But, aside from Google+’s features and functions which are compelling even as it is still in beta, I think the whole “plus” idea as a branding element is ill-conceived. It presents too many marketing challenges considering how social media memes are often integrated into the lives and conversations of users. Google needs a new social dialect with terminology that easily sets them apart.

The minuses on the plus:

• The plus sign is harder to type. Facebook is often abbreviated FB. G+ requires more finger contortions.
• The plus sign is an iconic cue for adding items (in fact, you’ll see it used on Google+ as a prefix, such as “+ Add more people” when you’re sharing a post). Peppering the interface with plus signs — which is your logo if you’re Google+ — may be confusing.
• Like something? Google+ gives you a “+1″ button. People won’t say “I plus-one’d it on Google Plus”, will they? That seems clunky. If anything, they’ll say, “I ‘plussed’ it.” (Google+ may eventually have to simplify their version of the Like button with just a simple plus sign dropping the “1″). Using your logo element here would be akin to Facebook, instead of its thumbs-up Like icon, using an “F” button.  Imagine if people F’d this or F’d that.  That would be pretty F’d up.  People like Like and I suspect +1 is going to be hard to adopt.
• Compared to the very colloquial “Facebook me”, “friend me”, “Google it”, “tweet”, etc., what’s the Google+ verb?
• The girl at the bar who asks, “Google me” — is she suggesting a background check via the Google search engine or is that a “friend” request on Google+? What about some other Google+ themes? “Circle me” conjures images of prey. However, “huddle with me” is awesome, especially if she’s cute.
• Because of this, we can expect people to muddle terms from other service brands (e.g., “I ‘Liked’ it on Google+” or perhaps even “I sent a tweet on Google+”). Unfortunately, this dilutes its brand identity.

On the plus side, I give Google+ an A for taking away Facebook market share. But the ‘+’ adds up to a big G-minus for marketing.

File: flac2mp3.ps1


$flac = "c:\program files\flac\flac"
$lame = "c:\program files\lame\lame"
$tmp = "flac2mp3temp.wav"

foreach ($f in gci *.flac) {
    $f.name -match "(^.+)\..+"
    $fn = $matches[1]
    & $flac -d "$f" -o $tmp
    & $lame -b 320 -h -m s $tmp "$fn.mp3"
    remove-item $tmp
}


I’ve been fuming about a recent decision by Netflix to remove a convenient feature of its DVD “queue” management on streaming-enabled devices. Netflix, the company that sends DVDs to my mailbox and streams movies over the Internet, recently revealed plans to eliminate the ability to put a disc-based movie into the mail-order DVD queue. This appears as a button next to movie titles on Netflix streaming apps and devices. The company cites this as a move to make the interface simpler for customers. Was that feature really so complicated? I don’t buy it. There’s something more strategic going and I think I have it all figured out…

While Netflix has been upfront about their long range goal of boosting their streaming business, the number of titles available for instant streaming has been lackluster, necessitating physical discs as the only way to see recent and popular movies. This is one of the biggest gripes customers have about this darling movie membership company that knocked the block off of Blockbuster. Now, it seems that every painful move Netflix makes to get out of the mail-order DVD business is not counter-balanced by any benefit with the streaming side of their venture. This has many subscribers upset, including this one.

But how could such a brilliant company, which only a year ago could do no wrong by customers, begin to make exceeding questionable and, frankly, downright bone-headed business decisions that are enraging a loyal customer base? After all, the company managed to attract over 20 million customers — a testament to many things it does right. I recall singing its praises after dropping Blockbuster when it was clear that Netflix was the better choice. It had a larger disc selection, lower prices, and faster turn-around time on shipping. But now, with its streaming focus, many are really starting to wonder.

It was only a few months ago when they increased pricing on DVD plans while introducing a low-cost streaming-only plan. This forced many customers to opt for plans that offered fewer DVDs at one time, or pay more for the same number of discs.  For customers like me who used to manage two discs at a time, I’ve selected the one-disc plan to keep my cost the same.  That’s moving the needle on my happy meter in the wrong direction.

While waiting for the US Postal Service to shuttle discs between Netflix and my mailbox, I’m scouring their web site for movies I can place into my “Instant Queue”. Sometimes I use my web browser on my computer. But more often than not, I’m on my iPhone using the Netflix app. Yet, when I can’t view an instant title I want, I have to put it into the DVD queue. Only now that extremely convenient ability is going away for reasons Netflix dubiously claims is confounding to customers. And I’ll have to remember to do this next time I get back on my computer, which means it probably won’t happen.

