IMAGE: CHRISTINA ASCANI/MASHABLE

View the original story here.

Its not like these are things you need to have a major in AI to know; and the fact, I did a spot check of all the outlets that announced this ‘great event’, and with each one the commentators seemed to know more about the Turing test, and other problems with this story, then the writers.

Come on guys, I know you have to rush a story out to beat everyone, but at LEAST go back later and check your facts, or read the comments and update your story.

Nice Custom Pebble from reddit.com/user/Exhumed

But I said they stumbled.  How? They have a good watch and a good start with an ad campaign. They made business decisions that basically made the watch appealing to only a very small segment of the population.  First the watch has everything but the kitchen sink making it costly. What is great about the Pebble is how simple it is. In fact many Pebble users customize the watch with decal surfaces and nice watch bands.  Second they made a very odd decision to have the watch only work with a few (two at the time of this writing) devices instead of allowing it to work with any modern device. Crazy.  I just do not understand.

There is no technical reason it cannot work with other Android devices even if some features might not work. Instead it was a business decision to only support one phone and one tablet. What I was expecting to happen was the Gear would be released with basic functionality across any Android device with a modern OS version, Samsung devices would have extended features, and new devices would have even more extended features.  This would allow for the greatest market uptake as well as encourage people to make Samsung devices their next device. Also, I would have made my entry device at least at the $200 price point again to capture as much as the market as possible; and that could have been accomplished be removing some of what many consider unneeded features.  I was excited to get the Samsung Gear, now I’ve lost interest in getting one.  Instead, I’m looking forward to what is going to come out next.

So here we have this market that Pebble has already proven and have plenty of copy cats coming out.  Now we hear Google is pushing hard to get a watch out.  Perhaps to beat out Apples iWatch and get a few people to jump from Apple to Android.  It could happen.  The difference between an iPhone and a good Android is not that great anymore.  Heck, the fact the Pebble did not work well with the iPhone was the tipping point for me to jump ship off iPhone. Google and Apple are not the only ones who will enter the smart watch game; Sony has been here before and even Qualcomm has a watch coming out called that Qoq, but here is the Question; of these big player’s, who is going to create a good simple watch that can work with ANY device like the Pebble.  I already know the iWatch will only work with iPhones and iPads, but will Google’s watch work with a iOS devices?  Will Google try to pack the kitchen sink like Samsung? Will they create good adverts like Samsung and I’m sure Apple, or will they have a bunch of dancing fools like Microsoft and try to push a watch with 10 extra unneeded features driving up the price? I’m thinking given Google propensity for simplicity that will not happen, but you never know. However, Samsung’s poor business decisions have left open the door, who of the major players is going to walk through?

So out comes this article  month back on how EA is thinking of putting out an offline mode.  I read the post and though, ok, lets see when they do it.  Later on I returned back to this post and read what I though was a really wonderful comment from Casey Reece on Penny Arcade.  This comment sums up my feelings on SC and why I just cannot bring myself to give EA a penny for this game.

Why this entire episode has been so vile is that EA essentially took a series that had never before had a bad entry in it; and then used it to redefine the very concept of a “bad entry.”

This would be the same if Nintendo released a 2-D side-scrolling Mario game in 1999 that controlled horribly. When it decided to actually be recognized by the console.

Every Sim City game from the first onwards showed such ambition and such love, that those who loved it (rightly) in return were always rewarded. This is a series that has built up nearly a quarter century of good associations, good press, and good feelings. It was a staple in gaming that stood above the concerns of most games (do they work, does it control well, and will you still enjoy it in a year), and delivered on our expectations time and time again. The jump in conceptualization between the first and second Sim Cities was in essence a complete rebirth. The third Sim City then took everything the second did (and much, much more) and polished it even further.

The fourth in the series was an amalgamation of everything that everybody ever wanted in a Sim City game, period. It just nailed it. And nailed it so hard, that they didn’t even consider creating a new one for over a decade.

Until they did. And the concepts for the new Sim City were absolutely worthy of the title. Even so far as to actually justify just naming it “Sim City” and not having to do the “5” afterwards – because that is how large the ambition was with this title.

