresh then the page normally renders OK.

Now what makes this weird are the following facts

1 - I am running two servers live and test. The problem is the same on either server
2 - I have 8 other PCs here that do NOT have the same problem accessing the servers.
3 - If On the problem PC I access the same file by simply copying via windows explorer over the network there is no problem.
4 - I have ruled out any hardware problem by swapping the complete HDD into another identical machine but this still fails.
5 - The problem machine has NO trouble accessing any other www servers with HTTP over the internet, only my local servers with http.
6 - I have tried with multiple Browsers with same result.
7 - Compared IE advanced settings and add ons line for line with the 3 month old working version.
8 - Set up a new administrator user on the problem PC but still same problem
9 - As I have 2 domains, I joined the other domain with the problem PC but same problem
- I have run Adaware, AVG reports nothing and I have run registry checks


So in conclusion the problem occurs due to some relationship with http access between my one Problem PC and 2 local servers. Those same servers are currently successfully serving pages to the internet without problems.
I have an old backup copy of my HDD from around 3 months ago and this does NOT have the problem, so whatever has caused this has occurred in the last 3 months. I have uninstalled any software products during this time, but it hasn’t helped.

My own personal theory at this stage is that the problem appears to be related to throughput errors. The bigger the download, the more likely the http protocol locks up. It is as though some parameters have been changed to affect the buffering or something in that area of which I know nothing...

Steps Taken to Analyse and Solve this Niggling Problem

STEP 1
Test to see if this problem is IE7 related or whether it is the same using Firefox.
- Result is that it is not Browser Dependent

STEP 2
Compare the Network settings against the 3 month old copy for these protocols
Client For Microsoft Networks
File and Printer Sharing For Microsoft Networks
QoS Packet Scheduler
Internet Protocol(TCP/IP)

- Result is that all the settings are all 100% the same on both machines. This is not surprising as the Old Working OK version was in fact a clone of the Problem PC made approx 3 Months ago.

STEP 3
Download a copy of the free open source analysis tool called Ethereal and this captures a whole lot of information that is happening at the time the download is happening.

- Result is The Ethereal traces showed the PC was producing packets with an incorrect TCP checksum which would indicate faulty hardware i.e. time to swap out the Ethernet card for a new one and un-install and re-install new network card drivers.

- Unfortunately the result is exactly the same with the different Ethernet card fitted. I am not surprised at this, because one of the tests I did earlier to rule out any hardware failure was to remove the HDD of the problem PC and insert it into another physically identical PC connected to a different network cable and this still displayed the problem.

- I have to conclude that the problem is system software related but I have also ruled out browser dependency...


STEP 4
Run a Disk Check on all Data Sectors
- Result is no errors found

STEP 5
Now Uninstall ALL TCP/IP related network components and re-install

…now this one is a bit tricky. There seems to be no official way to uninstall TCP/IP in Windows XP Pro so I had to complete the following steps: -

1 – Display Properties of the LAN
2 – Highlight Client for Microsoft Network and click Uninstall
3 - Highlight File and Printer Sharing for Microsoft Networks and click Uninstall
4 – Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) cannot be uninstalled, so I followed an unofficial procedure as follows:-

* Boot into Safe mode with networking
* Delete keys Winsock and Winsock2 from the registry
* Edit the nettcpip.inf in c:\Windows/inf file and set the MS_TCPIP.PrimaryInstall Characteristics value from 0xA0 to 0x80
* Open the LAN properties, click on Install, click on have disk, point to the windows/inf directory and Now its possible to uninstall the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP)
* Restart the system into normal mode
* Edit properties of LAN again and then install the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP)
* Reboot Finally for the Last Time

- I also uninstalled IE7, downloaded a fresh copy from Microsoft and Re-installed that.

Result - Bad news is that the same fault persists!


STEP 6
Now time to visit www.sysinternals.com and download the following two free Microsoft tools that offer more detailed analysis of processes going on at the same time.

The first tool is called "TCPView" and gives a lovely indication of network traffic in real time as it happens.

The second tool is called "Process Monitor" and this gives out a huge volume of information for every process that is doing something again in real time. This tool needs a bit of "tuning" to remove unnecessary messages. This is easily achieved by using its rich set of filters e.g. you can right click on any particular process like "iexplorer" and select "include" to display only Internet Explorers activity.

