Joe Levi

Sorry guys, I'm moving again... moving my blog that is... I tried out BlogEngine.net for some time, and it's just not up to snuff with what WordPress 2.5 can do... so I'm jumping ship.

The new blog address is http://www.JoeLevi.com, the new RSS Feed can be found at http://www.joelevi.com/blog/index.php/feed/

Please update any bookmarks or blogrolls at your earliest convenience... I'll see ya over there!

If you liked this post, please be sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.

"I'm normally not a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me, Superman." -- Homer Simpson

"Feeling unknown and you're all alone, flesh and bone by the telephone. Lift up the receiver, I'll make you a believer. ... Reach out, touch faith." -- Depeche Mode

If you liked this post, please be sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.

1. 12GB MicroSDHC for $180. Need I say more?http://www.memorysuppliers.com/sa12trmimmec.html 
2. Guitar Hero 3 on your Pocket PC: http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonlan/archive/2008/04/10/guitar-hero-3-on-windows-mobile.aspx
3. last.fm radio and scrobbler for your Windows Mobile device: http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonlan/archive/2008/01/10/last-fm-on-windows-mobile.aspx
4. MSN Direct (the same data that feeds your MS S.P.O.T. Watch) now has a Windows Mobile Today Screen app... too bad it only works on Windows Mobile Standard (not Professional, aka "Pocket PC") devices... my HTC Tilt doesn't get any goodness... :(  http://phone.msndirect.com/phonefinder.html
5. CoPilot Live 7 now ties to Live Search for local searching... too bad I can't figure out how to do that! And too bad you can't do voice recognition like you can with the FREE Live Search app from Microsoft... http://www.alk.eu.com/press/Tradeshow_mobileworldcongress.asp
6. How to back up your SMS messages: http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonlan/archive/2007/12/14/need-a-solution-to-backup-your-sms.aspx

If you liked this post, please be sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.

Before I get to the "begging for help" part, let me quickly tell you who I am:

• I'm a Senior Web Developer for a relatively large company. I use Visual Studio 2008, connect to SQL Server 2005, and use IIS6 on Server 2003.

• I own two copies of Visa Ultimate Edition (one for my Tablet PC, one for my Media Center server).

• I've had Windows Mobile devices since I replaced my Newton MessagePad 130 with a Casio Palm Sized PC (and currently have an AT&T Tilt).

• I was an early adopter of the XBOX Original.

• I bought one of the first Zune's to market.

• I use BlogEngine.NET to run my personal blog, and SharePoint 3 for my family portal.

• In short, I'm a Microsoft supporter through and through.

Christmas 2006 I finally talked my wife into replacing our XBOX Original with an XBOX360. We bought it and a handful of games the week before Christmas. Christmas Eve we set it all up. It was dead right out of the box. Technical Support told me to take it back for an exchange, that took 3 days. XBOX360 pretty much ruined Christmas for me that year.

I attended MIX07 and was very grateful that Microsoft sponsored such a cool event, and provided us developers with XBOX360 consoles and games to relax at between sessions and after the block.

At this year's event, MIX08, Microsoft sponsored a Rockband tournament. Wow. I was sold. After I got back from MIX08, before I even got home from the airport, I stopped into my local store and purchased the full Rockband set. I played it once and my family loved it.

Over the next few days my XBOX360 started having problems reading discs. Finally it wouldn't play DVDs at all and when I pop in Rockband my XBOX360 politely tells me that I have to play my game in an XBOX360 console (it tells me this in about 10 languages, just in case I don't get the point). So my XBOX360 has forgotten that it's an XBOX360.

I use my XBOX360 as a Media Center Extender for my Vista Ultimate box in the server closet (yes, I have a server closet in my home), and for the kids to play their DVDs in. Once it stopped reading discs I had to replace it with my old XBOX Original, so now we can't watch any TV that my Media Center has been recording for us, we can't play any games, and I can't unwind by rocking out with Rockband or fragging some Covenant Troops on Halo3 after a hard day of coding.

