Links

AI Customer Support Devalues Customers And The Company That Adopts It

AI customer support isn’t all that intelligent or supporting

I noticed an article on MacRumors that Apple is getting ready to roll out it’s “AI-powered Support Assistant.” Apparently Apple’s only willing to take the risk with tech support and not customer support. That’s where money might exchange bank accounts.

Shutterstock 2482823939.

This is the way the world is spinning at the moment. My prediction is that companies will ratchet back these cost saving moves but not until the realize what it costs in customer loyalty. We have to go through the suck, before we get to the less suck.

I base that prediciton on my experiences spending the better part of this Summer and past Spring helping clients and a few relatives, some elderly, work to cut back on expenses and take care of some warranty repairs for appliances. (Hint: Ditiching warranty services is one way to cut montly costs.)

Timing is everything. My efforts coincided with several of these companies caught in the process of switching to AI solutions for customer and tech support. To be direct, it was a mess. For me, the customer, and also for the employees left holding the bag on the other end of these crazy corporate strategies.

No one would argue that most customer and technical support systems were in good shape previous to these kind of moves. They were indeed ripe for re-inventing and they have always been easy marks for the bean counters to cut corners.

Chatbots had already begun to proliferate, descended from automated phone trees like some form of inverted evolution that only a sadist could love. No one would ever conclude that they had been intelligently designed. My previous experiences were always hit and miss, but at least I understood that if I followed the steps I could eventually reach someone on a phone or live chat. During these transitons that became nigh on near impossible.

Prior to one of the companies I worked making the switch, it had become obvious that they had abandoned call centers and let their agents work from home. I kid you not, I spent one phone call with a barking dog in the background of whatever small quarters this rep was in, and another with two small children fighting with each other in the background of another call.

Let me give you one example from my recent experience with one company undergoing a transiton to AI tech and customer support.

Sears Home Services

Sears Home Services has been a popular home warranty service for many throughout the years. It’s been apparent for a while that services like these have lost their luster and some have devolved into scams. But for folks of certain generations they were always in the monthly budget. In my experience with one of my clients, prior to their switchover, it worked about as well as it was advertised to work. You made a call, talked with an agent, set up an appointment, a technician arrived to check things out, ordered parts if necessary, rescheduled the appointment, and then came back to effect the repair or replacement.

The first repair I assisted with happened just like I described above. The entire process from first call to final signoff on the repair took 10 days.

The second call not so much.

I guessed things were in trouble when the phone number prominently displayed on the webpage would not yield a method of speaking with an agent, but kept pushing me to their chatbot. The chatbot had limited options that you could select. It did not have a way to enter any request beyond those options. My guess is the company didn’t want customers speaking to an agent.

Undaunted, I did the usual online searching for phone numbers and finally stumbled on to a Reddit thread where users experiencing the same problems were reporting phone numbers that worked. Until they didn’t. It was a cat and mouse game of dialing a phone number before it was changed or taken out of service. That lasted about a week.

Finally I succumbed and scheduled an appointment via the chatbot. That chatbot sure was happy. I was told the support technician would contact me the night before to schedule a more specific appointment window. Things were looking up. That call never came. The morning of the appointment I got a text telling me the appointment was scheduled between 8 and 5pm. In my previous experiences these appointments were scheduled in four hour windows.

On the afternoon of the repair, at 5:30pm I got a phone call from a support person saying he would be their in a half-hour. He showed up 45 minutes later. He diagnosed the issue, said he would order parts and they would be shipped directly to me. This was a change I’ll describe later. He then said he needed to go sit in his truck and work with the system to get the parts ordered and that would take a half-hour or so becuase the system was constantly kicking him out mid-order and he would have to start over.

When he came back to finalize everything for that appointment he reiterated that this new system was screwed up. I told him I wasn’t a fan either. We had a good conversation.

Previously, according to him, each night technicians like him would get a list of their appointments for the next day. They would go to a drop ship pickup location for any parts for that day’s appointments, head out and do the work. Now the system sent parts directly to the address of the repair and required the customer to reschedule the next appointment once the parts arrived. Because customers were not receiving notifications of these part shipments, the parts would just show up, often get returned, delaying the inevitable service.

