Headline FeedsTechNewsWorld Talkback
|
|
See Full Story
T-Mobile and Microsoft susidiary Danger have restored the data Sidekick customers lost when Danger experienced a massive server failure last week. The company announced the news via an online forum used to keep customers apprised of developments. The companies also provided a few sparse details about the meltdowns. The system failure caused data to be lost in both the core database and the backup system, according to Roz Ho, vice president of mobile experiences at Microsoft.
Perceptions regarding the Sidekick data loss fiasco
Posted by: dbb10001 2009-10-26 05:51:03 In reply to: Erika Morphy
Especially among those who lost significant data, I think there's a fair amount of outage outrage among Sidekick-ers. I wanted to add a strategy to reduce your cell bill by around 20 percent for those T-Mobile customers (or even people with other carriers, for that matter) who want aren't satisfied and want to go farther than the discounts, coupons and freebies. I'll cut to the chase: I work in the consumer advocacy division of the company Validas, where we electronically audit and subsequently reduce the average cell bill by 22 percent through our website, http://www.fixmycellbill.com . Put simply, Validas guards against frivolous and unnecessary charges that inflate your cell bill more than it should be for your usage. You can find out for free if fixmycellbill.com can modify your plan to better suit your needs by going to the website.
For more info, check out Validas in the media, most recently on Fox News at http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/consumer/conlaw/lower_cell_phone_bills_072409 .
Good luck to everyone on further reducing those wireless costs.
Dylan
Consumer Advocacy, fixmycellbill.com
For more info, check out Validas in the media, most recently on Fox News at http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/consumer/conlaw/lower_cell_phone_bills_072409 .
Good luck to everyone on further reducing those wireless costs.
Dylan
Consumer Advocacy, fixmycellbill.com
I'm not even sure where to begin.
Posted by: josephmartins 2009-10-15 17:33:20 In reply to: Erika Morphy
The two words that came to mind as I read the article and the comments from the "experts" were sheer ignorance.
I'm appalled that anyone in IT would refer to this as a failure of "the cloud". What, precisely, does that mean? Zip, zero, nada, nothing. Frankly, I don't like the term "cloud" either...it's too broad to be meaningful. But let's not distort reality.
Cloud terminology aside, the Danger catasrophe should compel all of us to re-examine the custodial competency, responsibility and accountability of third party service providers. And that transcends "the cloud".
I'm appalled that anyone in IT would refer to this as a failure of "the cloud". What, precisely, does that mean? Zip, zero, nada, nothing. Frankly, I don't like the term "cloud" either...it's too broad to be meaningful. But let's not distort reality.
Cloud terminology aside, the Danger catasrophe should compel all of us to re-examine the custodial competency, responsibility and accountability of third party service providers. And that transcends "the cloud".
Anyone Who Would Depend On Anyone Else For Backup...
Posted by: Fetrow 2009-10-18 19:55:11 In reply to: josephmartins
Anyone who would depend on anyone else for back-up is an idiot!
Why would you do that? Depending on some external company for a SECONDARY backup is likely a good idea, but if you are not responsible for your own primary back-ups you are an IDIOT!
Back up locally, back up on drives you move off site, then back up on on-line services.
Backing up on ONLY on-line services is just stupid.
Why would you do that? Depending on some external company for a SECONDARY backup is likely a good idea, but if you are not responsible for your own primary back-ups you are an IDIOT!
Back up locally, back up on drives you move off site, then back up on on-line services.
Backing up on ONLY on-line services is just stupid.
