Archive for technology

May
12

Their Days Should be Numbered

Posted by: greg | Comments (0)

Including area code, there are 10 digits to any garden variety telephone number.

Tell that to the folks at Progressive Insurance.

I’m sorry to pick on Progressive, but they’re the most egregious example of what’s been making me cranky lately.

I find that as I get closer to 50 years old (I’ll be 47 this summer), it doesn’t take much to crank up my crank machine.

Progressive, if you’d like to call them, pumps a phone number that defies logic and that makes its own rules for dialing.

1-800-PROGRESSIVE.

The “area code” for purposes of this number is the toll-free 800, thus leaving seven digits to dial a proper, legal phone number.

“Progressive” contains 11 letters.

I think you see where I’m going here.

What the Progressive people want you to do is use the name of their company to better remember their phone number. On the surface, I understand that sentiment.

Two problems.

One, you have to dial four superfluous numbers.

Two, the new “smart” cell phones, like BlackBerries, aren’t so smart.

A traditional telephone keypad contains both numerals and letters; you know—2 is also ABC, 3 is DEF, etc.

But a smart phone doesn’t play that game—which has only been around since the days of WWI, for crying out loud.

The numbers on a smart phone share the same keys as the letters on a QWERTY keypad, a fancy term for a typewriter keypad.

So the 1 is on W, the 2 is on E, etc.

This doesn’t do you any good when the phone number you are meaning to dial isn’t a number at all, but rather a word.

Try dialing 1-800-PROGRESSIVE (forget the 11-digit thing for a moment) with a “smart” phone, if you haven’t committed to memory what number P is, then R, and so on, on a traditional telephone keypad.

Here’s what I want: I want a phone number. Just give me a phone number. I don’t want cute, clever words—just numbers.

Turns out that 1-800-PROGRESSIVE, for example, is 1-800-776-47377483.

See how silly that sounds?


Huh? You’re supposed to dial “dot-com, inc.”, too?

I guess the beef I have isn’t with the notion of using names instead of numbers, in of itself. To be fair, this phenomenon began way before smart phones came out.

My complaint is the abuse of this practice; read: using words that contain more than seven letters!

Like I said, 1-800-PROGRESSIVE is, by far, the worst abuser of this attempt to provide an easy-to-remember phone number.

If you dial all 15 numbers, the phone thinks you’re nuts. It may or may not complete the call after the first 10 digits. Regardless, it’s probably wondering what the hell you’re doing, tapping in 15 freaking numbers for a task that only requires 10.

1-800-FLORIST is nice because it shouts the name and purpose of the company, AND—bonus—it only uses up the allotted seven key punches!

But gradually, companies began fudging—sneaking eight-letter words into their cutesy phone numbers, then nine.

Progressive takes the cake, with 11.

Still, I prefer numbers only. OR, a compromise: announce the cutesy number (for radio spots, for example), then repeat it in numerical form.

“Call 1-800-FLORIST; that’s 1-800-356-7478!”

Printed forms of the cutesy numbers sometimes will include both alphabetical and numerical versions. God bless those people who provide that.

Just thought I’d share that with you.

Categories : Enotes, society, technology
Comments (0)
Nov
10

Phoney Baloney

Posted by: greg | Comments (0)

First, it was that you couldn’t get a human being on the phone when you called (insert company). It’s still that way, of course, but now I have a new beef.

You can’t even get a human being on the phone—when YOU’RE the one being called!

I suppose they’re called “robo calls”—the phenomenon of automated systems dialing you with pre-recorded voices on the other end of the line.

Some of these calls are slickly done; they start out sounding like a real person.

Technology has improved. Time was, pre-taped messages sounded, well, pre-taped. These new calls sound like people, because there isn’t that AM radio-like hiss or static.

I’ve been fooled.

I got a call several months ago from some financial planning dude named John Stephens. He sounded very casual and friendly.

“Hi, this is John Stephens,” he said in a manner and tone that suggested that he and I were longtime friends. I actually started to talk to the guy—before finding out that he was no guy but some recording!

This morning I received two such calls—one from someone wanting to know if anyone in the household had diabetes, and a “courtesy” call from CVS pharmacy reminding us of a prescription that needed to be refilled. Both recorded.

But there’s an advantage to these recorded calls: you can hang up on them without feeling guilty.

“John Stephens,” by the way, has called me several times since, but now I don’t fall for his casual, nice guy routine. I’ve even stopped talking back to him.

It’s starting to feel like a “Twilight Zone” episode—millions of phones in this country without people on the other end, both calling us and taking our calls.

How long before these computerized operators start calling each other?

Will there be a day when the computer answering my call at the electric company runs afoul of its software program and dials “John Stephens”?

What a conversation that would be!

I wonder if John fills his scripts at CVS.

Categories : Enotes, society, technology
Comments (0)