Most striking in his telling was the fact that he no longer received the next day’s list of appointment the night before. Only the first one for the day. Once that was completed he would receive his next appointment. Again, according to him, the previous system in place for dispatching personnel was pretty good at scheduling the next day’s appointments with minimal travel time between appointments. Now with the new system, he would find himself traveling between appointments, often located far apart, more than he would working the repairs.

To begin to bring this ancedote about this repair to a close, suffice it to say that the entire episode from first call to eventual repair has not yet been completed. It begin on May 20. Once it was determined that the appliance needed to be replaced, not repaired (that took two appointments,) a new one was ordered. Then canceled by Sears Home Repair’s system. Then re-ordered.

On the night before the scheduled delivery I got a call that it would be delivered the next day. That morning I got a call saying the delivery would take place that morning. Ten minutes later I got a call saying that the appliance had not been delivered to the delivery driver. (It was too large for a home delivery.) This necessitated canceling the order, re-ordering and a repeat of the process.

Somewhere in the middle of the process phone calls with agents became possible again. Progress? Not quite.

After several discussions with several agents I discovered that they were as challenged as their customers were by the new system. I’m sure you’ve played the escalation game to get to a supervisor and I played that game here as well. At last count I’m waiting on approximately 7 phone calls from supervisors that never came in.

Eventually the appliance was delivered to the delivery person. But there was no record in the system of an appointment to install the new one and remove the old one as per the warranty.

It took a month and two more canceled appointments for installation before Sears finally gave up and said a check would be forthcoming to cover the installation costs. That check has yet to arrive. (That’s why I consider the transaction not completed.) We did get the appliance installed on our own.

But of course, we did receive the usual survey request asking us to rate how well Sears Home Repair Services performed. Once the check arrives and clears the bank, my client will be cancelling that warranty. That will be our response.

Xfinity

One bill I was working on reducing for another client was Xfinity. I probably don’t need to say more if you’ve ever dealt with that company. But I will. I simply wanted to call and discuss plan options for reducing the bill.

No where was I able to get through to a live person. I was sent links to chatbots that would promise a live person, if I followed along, but those calls never connected.

I eventually took a trip to an Xfinity store and got the info and made adjustments to my client’s bill in person. The staff member at that store told me that they were seeing more foot traffic because the online and phone systems were such a mess.

Back to Apple

Now, I began this post mentioning Apple’s move to a generative AI based technical support system. I find this greatly disappointing. In general, because I believe this type of cost cutting move represents a decline in how I value a company because it represents a decline in how these companies view their customers.  And in Apple’s case, I have typically found Apple’s tech support to be better than most companies. Not perfect. Still flawed. But better than most.

I’ve had to work through some tricky issues over the years with Apple’s technical support. Some easily resolved. Some not so. One of those issues required several months worth of conversations, eventually reaching up the chain to Craig Federeghi, before getting the issue resovled. I can’t imagine any tech support system being able to measure up to what Apple has currently, even with flaws and failures that require steadfast persistence and often negotiation.

In my attempts to aid my clients I’ve tried some of the AI chatbots that aren’t part of the specific company I’m working with. Typically they spit out much of what I imagine is in the documentation most phone bank customer service reps use to begin a diagnostic process. (Yes, the device or appliance is plugged in.)

I imagine that Apple will use this new system to handle those rudimentary requests that come in that I’m sure fill up the tech support queues and can be resolved easily. I can only hope Apple then passes more difficult issues to an actual human being who can do the type of intervention necessary to reach a resolution. Heaven help us all, and Apple, if they ever automate the degree of support that requires screen sharing over to a robot.

I have yet to meet anyone in the real world that thinks AI on any level is going to fulfill anything close to the promises made by those pushing it. Folks have already seen and felt the results of these early efforts and have turned sour on the entire concept. I think of this like I imagine the last century’s transition to the automobile. Regardless of how some felt upon seeing the first automobiles on the same streets as pedestrian and horse traffic, everyone knew, for better or worse, it was a future they would have to adapt to.