- Result of this allowed me to see the "WriteFile" activity during the download. Now this could be very useful in some situations, but in this case it did not lead me to the answer.
- However, one interesting effect was that while the Process Monitor was running, that in itself improved my problem so that I could download up to 10Mb. Although as soon as I made the file larger (400Mb) I had the same problem again. This was a weird effect but obviously no solution.

STEP 7 - THE SOLUTION
Suddenly thought of trying to restart my machine in Safe Mode with Networking and see if the problem was still there.

- Result was that in Safe Mode the problem disappeared and the downloads worked perfectly.
- This meant it was likely to be a software driver of an application causing the problem. I therefore carried out the following: -

- 1) Create a "GHOST" Disk to Disk Copy of my HDD so I can play around with no risk.
- 2) Restart back into normal mode.
- 3) Go to Add/Remove Programs.
- 4) Work through each program and uninstall every possible candidate making a restart after every 3 uninstalls. Immediately retry the download.

- Using this method I eventually found the troublemaker and cured my PC!!

The culprit? Well this turned out to be Zonealarm version 7.0.362.000 and I wish to God I had started that search in reverse alphabetical order!

So I installed al older version of Zonealarm and that gives no problems. Just to double check, I re-installed version 7.0.362.000 again afterwards and the problem was instantly back.

So Check Point, given the right circumstances your latest version has a bug in it!


Phew!

Pixord P400 IP Camera Review

I have just forked out £220 on a nice looking new fangled IP camera by Pixord, model 400W P.

For those that dont know the difference between an IP Camera and a webcam, the difference is that an IP camera has a network card inside it allowing it to be attached directly to your internet connection and act like a mini computer in its own right with its own video server software running on the camera.

So all you do is set it up and (subject to a decent broadband connection) you can then from any computer in the world, type in the appropriate web URL and be directed straight to the live camera picture.

This makes for a great way to keep an eye on your young kids while someone is babysitting, perhaps your house while on holiday, entertaining your husband on the oil rig or any kind of live surveillance...

Hardware - The Physical bit

Right well I have actually completed all of the above and I can report that the camera itself seems to be well made, easy to fit up and the picture is OK. Only problem I have found physically with the equipment is with the sound. I need to scream like a madman from 2 inches of the body of the camera before it becomes audible to a viewer. I am yet to get to the bottom of this fault.

Software - The Clicking and Typing bit

Now this is a fabulous example of how difficult it is to choose a device by just looking at it or even seeing it in a shop delivering a picture on a screen. The Software Side of any device is just as important and in this case I would argue more important.

I am afraid this is where the device comes crashing down as it is an example of what happens when a company scrimps on or rushes out a bare bones version of supporting software. I have written to the company with my test results an I include the points I have mentioned to them below: -

Detailed Report To Manufacturer Concerning the Equipment

Having now installed and tested the Pixord P-400W IP Camera, I would like to report my findings to you: -

1 - Using the Camera out of the box with the latest version of IE7 with updates is actually not possible unless you first install the components from the provided CD. Obviously this has the drawback that no remote person with the latest IE7 can view your webcam ! This problem is solved only by downloading and installing the latest version of the Firmware from Pixord. This is worrying for the future.

2 - Sound is actually working, but sound volume is virtually zero, unless I scream at the lens on the camera.

3 - I have set up the motion detection option to email me via my own mail server. This seems to work, but all I receive is an email with an attachment of approx 1 second long AVI file. This displays a screen which has captured no motion at all, even though I have walked slowly through the door, past the camera. The motion detection area has been correctly created to cover most of the field of view. I suspect it is behind the action.

4 - The Properties settings of the motion area are just unintelligible. Sensitivity I can understand, although it needs an example i.e. (1) detects a crawling ant where (100) is only triggered by a raging bull. Also how do I understand what values "SAD" and "Motion Vector Threshold" should be set to ?

5 - Also I can’t seem to configure the motion detection. How does it work ? How long can it record for in seconds, before / after motion stopped / what quality to set, how long does the camera need to be standing without motion before the motion trigger is reset etc... ?