I called technical support. Yes, it's a hardware error. Yes, my hardware is in the "suspect group" that runs a high risk of getting a "red ring of death." But no, since my hardware failed in a different manner than the red-ringers, I'll cost me $99 for out-of-warranty repair.

I just bought another year's subscription to XBOX Live! for $50. I recently purchased $50 worth of Microsoft Points and used them to download Live Marketplace items that now I can't watch. So I asked for a refund. The first level of technical support couldn't help with that so I asked to speak to a manager. The manager said I'd have to talk to XBOX Live! Support for that, and I asked him to 3-way conference us so he wasn't just "passing the buck." He couldn't do that so I asked to speak with his manager. That manager said in no uncertain terms that "under no condition does Microsoft provide refunds for Live subscriptions, points purchases, or Marketplace downloads, even if the customer does not have an XBOX with which to use them." That floored me so I had him verify that to me 3 times. Further, he stated, "policy does not allow us to offer warranty repair on out-of-warranty consoles" and "policy prohibits waiving the out-of-warranty repair fee."

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to pay to have my XBOX360 repaired. I think Microsoft should foot the bill for that. If Microsoft doesn't want to do that then I need a refund for the $100 bucks that I just sunk into a Live subscription, Points, and Marketplace purchases. I'd also like a refund for the $150+ that I just spend on Rockband that I guess I'll never be able to play again.

After having been burned by a DOA XBOX360 on Christmas Eve, and now being burned immediately after dropping $150 on Rockband, I'm really doubting the XBOX360 hardware and feel this might be a good time to switch away from Microsoft for my gaming console -- and since my Vista Ultimate Media Center decision was based on it being able connect with my XBOX360, maybe that bears switching over to Linux' MythPC Media Center.

Obviously I don't want to throw in the towel with XBOX360, I want to keep my setup the way it is. But it's becoming apparent to me that Microsoft doesn't care about us loyal customers, nor loyal developers, regardless of how much money in subscription services and DRM locked content tied to the console they've invested.

Can you or anyone at Microsoft prove me wrong?

- Joe Levi
   www.JoeLevi.com

Update 4/10/2008, 16:30

I emailed my concern to Major Nelson who asked for my case number, which I provided. A few hours later I got a call from Chad(?) in response to "an escalation to the Vice President's Office".

Good news and bad news and bad news:

Good news: they're willing to refund the $50 for my XBOX Live Gold subscription (which is contrary to what both supervisor Wade and manager Andrew told me last night).

Bad news: they're not willing to refund any remaining (and unused) Microsoft Points (I don't think they're transferable, are they?) nor any recent Live Marketplace purchases (and though I didn't ask, I'm sure they wouldn't have enabled me to move these off the XBOX360 hard drive to, say, a .WMV to watch on my computer), nor for my $150+ purchase of Rockband (according to Andrew).

Bad news: they're not willing to take care of the repair under warranty, or waive the out-of-warranty repair charge.

I illustrated this by saying "so you're saying that Microsoft is more willing to lose $50 right now, plus all future revenue that would have come through accessories, games, Marketplace purchases, and future subscriptions to XBOX Live for a lousy $99?" Yup. Wow.

So I paid the extortion money to be able to repair my console, watch my purchased content, game, and use up my Microsoft Points. Sure, I could have gone to my credit card company and contested the Live and Points purchases, but that would have taken time and effort and may not have worked out in my favor... I feel so dirty... and so much like Microsoft doesn't care and has trapped their customers so they can't leave when they want to. And this is coming from a guy who supports the "all connected" manta of Microsoft.

I guess they have a year to try to win me back. They're off to a really rocky start.

 

If you liked this post, please be sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.

Register.com will charge you, what, $35/year to register a domain name with them. Other domain registrars like GoDaddy are less than $10.