The idea that every Sim was individually counted – that your factories produced actual goods you could track and watch move throughout your city – that the graphical interface and the statistics (graphs) interface had melded together into a more organic, living, and real entity. This, alongside your map and commerce being directly relate-able to other online Sim City players gave the promise and potential of this Sim City title an absolutely star-bound voyage. And Sim City games were always great – they always came through – and they always rocked the house with whatever it is they tried to accomplish.

Except for this one.

But not only that – this one got things wrong that even the first Sim City got right. Actual balance between commerce, industry, and residential. That the third Sim City nailed; how to get the proper Sims to the proper situations (fire department, police, etc. – they didn’t have robbers doing stick ups right next to the police station – not even in the first).

Then, it turns out, the entire “advanced” engine which is having so many difficulties with acting legit is because the actual “advanced” engine was a lie. It could track a few thousand of your Sims, and after that, everything was made up. The very anti-thesis to what makes a Sim City game.

Even if you got some of the world’s most creative minds in the same room, they couldn’t have possibly planned a better screw-up of one of video-gaming’s most classic franchises. What had always stood as the absolute proof of all good that could be accomplished with and through games was essentially shot dead in a debacle of being unable to connect – and then unable to get a refund. The good will of a quarter century took EA essentially one month to devastate, blow-up, and then salt into the earth forever more.

And now they’re coming out with a game that supposedly is the actual game they promised in the first place? How is that even possible? The entire game was a lie to begin with – did they now manage to actually build the engine they promised and failed to deliver after how many years in production – now just after a few months? Promising to bring in features that should have never been removed – and then having the absolute gull to ask money for it?

That upgrade should be absolutely free. To have the nerve to release an absolutely ruined product, and then when you’re on the verge of (supposedly) correcting your mistake, they ask everyone to pay for it again?

Are they serious? Have they no idea how much bad-will they’ve brought upon themselves with this train-wreck from the start? Are they really that callous? That stupid?

Of course. It’s EA. America’s worst voted company two years running, and, from what they’re showing, at least a few years more.

{Update:  According to TC, they are NOT going to end it. In fact, there is to be more!  Ug

“Scroogled will go on as long as Google keeps Scroogling people. We know Google doesn’t like it when the facts come out. Chapter two of the consumer education campaign has shown people care about their privacy. More than 3.5 million people visited scroogled.com, and nearly 115,000 people signed a petition asking Google to stop going through their Gmail. Stay tuned for the next chapter.”

If you have not seen them already, its a set of really ‘forced’ adverts where some clueless person is upset that Google is using keywords to fear monger gmail users because they will show adverts based on their email content.  So what?  Remember, if you are not paying for the product, you are the product. Aside from them looking for an issue that is not really there, and doing a poor job of it, it smells of desperation. To invent a word like ‘scroogled’ (who came up with that?) and suddenly its something you need to avoid is pretty weak.  Worse, does not say why you should use the recommended alternative, Outlook.  The funny thing is; Outlook is 100 times more powerful then gmail is.  If they simply had a commercial pointing that out, they would get further.

So this has been on my rant list for awhile and then this pops up on VentureBeat; Microsoft is to kill the Scroogled campaign.  About time. I guess I should give them credit for realizing these adverts are not working, but will they take a lesson from this?  That basically if you want us to buy/use your service, tell us why its better.  No flush, no fear mongering.  Say what you want about Apple (I’m not exactly the biggest fan boy out there as I type this on my PC) but they understand marketing.  When they put a commercial together, its clean and clear.  Here is what we have, here is what it can do for you.  Simple.  Presented in a clear and pleasant manner.   One would think people would have figured that out by now.

If you want to watch one of these painful adverts, check it out… Or not.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WIluNt0mvA

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=63u-RG-31B0

It all started with a roundtrip ticket I bought for a friend’s wedding to fly from SFO to DFW for Oct.1 and returning Oct. 15. Twenty four hours before I was scheduled to fly, I received an email welcoming me to Virgin America’s Travel Bank stating I now had an airline credit. Alerted and confused, I called right away to identify the status of my flight. Was my flight cancelled? Is Virgin giving me credit because I fly often? Is Branson rewarding us because he has too much money? What?