In other words, not only did they force me to lower my membership plan to receive fewer discs, but now the very act of getting discs lined up for shipment becomes a rarity.

This change in behavior — or rather, the pain of it — is exactly what Netflix appears to be aiming for as they surreptitiously cause customers to loathe anything having to do with physical DVDs by making it costly, inconvenient, and tedious.  Crazy!

It makes no sense to invest into taking away a feature. As an Internet application developer, I know what this entails. A team of programmers at Netflix will have to go into the software code and make changes to eliminate the “Add Disc to DVD Queue” feature. For example, the Netflix app for Apple devices will have to be changed and resubmitted through the iTunes App Store and redistributed to all iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch users. The firmware (software that resides in hardware devices) for Netflix-enabled game consoles, Blu-ray players, and TVs will have to be changed and offered as updates (perhaps mandatory, as I would not put past Netflix to do). It takes time, developers, and salaries to make that kind of backwards change.

So why would this successful company go out of its way by investing money into changing its software and firmware only to further frustrate customers and possibly lose them? Are they truly crazy? Or maybe crazy like a fox…

This may be total conjecture on my part, as I have no insight into the movie industry. But I suspect that Netflix has basically had it with Hollywood, specifically the impossible wheelings and dealings with the movie companies to release their titles quickly for streaming. Why should the distributors consider that? The only business models they know are syndicating movies through brick-and-mortar theaters, the sale of DVDs, and whatever arrangements they have with the DVD rental services like Netflix, RedBox, etc. And that’s worked just fine for years. How long had Blockbuster been doing that? You’re not going to see titles available for streaming until the distributors are satisfied that they’re not going to make as much on the physical sale of DVDs via retail.

This is why you mostly see obscure streaming titles from smaller (think: indie) distributors, or very old titles that don’t have much appeal to buyers (think: bargain DVD bin at Walmart). George Lucas is not going to be happy with a few pennies from streaming The Empire Strikes Back when there is a chance you might just go out and buy the DVD. And that’s why, I believe, you don’t see hugely popular titles available in instant format. If the movie studios made all their titles available for instant streaming (after their run at the theaters has lapsed, of course) they would see a huge drop in the purchase of DVDs.

Like Netflix, I think most people share a vision of an everything-at-your-fingertips world of entertainment. It’s not farfetched to imagine a time when all you need to do is point and tap (or grab your remote) and you can watch just about any movie instantly. So why would you pay $20 for a DVD to take up space on a shelf when for half the cost of one DVD per month you have every movie whenever you want, on your TV, computer, phone, game console, etc.

Undoubtedly, this vision of a streaming-only world is difficult for Netflix to achieve given legacy distribution models. Streaming eliminates all the hassle and cost of physically handling DVDs which Netflix has to initially buy — lots of them for each title, replace them when they get scratched or lost in the mail, etc. They’ve got mailing centers all over the country. Someone has to staff them and handle shipping, receiving, and all the management related to processing your disc queue.  There must be some kind of pay-per-rental agreement between Netflix and the movie distributor, and so all that has to be logged and accounted for as discs fly in and out.  Even with barcode scanning on the mailers, it’s still clunky.  What a logistical pain.

And let’s not forget, this is not what Netflix envisioned in their business plan. They called themselves Netflix for a reason, not Mailflix.If someone told you that every movie made was available immediately, my guess is you’d prefer that over discs. (And, yes, they would need to address the problem of subtitles and closed captioning).

This next evolution to purely streaming is inevitable, and Netflix realizes this. But the movie industry is in the way. Customers today need DVDs because the streaming titles are abysmal for reasons already given. How do we get to that next level? And this is where, I believe, Netflix is gaming the movie distribution industry.  Unfortunately, it didn’t tell us that we are the pawns in this odd game of chess that will force the industry to change.

By making it harder for their 20 million subscribers to rent DVD discs via mail, that means fewer discs are being purchased by the rental companies,  fewer are being rented, which means fewer royalties are being paid to the distributors. As the movie distributors begin to ache from this decline in revenue, Netflix will show them there is a growing demand for on-demand streaming to take up that loss.  Distributors will cave in to pressure to release newer titles earlier, and hopefully permit popular titles to be streamed (e.g., Star Wars), as the market for owning physical DVDs dwindles.