Why everyone doing business with Register.com hasn't jumped ship is entirely beyond me. I jumped years ago.

Today I got an email from register to "get big business email for a small business price."

They say "D. Joseph.Levi@thebiglerfamily.com" beats "joe (at) joelevi.com"

What?! I'm Joe, my website is JoeLevi.com, but for some reason my full name (with a space in it? I didn't think that was legal in a properly formatted email address) at some other domain that I registered for a client beats my "me at my site" address? Really?

Wow.

If you liked this post, please be sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.

It's a story of David versus Goliath, in the most literal sense.

It began with a man named Uzi Nissan who moved to the United States of America in 1976.

Back then, Nissan Motors made a little line of cars under the Datsun name brand. My mom owned and drove a little, yellow "honey bee" when I was a kid.

In 1980, Uzi Nissan started a vehicle repair business that serviced foreign cars, including the Datsun; he called it "Nissan Foreign Car."

In December 1987, Uzi Nissan started an import/export business known as "Nissan International." Nissan Motor was not well known as Nissan, but primarily as Datsun. 

On May 14, 1991, "Nissan Computer Corp." was incorporated in the state of North Carolina. Uzi Nissan was then, and still is now, the company President.  He used "Nissan" as part of his trade name in connection with the sale of computer hardware, computer maintenance, networking, computer training and other consulting services related to computers.

On June 4, 1994, Uzi Nissan registered the domain name "nissan.com" and created a web site to promote computer related products and services on the Internet. (On March 17, 1996 he registered "nissan.net" and began offering ISP and other internet services.)

In July of 1995, he obtained a service mark registration for Nissan and his logo from the State of North Carolina.

In 1999, Nissan Motors decided they wanted to take away Uzi Nissan's domain name and use it for their cars (which were no longer "Datsun's," and had been switched to "Nissan's"). The court battle ensued.

Any other person would have caved under the pressure and financial burden to fight a Goliath like Nissan Motors. Uzi didn't relent, and didn't give up. It was his name, he wasn't using it in an infringing or diluting manner. It shouldn't have mattered... Except that Nissan didn't register the domain name that they wanted before someone else did, and rather than kick themselves and live with it, they decided to try and "steal it" (though the court process) from the rightful owner: Uzi Nissan.

So far, Uzi Nissan is winning the war... he's lost a few battles along the way, and it's probably cost him a fortune to litigate. But we all (domain and website owners everywhere) owe him a debt of gratitude for his work. He's fighting the war for us -- and hopefully setting a precedence that what we have registered legally rightfully belongs to us, and the shortsightedness of anyone (especially big companies) cannot just come in and take it away.

Uzi sums it up best on his site:

We cannot allow this type of corporate terrorism to affect our freedom, where "the the law of the land" becomes solely based on the "law of the jungle" thus affecting every citizen of our great nation.

Public awareness of this unacceptable corporate behavior is crucial to eradicating it and we are asking you to take a stand and make a difference on this issue.

(Permission for use of the "No Nissan Car for Me" graphic granted by Uzi Nissan.)

If you liked this post, please be sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.

I've been getting phone calls from various phone numbers for some time now (ever since my wife and I purchased a new van from a local dealer). It's always a recording that calls and asks you to press some number to get to a warranty representative, and another number to be placed on their do-not-call list.

Every time I've picked the option to be placed their do-no-call list. I still get calls, sometimes 2-3 a day.

Recently I decided on another tactic: talk to a person and go through the whole "do not call" script. The first time I tried I was hung up on immediately.

So today I tried something different.

04/07/2008 in the morning I was called by 954-692-7602

"This is your last follow-up notice and you will not be called again. Press #1 to talk with a representative, press #2 to have your name permanently removed from our call-back list. "

I picked option 1 to talk with a human. Knowing that the last time I opened with "do you have a do-not call list" I was hung up on, I told them I had a 2008 Tesla Roadster. After about 10 seconds of holding why the looked that up, I was hung up on.