I have encountered a few business owners who think AI will help them create efficiency and reduce costs, but their discussions about what is possible demonstrate a real hype-fed ignorance and hoped for way of cutting costs. I have one client who is smitten with the promise, but is constantly getting bitten by the results.

I’m betting Apple’s move will take a bite out of its customer satisfacton numbers as well.

(Image from Munthia on Shutterstock)

You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. 

The Quest for the Unicorn AI Device

Hyping a tech war that won’t ever happen

Reporters love to declare war, crown winners and dismiss losers. Except of course when it comes to shooting wars and the rhetoric that often leads to them. But that’s not what this post is about. Tim Higgins of The Wall Street Journal, and his headline writers, are declaring that Mark Zuckerberg Just Declared War on the iPhone. 

I usually expect this kind of nonsense from the half-a-gazillion blogs and social media accounts out there that like to ginny up controversy to generate clicks. With AI glasses will clicks become blinks?

Now that I think about it, I’m wrong in my expectations because the WSJ, like most of the mainstream media is trying hard (too hard) to follow that pattern these days. It’s an easy game to play in the short term, but then so is the game of companies and governments making big announcements about the future. Remember the “pivot to video?” Remember “virtual reality?” The faux legs went out from underneath that pretty quick.

Higgins does and mentions those failures to capture marketshare beyond the initial hype and funding fevers. Nevertheless, he forgets a few simple things during his embedded tour on this march to the promise of “Personal Super Intelligence.” (That’s this fiscal quarter’s new label.) Zuckerberg might indeed be banging the war drums by propagandizing AI glasses as the latest form factor of mass destruction, but it’s too much hype without enough rhythm to marshall the troops. And to be fair, most of Higgins’ column is just regurgitating old news (AI summary?) that has been bouncing around in what passes for new news these days, tacking Zuckerberg’s recent announcement on as the headline war cry.

Bottom line in my opinion, we’re not going to see any new form factor take down iPhones, smartphones as a category, or computers, as the way we live, work and play in any near future. Folks have been waiting for all kinds of second comings for quite awhile now. I love how even the coming of advanced AI is now referred to as “near emergence.”

One day perhaps. Long after most of us interested in what this technological moment might eventually yield will have forgotten what Medicare and Medicaid were actually about. If and when that day arrives, the real clicks (blinks?)  will be in tutorials on how to turn off all of the notifications and other distractions and keep the tech from tracking you.

I’m old enough to remember when FourSquare came on the scene. The promise was you’d walk down the street and receive a notification from the coffee shop you just passed about the daily special. That never really materialized, but the tech was different then. Google and Waze later tried that and just annoyed any driver who stopped at stoplights looking for their next turn.

When the marketing survelllance mavens can figure out how not to send me ads for something I just bought I think there might actually be a chance for that kind of thing to work. A small chance, but a chance. But they’re not even close to that on the backend, let alone integrating them into some device that might pinch your nostrils after wearing them for too long.

Don’t get me wrong. I think it is indeed cool when companies create niche products that give some people joys and hobbies. Bits and pieces of that kind of innovation often creep into bigger things that do help our lives somewhere down the road. Even if they become creepy. Obviously I’d prefer they not become creepy, but that’s where the money is and the creeps always follow the money.

I’d much prefer to see the money and the hype meisters follow something like this that could probably actually help humanity. But even that kind of innovation can attract the creep factor.

Call me when a reporter can research, write, and submit for editing a column like this one I’m complaining about with a pair of AI glasses, an Alexa device, or a pendant, or any other smart device currently in the works.

Call me again, when the AI summary machines can actually deliver an accurate summarization of that article.

You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. 

Sunday Morning Reading

A bit of this, a bit of that. All good bits.

It’s the Dog Days of Summer and it’s been a hot one so far. We’re traveling again, but there’s still some interesting Sunday Morning Reading to share. Some of it hopeful, some elegiac. Some just geeky and fun. Enjoy.