The only way Netflix can impose the leverage it needs is by effectively strangling the whole system by dropping support for physical DVDs, recognizing it may lose customers in the process. In the long run, that may be worth it. That’s the only way all these crazy, customer-hostile decisions make any sense.

But don’t feel bad for the retail DVD industry. Once the rental companies stop offering DVDs by mail, you could be more inclined to actually buy one for those wonderful bonus features and HD Blu-ray quality. In the end, the benefits might outweigh the negatives many fear today. Perhaps more discs will be sold outright, Netflix will realize huge savings by eliminating mail-based disc processing and have virtually all titles on hand at a lower monthly subscription cost. We might even see the return of the local video rental shop for when you want a cheap DVD rental without having to buy a disc. Sounds like a win-win.

I’m hoping this is the case. However, Netflix could be more transparent with customers rather than making flimsy claims about user interface complexity. They’re dead set on doing what they are going to do anyway, and we ‘re all being taken along for that ride. I’d rather it be a short, bone-jarring ride, than one that drags on forever and is annoying and uncomfortable. So please, Netflix, just come clean with us so we can get it over with faster.

This past summer, after studying favorable reviews of the Samsung LED TV series 7000 and 8000, I decided to get one. I ordered the 8000 Series unit (UN55B8000) with 240Hz refresh rate. It arrived in perfect physical condition and worked great. I was thrilled with the picture quality.

But then, things went terribly wrong …

A Terrible Buzz

Within a day of installation it started to emit a noticeable buzzing sound — not like a normal hum you hear when you put your ear really close to some electronics. That would be fine. No, the distracting din can be easily heard from across the room and competes with the sound from TV programs and movies.

The buzzing is intermittent. Sometimes I’ll turn on the set and it’ll be perfectly quiet. When the unit is working right, it emits no ambient noise at all. But then it will start buzzing for hours before it settles down (or I get exasperated and switch it off). There is no repeatable pattern, and it doesn’t appear to be heat-triggered.

At times, it sounds like a pack of crickets chirping madly behind the unit, and it wavers in intensity for no reason. Sometimes (but not always) it becomes louder as the brightness of the picture increases. It’s at a headache-inducing frequency that just makes you wonder if watching the TV is worth the pain. But something about having just parted with three G’s makes me feel obligated to suffer with it.

Want an LED TV that doesn’t buzz? Check out the LG LED TV!

The Service Calls (Yes, Plural)

As soon as the problem started, I searched the Internet to see if anyone was reporting any problems. But back in August, the 8000 series was newly released so I could not find anything.

I suspected a bad power supply as the noise wasn’t coming from the speakers. (In fact, later I proved this by disconnecting them completely.) So I called 800-SAMSUNG and opened a trouble ticket. After a couple of weeks and finally getting a regional service center to respond, a tech rolled up and replaced all the circuit boards except for the timecode board, which is part of the panel element. We fired up the set and it was perfectly quiet the way it should be.

The tech left, and I went to start reconfiguring the networking on the unit. But within an hour, it started buzzing again!

The gorey guts of the TV splayed out across my living room.

I called the service center back and they said the only thing it could be is the panel itself. So they ordered a new panel. A week or so later, the panel shows up and once again all the circuit boards are pulled off the old panel and installed on the new panel. Only this time when the power was applied, it was buzzing right away.

The service tech postulated that the first panel was bad and was blowing out the power supply boards, which is where the buzzing originates. (Specifically, it’s near two relays close to where the power cord connects to the board). So we ordered another power board and again waited for that part to arrive.

As before, the unit was opened up and the power boards were swapped again. But no difference and I’m not even surprised at this point. Keep in mind, this Frankensteinian result is essentially a completely new unit — new circuit boards, new LED-backlit LCD panel, new everything. Same old buzz.

Let’s Replace The Entire Unit

After three visits and changing out all the guts, the tech conceded and said I should call Samsung and put in a claim for a replacement unit. Now after nearly four months of messing around, a new UN55B8000 will be shipping within the first half of November.

As I contemplated two more weeks of buzzing, I expressed my concern over getting another bad unit. My Samsung Executive Claims representative assured me, “I don’t see that happening because it was manufactured at a different time than the previous unit.”

We’ll see. I’ll update this post when the new unit arrives.

Not Alone Anymore

While waiting, I searched again for trouble reports on the Internet. Only this time I started to find several people reporting very similar experiences. Many indicate going on their second, third, and even fourth replacement units! This has left customers feeling frustrated and hoping that Samsung is aware of the problem.