04/07/2008 in the afternoon I was called by 702-520-1276

This is a courtesy care notice that your warranty is about to expire, I spoke with "warranty specialist" Melissa Appley (spelled as it sounded to me on the phone)... she said it's a Prussian name. This time I claimed I had a 2004 Honda Insight with "just shy of 50K miles, no problems." I gave her a fictitious name "Joe Picklefudd" at PO Box 184...

She knew I was in "Clearfield" they offer two types of coverage, the main type is new car protection only while it's under the original mfg. warranty... since my (fictitious car) has around 50K miles on it she put me on hold while she got someone else on the line (Courtney). 36,000 miles. "Factory warranty has expired, is everything currently running okay?... two types, new and used, prefer the new cars"small favor on your part "accept or decline over the phone" then transferred me to a warranty specialist (John)

Margaret Escondido was the file that was sent over John said "You don't sound like a Margaret, so let me look up your file..." Apparently I wasn't in there, so I gave him the same information that I'd given Melissa Appley previously. He said "oh, how's Utah?" Good... Where are you guys at? "St. Louis, Missouri."

I was starting to narrow it down

After a bit more discourse it turns out that I'm qualified for an additional 4 years, or up to 100K total mileage (they say Ken "Graff" is my local qualified service center, but any will work as long as they are ASC certified), platinum bumper to bumper, $100 deductible, free towing, 24/hr roadside assistance and rental car, $775/year * 4 = $3,100 pay in full or "Interest free financing with ~$300 down, plus ~$200 monthly."

Can you send me this information so I can read through the fineprint before I agree to it? "We've found that people usually don't respond to those, and when they do it's usually after they need service, so we don't send stuff like that out anymore." Is there someplace I can get that information, like on the web or by fax, or I guess you could read it to me and I could record it..." Yeah, we have a website, it's over oneautowarranty.com..." Which has the following information on their Contact Us page:

Dealer Services
100 Mall Parkway
Wentzville, MO 63385
1-800-649-1856

So, after 20 minutes of being jostled around I asked some questions...

Do you have a do not call list? "I'm sure we do"
Do you have a written policy concerning this list? "I don't know."
Federal law requires that you have and maintain a do not call list and a written policy regarding that list, and that you provide me with a written copy of the policy upon request. Will you provide me with a written copy of this policy? "I'm not in the management side so I can't do that. I can transfer you to customer service and they can take care of that for you." (was transferred)

I asked "Christina" in Customer Service if they have written policy concerning their do-not-call list? "We have gotten that request before and we no not. We don't have a policy because it's in the computer."

Under Federal Law, any company making telephone solicitations must must have a written policy concerning their do-not-call list, and must provide (upon request) a copy of said policy. Are you telling me that you do not have such a policy and cannot or will not provide me with a copy of it? "Hold on while I check."

When Christina came back she asked for my name and mailing address so "that information can be sent" to me. I provided my first name and mailing address and asked when I should expect the letter. "It will be mailed out within 3-5 business days... but it takes 30 to 45 days to be taken off the list." I asked if the 30-45 day waiting period would be covered in the document that they'd send out. "Yes it will. Would you like me to add your name to the list?" I've already submitted my number to the computer. "The computer doesn't work all the time... It doesn't work as well ask a person anyway. It's not as fast." So I gave her the number at which I've been harassed for the last while so she can manually add it to the list.

Will you give me the name and physical mailing address of someone to contact if I don't get that letter in a reasonable amount of time? "No sir." Federal Law requires that you provide me the name and a physical address of that person should I need to contact your company. Are you refusing to give me the information? "No, I'm not refusing to give you anything." Okay, what's the name and address as required by Law? "Sir, I'm not authorized to give out anyone's information but my own. The name and address will be on the letter that you receive." So you're refusing to give me the information over the phone? "Yes, sir, I suppose I am."