6 - On D1 setting, screen freezes repeatedly if there is plenty of movement in the picture, and browser needs to be restarted. This is just as bad on both wireless and cable, although surprisingly better on wireless. It does however drive you crazy. I have to say that this has been improved a bit by the latest firmware upgrade.

7 - If I physically move the camera, massive pixilation occurs, this in itself can be expected, but on one occasion the IP address of the camera was totally lost just by moving the camera 2 feet to my left. I could not discover the camera again, even with the IP-Installer. I switched it on and off numerous times, only way I got it back in the end was to open the saved ip-installer cfg file and make a synchronize. After 1 minute camera re-appeared under its IP address !

8 - Why is there no option to have a detachable resizable screen view so it can be placed conveniently on the screen ?

9 - I can’t work out how I use QuickTime/VLT to be able to view the streaming MPEG4 from the camera instead of the Pixord software. It would be nice to see an example of how to achieve this.

10 - What do these sort of messages mean that are displayed within the software to the end user (see below) what am I supposed to know ?

Note:Alert Message can be set by listen AP
(CGI ex:http://192.168.1.200/alertcfg?action=apply&
alert1_enable=1&alert1_ip=192.168.2.172&alert1_port=2203&alert1_msg=oct03)

11 - I feel like the software package that accompanies this camera/video server is just a bare bones version that barely works. Can you confirm if they are about to release a fully functional software platform to support this hardware properly in the near future, or is this as good as it gets ? I keep looking on the CD thinking and hoping that I have failed to find the real user software that comes with this product !! Unless I have missed a basic point here, it’s safe to say that this product as it stands is less than satisfactory. I would be interested if you could let me know your own experiences with this unit.

Conclusions

This is a frustrating example of a product that could be great if they spent another 3-6 months on perfecting the software side and providing a rich set of facilities through the user interface that would allow you to use the built in capability of the camera.

In a way I dont want to give it back, on the hope that there will be a new firmware release next week that will complete the job and implement all the facilities I mentioned.

However, the stark reality is that having spent £220 I on this combined unit, I know I could buy a stand alone video server and separate camera for the same price that would have been superior.

Anyway, the company, they have described my feedback as "great comments" so I am waiting in anticipation for their technical reply....

Bank Transfer Confirmation ?

Unbelievable really, that we are in the 21st century and still put up with this concept of service.

I am talking about a bank transfer I made a few weeks ago to Belgium. Now because of the type of department it was sent to, it was impossible to get confirmation from them that the bill has actually been paid. If I just left it, I would receive the late payment fine in the post.

So it suddenly dawned on me what a shocking system that is still in place today for making such a transfer. First of all I have to pay £30 for the bank to make the transfer in the first place. Secondly the bank makes the transfer and tells me it could take up to 7 days before it is credited into the account (what is that delay all about?).

But here is the killer blow: - My bank is completely unable to confirm that the money has been received by the receiving bank.

If you think about it, that is quite ridiculous. I have just coughed up £30 and they cant even confirm the cash has been received !! Its a joke and none of us ever complain about such an archaic system.

I insisted I wanted a confirmation, so after half an hour on the phone I am told the best they can do is send a "Swift" message to the other bank to ask for confirmation of receipt. I must then phone the bank back after 7 yes seven working days to find out the answer. I phoned yesterday, 10 days later, only to be told they still havent heard, so phone back again next week some time.

Isnt that a pathetic way to operate ? I can get an auto receipt of an email anywhere in the world, but transfer a massive sum of cash and nothing can be done.

This is in fact all UK banks that operate like this, its not just a one off....

ATOM and understanding the Universe

...The ATOM was the name of the BBC documentary three part series that concluded the other evening.

Am I alone in being absolutely mesmorized by the facts, theories, mathematics and conclusions that were drawn by this series, the trouble was that I had no idea what they were talking about most of the time. With a vocabulary of words including Quantum, Electron, Mass Energy etc... I was eventually left with this less technical example of how to think of it below: -

Example of how to understand the Universe
In order to understand the universe, all I had to do was undestand their simple analogy which was to stick a cat in a box facing the prospect of being poisoned with a cyanide contraption. While you dont raise the lid of the box, the cyanide contraption is "deciding whether to activate of not" so the cat would be both in great health AND dead from the cyanide at the same time. However, as soon as I lifted the lid, either the poisoning would have taken place or not, so only one would then be true.