Milen kolev zs9jdUCaP_4 unsplash.

Kicking things off is a piece in The Atlantic from Anna Deavere Smith called When You Don’t Look Like Anything. She’s a singular artist always worth paying attention to. Her story of her 50-year search for the American character is certainly more than worth your time. Damn good stuff.

A.R. Moxon popped up on my radar this week with a piece called Total Eclipses. It’s part 2 of a series, the first being Be Bolder, Not a Boulder. If you’re like me and looking for any light at the end of any tunnel these days, do give both pieces a read.

NatashaMH offers up An Ode To The Poetic Detours. It’s about writing and where she finds inspiration, but more broadly, it’s about observing, noticing, listening, seeing, and feeling between the lines we sometimes get trapped within.

Will Dunn asks Are Emoji’s Killing Language? I’ve been saying they are for quite some time. For the life of me I don’t understand why we seem intent on regressing back to an age of hieroglyphics instead using the complex beauty of words and language.

Mathew Ingram says The Google Link Economy Is Dying and It’s Not Coming Back. He’s not wrong. Actually, he’s very right.

Health is a big deal in tech these days, especially when it comes to adding features to improve monitoring what’s going on in our bodies. Frankly, as someone who uses medical devices for monitoring my diabetes, the promises to add that kind of monitoring to smart devices, along with blood pressure and other conditions, sound hollow, seeming as realistic to me as self-driving cars. We may get there one day, but for now it’s mostly a clever way to market something new to increase the bottom line. Victoria Song takes a look at Samsung’s recent effort to check out our level of antioxidants with their smartwatch in I ‘Fooled’ Samsung’s New Antioxidant Feature With a Cheez-It. 

Much has been made of Paramount’s caving to Donald Trump, leading to the firing of late not comedian Stephen Colbert. That was quickly followed up by the Trey Parker and Matt Stone’s skewering new season opener of South Park. Paramount paid up, got its merger, and in an Aristotelian, if not Mel Brooksian sense there’s some grand comedy in the entire thing. I’m a fan of Alexandra Petri’s piece examining the moment pre-South Park titled Are You Laughing Yet?

Sometimes we just need to laugh at what feels like no laughing matter.

(Image from Milen Kolev on Unsplash)

If you’re interested in just what the heck Sunday Morning Reading is all about you can read more about the origins of Sunday Morning Reading here. If you’d like more click on the Sunday Morning Reading link in the category column to check out what’s been shared on Sunday’s past. You can also find more of my writings on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome.

Two Interesting Takes on iPadOS 26

iPadOS 26 beta reactions are making me think twice about installing

As I continue to live vicariously, watching from the sidelines through this summer’s Apple beta season, two interesting takes on iPadOS 26 have crossed my radar and are worth sharing.

IPadOS 26 WWDC_a.

First up, Harry McCracken says what most using iPadOS 26 are saying that Apple has made the iPad more Mac-like. But he also wonders where that might lead?  Check out his post here.

Follow that up with M.G. Seigler’s post. He thinks Apple might have created sort of a Mac, Jr. His post is from prior to the release of the public beta.

Both gentlemen delve deeper than the “what’s a computer?” discussion into other facets of the betas and both posts are worth your time, if iPads are your thing.  That “what’s a computer?” question is going to probably be with us through most of the next year.

FYI. I’m adding an iPad category to this little corner of the web. I have a feeling we’re going to be talking quite a bit about iPads in the months to come.

You can find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. 

Hang On Commodore 64 Nostalgia Nerds. Legal Trouble Is Brewing

Jumping the gun?

It seems longer, but it was just a week ago that there was lots of excitement in tech nostalgia circles over an announcement that YouTuber Christian ‘Peri Fractic’ Simpson was taking pre-orders for a “new” Commodore 64. 

Cleanshot 2025 07 16 at 08.03.38402x.

As if we all don’t have enough to keep up with, the news generated quite a bit of buzz. No word on if it generated actual pre-orders.