She asked if there was anything else she could do for me, I answered that apparently she could not, and we hung up.

So, now I await the letter...

Update 04/09/2008

They called back today from 1-702-520-1208 at 9:32am. No letter yet.

Update 04/11/2008

They called back today from 1-603-214-3656 at 11:58am. This time it was "press 2 to close your file" so I did and got a busy signal. No letter yet.

 

Update 04/24/2008

 

They called back Thursday, April 24, 2008 9:19:13 PM from 760-224-2542.

Update 04/28/2008

I got the promised letter... it's an apology letter confirming that they got a request on 4/7 to remove my name and numbers from their call and/or mail list. Further, that it will take "7-10 business days for the removal process to take affect."

Funny, the request for for them to send me a copy of their written policy regarding the use of their do-no-call list, as required by Federal Law. I'll write back and let them know that their letter wasn't what it needed to be.

It was sent from Stacey R. Scales, Paralegal, Dealer Services, 100 Mall Parkway, Wentzville, Missouri 63385, phone: 1-800-649-1856, fax: 1-800-649-1719.

Update 04/29/2008

I got a postcard from Dealer Services about their services; it was labeled "Final Notice." If only that were true...

Update 04/30/2008 

They called back Wednesday, April 30, 2008 6:49:12 PM from 870-879-2373.

Update 05/02/2008

I wrote back to Stacey R. Scales quoting Federal Law and requesting, this time in writing, their official policy regarding the use of their do-not-call list.

 

If you liked this post, please be sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.

Senator Jones,

First let me commend Utah's Legislature for placing sessions online, and more importantly in a podcast that I can subscribe to and listen to on my way to and from work. This speaks highly of our Legislature and opens the political process to the younger generation, and I thank you and the rest of the Legislature for it.

I have been listening to the Senate Floor Debates of 02/05/2008 and took particular interest in your comments on SB 67.

You stated: "If I own a business and I own the building and I own the parking then the rights of the gun owner would outweigh my rights as a property owner, correct?"

Senator Madsen addressed this in his response, but did not (in my opinion) address the root of argument, that being a Right of one person shouldn't infringe the Right of another, especially when it comes to the ability to defend oneself from injury or death.

You continued: "I feel like this strips so much power and authority away from the property owner. I just don't understand the purpose of this bill." (1) Isn't the property owner stripping the right of their employee/customer to be able to defend themself?

Let me try and explain my interpretation of the purpose of this bill. Based on my impression of your argument, you feel the property owner should be able to prohibit an employee or customer from bringing a weapon for the purpose of self-defense on their property. This seems fine on the surface, but upon closer inspection, this means an employee or customer must leave their means of self-defense at home and leaves them without that protection while traveling to and from work/their place of business. The property owner has effectively disarmed their employee/customer while on public property as well (which is a clear violation of State Law). (2) Should the private property owner's rights extend past their property in this manner?

Furthermore, you concluded that "The rights of the gun owner should not trump the rights of the property owner."

A recent tragedy illustrates my points:

Trolley Square has a policy prohibiting firearms on their property. It was one individual brought a concealed firearm on their property that was instrumental in ending a killing spree. He was an off-duty police officer that willfully violated the property owner's rights and posted notification by bringing his firearm onto their property.

Why weren't charges filed against him? Why wasn't he disciplined for violating private property rights? Because he's a cop and it's his job to protect us? Is that the responsibility of police officers?

(3) Are we going to hold law enforcement agencies responsible and liable for protection of the individual?

(4) Doesn't my "job" of husband and father require that I protect myself and my family should need arise? (Hopefully that need never does arise.)

Since courts have held that the police aren't responsible or liable for the protection of the individual, if a property owner removes my right and obligation to defend myself and my family, (5) are you advocating that you're going to hold the private property owner responsible and liable?