I am not making this up by the way. It is real and called Schrödinger's cat.

Anyway, with this and other ideas such as, ...we are living in one of an infinite number of parallel universes with an infinite number of myselves (thats not a word I use often) typing random keys etc, its a wonder the churches are not full of people that would much rather believe in the less farfetched idea of an all powerful being that makes it all OK in the end.

Late Night Poker Online with Ninjas

...I'm sorry but I cannot help conclude that this late night online poker session is nothing more than a software controlled scam.

...lets put to oneside that I have just lost $8 to a "bot" (Software Robot pretending to be a player at the table and defined by a fellow human player as a "short stack ninja") and concentrate instead on the way the cards seem to unfold....

Now its my ever growing belief that although the cards may well not favour any particular player, it seems to me that a couple of other software tricks may be being employed.

So far I have identified two distinct traits that appear to be in force.

The Heartstopper - This is designed to draw you into playing more and more hands. Idenified by when you fold a hand that perhaps could have been played, the ensuing flop far too regularly reveals you would have made a fantastic hand had you stayed in.

Sexing Up The Flop - This makes Alistair Cambell's exploits seem like Enid Blyton at work. As the name suggests the hands are often too outrageously good at the same time. I sat down yesterday, on my third hand I was dealt AK suited. I naturally raised the stakes. Both other players went with me and we ended up "all in" The final hands revealed the other players actually had Pocket Aces and Pocket Kings. Three giant hands all at the same time !

Of course its obvious what the effect is on the value of the cut taken by the house on these huge pots. I know it sounds cynical, but you have to be a regular player to see what I mean. You get a feel for the chances, if you watch TV poker or play against friends with a real deck of cards in the real world, those hands just dont happen that often.

The thing is it would be so hard to prove it was going on. It appears there could be a kind of software dial that can be adjusted with devastating results, perhaps distributed across various tables making it impossible to detect.

There is one other unthinkable solution that may explain all of the above... maybe I am a crap player that is being gobbled up by superior skilled players, then in denial of that fact instead go looking for some insane conspiracy theory to balance my own crazy mind that would prefer to whinge endlessly on about it. Hmm, I feel a bout of introspection coming on I will keep you posted....

Google Drives Small Retail Websites to Ebay

Isn’t it time Google recognized that if you have a retail website selling products that are prevalent on the internet, it is not reasonable to expect each product description to be unique.

In fact some manufacturers would take offence if you start to make up your own unique description of each of their products. Consequently, it is not reasonable in that case for Google to decide, based on duplicate content or low back links to send these pages off to supplemental oblivion.

Retailers can make some slight changes to the titles and descriptions as in this attempt to differentiate between the new Jacques Cousteau dvd and original manufacturers description Similar content but Google is still likely to decide that the content is not materially different and your page could slide down to a firey grave...

So is it really fair to expect a retailer to go through this rigmarole to satisfy Google, and doesnt this just lead to retailers resorting to black art techniques, such as participating in affiliate schemes where people make a living out of placing links over the internet to your pages because you are agreeing to pay a 5% commision back to them on every sale ?

All pages from retailers should be properly indexed and shown to users on the basis of Google's normal algorithm of best page wins. Therefore if a smaller retailer puts a lot of effort into their pages, they deserve to be displayed somewhere. Also it is bad for the customer if they only ever get half a dozen big named companies, you know the usual suspects, displayed with no real choice, leaving them with the certain knowledge that there is bound to be a smaller more competitive perhaps helpful, knowledgeable family run business out there but which has been condemned to Supplemental Index.

This is a serious problem that is unfair to smaller businesses and unhelpful to customers and what in the end drives businesses off to become Ebay Shops with all the additional costs involved there, but at least it is a proper fair playing field where customers will be able to search and find ALL products for sale.

I would like to see Google ditch the one size fits all approach to indexing and accept there are exceptions that need to be considered for a more inclusive approach....