Well, for those thinking about joining the Commodore 64 nostalgia parade, there might be some legal hurdles on the parade route ahead.

Commodore Industries, S.r.l, is out with a press release claiming they still own what’s own-able regarding the Commodore 64 and offering documents and evidence. After all of the hype surrounding Simpson’s announcement Commodore Industries claims it is now time to “intervene” to set the record straight.

Quoting from the press release:

Mr. Christian Simpson (alias ‘Peri Fractic’) recently made statements on his YouTube channel, at different times, which were picked up by numerous media outlets and various newspapers, aimed at undermining our position, claiming to have ‘bought Commodore’ and describing our use of the trademark as ‘illegitimate’.

None of the initiatives launched in the United States give Mr Simpson the right and/or power to cancel or revoke our legitimate rights to the above trademarks.

Such claims are not only legally unfounded, but also compromise the truth and unjustifiably discredit a business project that has invested time, resources and expertise in relaunching the Commodore brand in a modern and technologically advanced way.

In closing the press release states:

Our goal remains the same: to continue to create real value for the brand and for the entire Commodore ecosystem. For this reason, we are ready to dialogue and collaborate with anyone who demonstrates, through their actions, a constructive spirit and respect for both the rules and the community.

#WeAreCommodore

The hashtag and bold typeface concluded the press release.

Sounds like some lawyers are going to make some money. No one ever gets nostalgic over that happening.

You can find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. 

Through A Glass Darkly: Apple’s Liquid Glass Future Isn’t Clear

Continuing to watch Apple’s Betas from the sidelines.

Apple’s adventures with its new Liquid Glass design language reminds me of the title of a terrific, yet gloomy, Ingmar Bergman film, Through a Glass Darkly. Keep in mind that I’m not running the beta and living vicariously through the reactions of those whose opinions I trust. That said, based on some of those opinions of the recently released 4th developer beta, the future of Apple’s new design approach appears less than clear. 

Image from @davemark on Mastodon

From most accounts it’s a battle between legibility and the “coolness” of the design’s featured transparency that overlays content with the intent for the content below to bleed through. The challenge seems to be finding the right amount of bleed through that also allows users to easily read a notification or a control. 

In my view, the challenge with that challenge seems to be one of fighting things you can’t control. Holding liquid in your bare hands without spilling a drop might be easier. Every website and app designer has their own preference and approach. Even Apple apparently has difficulty as some of their own apps with background bleed through obscuring text. 

Image from @viticci on Mastodon

Since Apple announced Liquid Glass there have been three iterations of the approach. In a sort of Goldilocks and the Three Bears adventure with Apple dialing transparency features back and forth. Now in the 4th version of the developer beta reengaging more transparency. Searching for a “just right” solution doesn’t yet seem to be yielding any clear direction. But then, Apple’s ambitions, perhaps by design, have created a lose-lose short term future. The eventual product will never please everyone with this design change. But to be fair, that’s always the case with design changes and the folks at Apple knew that going in.

There are other usability issues as well, including things like making it easy to tell which tab or control is in focus, and having to tap multiple times to perform a function that used to be one tap to name a couple I see repeatedly mentioned.

But the clear focus of complaints (and some praise) is Liquid Glass. I would venture that for users it’s still too early to judge, but supposedly the Public Beta is due soon and the consensus is that what we see there will be pretty close to what we see in the Fall. Developers on the other hand are increasingly worried about Apple’s search for a “just right” solution while they try to find a path forward to have their own apps ready for the big release alongside or close to the release of this new wave of operating systems. 

CleanShot 2025-07-24 at 08.38.27@2x.

The problem becomes magnified when designing for the lowest common denominator with so many users. From my perspective of supporting clients and family members, most folks just want to pick up their devices and do what they want or need to do. They don’t want a new learning curve getting in the way. They certainly don’t want legibility issues to get in the way. There’s a real tension between what Apple needs to do to keep the cash registers ringing and the familiarity users want that I don’t think the folks in Cupertino understand given the annual pace they seem locked into. 