Upon connecting to a live Virgin representative, I was told that I cancelled my ticket online and that this credit was for my ticket price minus a $100 cancellation fee. Calmly I expressed that this cancellation was not from me and had to be an error on their system. I stated all was good, they could take the credit back, I would show up to SFO and fly like planned. Oh how naive I am to think it would ever be that simple.

I was told by the rep that if I wanted to take my original flight, I would have to pay the current fare price that I could use my credit toward. WTF!? I went pale as a flood of emotions swept over me. I politely asked the young lady to transfer me to her supervisor in hope of solving the issue.

So after speaking to a few supervisors, this is what I learned about Virgin America I didn’t know before. First, all Virgin supervisors as I was told have the same power so don’t waste time asking to speak to someone higher than the first one you get. Second, all that is needed to cancel a flight is a name and confirmation number. Third, it is Virgin’s policy that a ticket cancelled through the web can not be reinstated ever it seems. Fourth, I was informed that it was possible that I accidentally hit the Cancel Flight button instead of Flight Status because those buttons are side by side (there is smart UI) and that sometimes this is what happens. It was when I heard this that I got really upset. Now I know I didn’t hit this button accidentally because I never went to the website, but the fact that the supervisor told me this happens made me think of all the people that Virgin has screwed over with this UI design choice and current policy regarding web cancellations. Have they never heard of software glitches or big thumbs and small screens?

So after 45 minutes the final supervisor I spoke with was still unable to put me on my original flight but did refund the cancellation fee. She also booked me a new ticket for Oct. 10 – Oct.16 that I used my credit towards. Yeah I lost some money and I wouldn’t be there the whole time I originally planned, but these flying complications hardly ever happen to me so why not chalk it up to ‘my turn now’. I really could tell they wanted to help me, but policy is policy. I let the supervisor know that although I was not happy with the outcome, that her empathetic attitude was what changed my mind from never flying Virgin again and our relationship could continue, until today.

So 24 hours before my rescheduled flight, I received an email stating I had a Virgin credit and when I called to inquire again I was told my ticket had been cancelled online. Now this has to be a problem with their system as I changed my passwords since our last encounter as a precaution and I definitely am not canceling my tickets to then call and beg to get put back on the flight. Another indicator to call the IT department is that I got the cancellation email less than one minute before getting a 24 hour checkin reminder.

When I called this time I had a very different experience. I shared again with a supervisor that this has now happened twice to me and offered to forward the emails I received from Virgin America’s automated system, but she really didn’t seem to care. She simply restated Virgin’s policies and told me that I must have cancelled online because she has never heard of this problem before with their website and she would not credit my cancellation fee. She stated that was a courtesy last time and that she would not approve that this time. I will spare the rest of the details as this has become quite the tirade, but no customer service here. I recorded the conversation with the second supervisor and plan to post that once I edit out the on hold time. This is not right to do to someone, especially twice.

As the techie airline one would think Virgin would be sensitive to the fact that automated systems can mess up.  Thank you readers for letting me vent and be warned. Virgin has some policies in place that make it very challenging for both the customer and powerless supervisor to find the win/win. Heaven help you if you ever run into a problem that is labeled ‘web’ for the Virgin America customer service.

*UPDATE TO THIS POST

Seems that I just can’t stay mad at Virgin America for too long. Sure I had to book a ticket on Delta to get to my destination, but shortly after this post I was contacted by a Virgin representative asking me to explain the details of my problem. After further investigation on their part, I was informed that the web cancellations took place from a masked IP. WTF?! I greatly appreciate those at Virgin America that took time to look into this and hope they do forgive my rant about the quality of their online system. I didn’t realize I had someone out to get me via my airline travel. Thanks again Virgin America, see you soon!

And actually, these are good questions to ask despite John Gruber inference that I should be writing disclaimers in my headlines.  Sigh.  Moving on, these are pretty stark numbers and so more information on how they came up with it, where they looking at traffic or application load counts, or could there have been anything else that would make these numbers so stark?