If so:

• (6) Would you be willing to introduce and support a bill that would require any private property owner having a policy prohibiting a means (or device) for self-defense (including, but not limited to firearms) be liable for any injury or death sustained where the employee/customer (or their surviving family) felt that absent said policy the employee/customer would have been able to defend themself (both while in transit to/from and while on said property)? (6a) If not, please explain why the property owner should not carry liability for their actions/policy.
• (7) Would you be willing to introduce and support a provision to such a bill requiring a private property owner to post a bond to cover any damages caused to any individual while in transit to/from and while on said property?
• (8) Would you be willing author and support an modification to the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America that would change the wording thereof to be "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed (except by private property owners)."? (8a) If not, upon which legal grounds do you base your contention that a property owner can infringe on the people's right to keep their arms?
• (9) We already require government agencies to provide secure storage facilities for their employees/"customers" for areas where firearms (and other self-defense weapons) are prohibited, why shouldn't private property owners be required to provide identical facilities when they make the same prohibitions?

I await your numbered responses to the several questions above.

With respect,

Joe Levi

If you liked this post, please be sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.

First of all, I really don't like MSIE7's rendering mode, but it is better than that of MSIE6.

MSIE8 (Beta 1) is expected to ship in "standards mode" by default, in other words, "not compatible with MSIE7 pages mode." That could be a problem.

I use Yahoo!'s YUI CSS libraries to "zero out" all the discrepancies between browsers so I have a clean slate on which to build. Most of the time it works pretty well -- until MSIE8.

Even in "standards mode" MSIE8 renders my pages MUCH differently than MSIE7, Firefox 2/3, and Safari 3. Why? No idea yet. In the meantime, here's how to make your pages load the same way in MSIE8 as they did in MSIE7.

Add the following meta tag to your header:

<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=7" />

Common Name	Compatibility Mode Value
"Quirks" Mode	IE=5
IE7 Mode	IE=7
IE8 Standards Mode	IE=8
Always Use Latest Mode	IE=edge

Of course that's not the "fix" but it will get you by until you can get to the root of the problem.

You can thank me later.

If you liked this post, please be sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.

Recently we started getting the following error message on our ASP.NET 2.0 web application running on IIS6.

• Exception type:
  • CryptographicException
• Exception message:
  • Padding is invalid and cannot be removed.
• Stack trace:
  • at System.Security.Cryptography.RijndaelManagedTransform.DecryptData(Byte[] inputBuffer, Int32 inputOffset, Int32 inputCount, Byte[]& outputBuffer, Int32 outputOffset, PaddingMode paddingMode, Boolean fLast)
  • at System.Security.Cryptography.RijndaelManagedTransform.TransformFinalBlock(Byte[] inputBuffer, Int32 inputOffset, Int32 inputCount)
  • at System.Security.Cryptography.CryptoStream.FlushFinalBlock()
  • at System.Web.Configuration.MachineKeySection.EncryptOrDecryptData(Boolean fEncrypt, Byte[] buf, Byte[] modifier, Int32 start, Int32 length, Boolean useValidationSymAlgo)
  • at System.Web.UI.Page.DecryptString(String s)
  • [...]

The application provides forms authentication as the login mechanism for the end-user.

Apparently, whilst tuning the IIS settings for the application's App Pool (we forgot to set the max CPU use) we inadvertently turned on Web Garden and increased the "Max number of worker processes" from 1 (default) to 2.

Doing this created an unhandled problem, forms authentication uses the worker process to create an encrypted login chunk in the site's cookie. The encryption is specific to the worker process (even if it's on the same box). Therefore, if your user logs in using one worker process, then is shifted to another worker process, their login (as stored in the cookie) is invalid and they are prompted with to re-authenticate (which will be valid until they are shifted from that worker process to another).

There are ways to handle this, of course, so the user can hop between worker processes (or even entirely different servers) and still maintain a valid, authenticated session. But for us, we just set the worker processes back to 1 and restarted the app pool and all was well.

You can thank me later.

If you liked this post, please be sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.