I am putting this entry into my blog as a magnet in hopes that others will document their problems here. With enough supporting evidence, perhaps Samsung will address the issue and provide a true fix.

If nothing else, I hope these experiences serve as a warning for those considering a Samsung LED TV. You should wait until this problem has been resolved before purchasing one.

The New Unit Arrives

A couple of weeks before the new unit arrived, the old one stopped buzzing and seemed to have cured itself. I was tempted to contact Samsung and cancel the order, but the shipment had already started and due to the intermittent nature of the buzzing, I was not confident that the old unit would stay fixed. But it made me wonder if these TVs need a burn-in period for the electronics to settle in, or something.  Another problem I had with the old unit was that it was having trouble recognizing valid AVI files on an external USB drive.  So I figured it was best to let the replacement happen.

The new unit arrived on November 17.  Just like the older unit, it was perfectly quiet upon startup.  And so far, almost two weeks later, it is still quiet.  Plus, it can see and play the AVI files on the same USB drive that the older unit couldn’t (both units had the latest firmware updates, in case you were wondering).

At this point, the new unit appears to be just fine.

Update: December 8, 2009 – For one day last week, the new unit started to buzz, just like the previous units.  I decided to leave the TV on overnight.  The next morning, the buzzing had stopped.  I haven’t heard it since.

What About Your Experience?

If you have a Samsung LED TV (series 7000 or newer, including models of any screen size) and are experiencing these problems, let us know here. Be sure to indicate your model number. If you have found a remedy or can confirm that newer models, such as the 8500, do not have this problem, shout it out.

You used to be able create shortcuts on the desktop that would directly open a remote folder via FTP with no intervention. With an open FTP folder window, remote file management was a breeze because it acted like a folder on your hard drive. This article shows you how to recover this helpful feature with one simple change.

Drag-and-drop FTP windows are possible using the extended FTP URL syntax that includes a username, optional password, and the server’s address. Example:

ftp://user:pass@ftpsite.com/directory

Unfortunately, giving an extended FTP URL to recent versions of Internet Explorer only displays a listing of the folder in “read-only” mode. You then have to click the Page menu and choose Open FTP Site in Windows Explorer. That fails because IE doesn’t pass forward any user/password credentials in the URL. So then you have to completely retype the URL again. What a drag just to get the old drag and drop mode.

But I found a workaround to preserve the simple behavior we used to enjoy. It works because we completely avoid the web browser. Instead of using Internet Explorer, you use Windows Explorer (the file navigation part of the Windows operating system). To do this, follow these steps:

1. Create a new shortcut on your desktop (right click in the desktop and choose New > Shortcut)
2. In the box that asks for the location of the item, first enter %WinDir%\explorer.exe followed by a space and the extended FTP URL.  e.g.:
   

   %WinDir%\explorer.exe "ftp://user:pass@ftpsite.com/directory"

3. Click Next, type in a name for the shortcut, and click Finish

Open the shortcut. At first, nothing will seem to be happening. After several seconds it should eventually open up the FTP site in a window. For the security conscious, if you leave out the :pass part (the password) it will prompt you to enter a password.

Fixing old FTP shortcuts is is as simple as putting %WinDir%\explorer.exe before the URL. Plus, since this workaround doesn’t involve the web browser, it also works for users who have non-IE browsers installed as their default. Basically, as long as you avoid Internet Explorer and use Windows Explorer itself, the extended FTP URLs are honored.

Notes:

• Put quotes around the FTP URL to avoid Windows File System errors.
• Under Windows 7 (and possibly other versions), including an FTP URL that has a directory component may not work. Omit the directory in the URL. You’ll have to double-click your way into subdirectories after connecting.

A recent NY Times article reveals why some people are leaving Facebook.  In May, I deactivated my Facebook account when the signal-to-noise ratio had clearly gotten out of whack.  Ironically, I found myself back on Twitter which I had left for Facebook when the latter seemed to offer a bit more value.  That was a different time.  Now, Facebook has just gotten altogether too silly with quizzes and games and all the same high-school shenanigans your classmates would have outgrown over the last few decades.  Alas, I’m back on Twitter.

Update: OK, I’m back again on Facebook. They’ve added enough filters now so you can hide all the ridonculous stuff.  Rather than shutting my Facebook, now I can shut your Facebook, ftw.

After getting fed up with network printing problems with HP printers, I wrote down the solution so I wouldn’t forget.