I followed up with Snappli with these points (especially the question about traffic vs app load events) and they responded.

We were keen to provide visibility into actual usage rather than anecdotal evidence. To that end, we were looking to see if we could detect any anonymized traffic from the Apple Maps app on any given day. We were not looking at the total amount of data used by the app. Our goal was to measure popularity, not how data hungry the app was, nor the impact of vector graphics.

Some of you have asked us whether we accounted for variability in traffic over days of the week – the answer is yes, we made the effort to look at usage for the five days before and the five days after a day zero (with day zero being the day each user updated to iOS 6).

Good enough?  Seems data flow has nothing do with it according to Snappli. Still not convinced?  Well lets add to that some data from Google Surveys.

According to Google Surveys, it looks like a 12% drop in usage.  Depending on how you interpret the Snappli data, this does not line up with the drop from 1 in 4 to 1 in 25, but still, significant although at a sample of 1000 and further bia possibility must be questioned since this data is based on people who found the survey and took it.  So I’m not going to put as much faith in the Google data, however, the fact that this survey is also indicated a measurable drop in usage make me more confident that the general point; Map is so bad people are not using it; holds true.

This story has taken a live of its own and I’m sure Snappli will be pressured to provide more raw data to back up their assertions.  Here is a question though, can Google get these numbers as well?  They must know if there has been a raise in the amount of calls from their web based app vs native app.

A company called Snappli, which just launched a few weeks ago (see coverage here and here) is a free mobile app that helps users stay within their mobile data limits by compressing and optimizing mobile data as well as video — a huge mobile data suck. Today they pulled some pretty interesting data around Google/Apple Maps, based on data from Snappli users in the UK and US.

My projects are normally not that complicated, and I publish to the web, so my requirements are more consumer then pro at the moment.  For those of you who have use FCP in the past and have looked at FCPX already know there is a laundry list of issues and shortcomings with Pro.  So much so that its really inaccurate to even call this Final Cut Pro.  It really should be called iMovie Pro.  That being said, if you are a consumer/amateur video producer, this could be a good fit. The snapping features is great, love the background processing and in general, its easier for a non-editors to use. Except for one thing… The Bloody Thing CRASHES!!!   A lot.  And its not like I have some old macbook I’m running this on either. My MacBook Pro is pretty beefy with maxed out RAM. (full disclosure, I’m still a PC Tablet Boy for everything else.)

I think once they get some of the bugs out of this thing, and believe me, there are a number, then we could have a nice product here.  But that’s not the end of my complaints.

One other thing that really annoys me in FCPX is that sooo much has been cut from the product that its rendered only useful for the consumer.  Heck, you have to pay extra just to re-size the a movie down.  Are you kidding me?  Uploads to vimeo?  Nope, not quite working yet.   Sigh…

For the time being, I’m switching over to either Avid or Premier.  Again, since I do not have heavy video production demands, I may go Premier.  However, will I ever switch back?  We’ll see.

I think its pretty clear Apple has decided to drop the Professional Video editing market all together and focus just on the consumer and perhaps prosumer market instead.  This will allow it to build a lighter weight program with optional features to keep the costs and hardware demand down. From a business perspective, this might make sense, but I know one thing, I would take a very care look if I was to trust anything on the professional level with Mac in the future.

So what triggered all this was a post I read on arstechnica.com.  If you have not already made a decision on FCP and do video editing, you may want to give this a read and gauge at what level of video capability you need.  Just home movies or little side projects? You should be fine.  Anything else, you may want to look elsewhere.

Due to unexpected customer demand for this item, our inventory was depleted prior to your order being processed so we are unable to fulfill this item as requested. Consequently, we have canceled your order and you will not be billed for this amount.

Great.  If I would have known this, I could have tried to hit one of the brick and mortar stores to get one, but I’m sure by now they are all gone.  Some more are suppose to be released this week, but again, I expect those with more flexible time then me will scoop them all.  Man.. Even when they cut the prices, things just do not work out for HP/Palm.  Rumor that more will be in stores tomorrow (wed).  I’ll give it one more try then.