Image from @jsnell on Mastodon

The Bigger Picture

From where I sit on the sidelines, I think Apple has also created some real and perhaps less transparent problems beyond how Liquid Glass eventually rolls out.

Coming on the heels, and at least somewhat intended as a distraction from last year’s Apple Intelligence and Siri woes, Apple needs to create a clear narrative surrounding Liquid Glass in order to sell this year’s new crop of iPhones. (I imagine the commercials have already been scripted if not filmed.)

That already seemed like quite a challenge given that the only big hardware news this year is the rumored introduction of a smaller, lighter, apparently with less features iPhone Air. I don’t imagine that Apple’s traditional iPhone lineup is going to have new features to tout that makes those familiar device form factors must haves or must upgrades. 

If you’re counting on a flashy UI design change as the distraction that gets criticized as much as the issue you’re trying to distract from you’re magnifying your problems. Unless of course, you bank on criticism of the distraction further distracting from bigger issues.

Adding to that, the larger narrative has somewhat already passed by this year’s iPhones to what comes next year, with just about everyone assuming Apple’s version of folding iPhones will be the new focus. 

Sum all of that up and this is starting to feel potentially like a lost year for Apple. Sure, Apple will sell lots of iPhones, but if it can’t capture the imagination the way Apple usually does, much of the narrative will be wait ’til next year. Apple historically takes a long view. Time will tell if they have lost control of the visible horizon.

iPadOS 26

That said, somewhat under the radar, iPad beta users continue to trumpet the success of changes made in iPadOS 26. I’m looking forward to seeing that myself. That said, as much as those potential changes will be welcome, I can’t imagine that’s the tentpole Apple wants to rely on to create excitement this year.

CleanShot 2025-07-23 at 07.19.00@2x.

I mentioned the film Through A Glass Darkly in the opening of this post. The story of that classic film is about a family that gathers to try and heal after a member diagnosed with schizophrenia is released from an asylum. If you ask me, the challenges we’re seeing at Apple with design changes, Apple Intelligence and Siri among other things demonstrate that there are multiple personalities exhibiting control at various times within Apple, at a time when some turnover at the top is already underway, with quite a few calling for more.

As always, I recommend Michael Tsai’s Blog as a good source to keep track of how all of this continues to develop.

And with that, I’ll leave this update from the sidelines with this. 

CleanShot 2025-07-24 at 08.29.28@2x.

Update: The public betas for all of Apple’s new operating systems were released shortly after this post was originally published.

You can find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. 

Are You Laughing or Crying?

Comedy kills or killing comedy?

Just a quick link to this piece from Alexandra Petri that had me laughing called Are You Laughing Yet? She also had me angry, but then that’s my state of things these days. I laughed because the writing and commentary is excellent. I got angry, because, well if you’re not angry at what’s going on these days, you’re either dead, or… well, I’ll just leave it at that.

Miguel alcantara udZkhKxnOyk unsplash.

Petri has a blisteringly funny take that begins with Trump’s takedown shakedown of Stephen Colbert via his pressure on Paramount. But it quickly spins into a larger take that’s well worth your while, especially if you enjoy comedy.

Well worth your time. Scroll back up and click the link.

(Image from Miguel Alcântara on Unsplash.)

You can find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. 

The Bad Guys Love The Law When It Is On Their Side

You only think you own what you bought.

I once wrote a line in a play that I cribbed from my mother that always got applause, “Just because it’s legal, don’t make it right.” I’d like to assume that most folks who might read a thing or two here understand that far too many laws have been written not to protect everyone or make things right, but instead to often give cover for blatant acts against the little guy in favor of the big guns. 

Copyright laws when used as a weapon to further corporate interests and feather CEO nests have been one of the  favorite tools for the bad guys. That’s been an ever increasing problem paralleling the advance of technology as more and more companies reject the idea that if you bought it you own it, and still claim rights that too often are protected by laws that were never written to contemplate the world we find ourselves in. 

With a hat tip to Denny Henke, take a look at this video from Louis Rossmann about a recent example of this. 

You can find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above.