What struck me first is Daisey’s description of himself as an Apple Fanboy. Most of how he describes himself Geeking out to Apple fan sites and the loving attentions he bestows on his Apple hardware reminds me much of myself. However, I posit, perhaps naively, that I can have a critical eye toward Apple — this position does not mean that I don’t own most of their gadgets.

Yet, after listening to Daisey’s experiences in Shenzhen and Foxconn City, any Westerner with a conscience would have to question his or her use of gadgets that negatively affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of impoverished Chinese citizens — some likely underaged. Is an iPad or iPhone so important to my life that I’m willing to condone what amounts to slavery in the twenty-first century?

At least that’s what I thought after listening to part one of the program. After Daisey’s 40-minute narrative, I found myself still in my car; I had made it home, turned off the engine, and was sitting in a dark garage. I went inside to listen to act two.

This part provides a step back from Dasiey’s narrative — some analysis and fact checking. While there were some mitigating perspectives and evidence, the fact still remains that our tech that has become so ingrained in our lives is made in sweatshops.

Why is this the case? Really? Why don’t we make our own fetishized tech right here in the US? I know it would be more expensive — our gadgets would likely double in cost — but isn’t that the right thing to do? Should we, as one of the commentators suggests, just accept the grim realities for Foxconn workers as the growing pains of a nascent capitalist economy?

Is it really that easy?

About fifteen years ago, my favorite uncle died. Uncle Elwood was a wiry, jolly man who always had a pocket full of silver dollars. He was also a pharmacist, so one time I remember him giving me soda water after a particularly rich country meal during a Lucas Family reunion in Eastern Kentucky. Uncle Elwood had a way about him, something that my child’s eyes saw as kindness, compassion, and sympathy. The silver dollars he gave became a symbol not of economic generosity, but of a genuine human connection.

At his funeral was another uncle of mine: Harry is my father’s older brother who happens to be a Texas businessman. I have no real memories of Harry, having seen him maybe there times in my life — though I got a general sense that he was a bit overbearing and that children like me should keep to ourselves. At the time of Elwood’s death, the US DOJ was prosecuting the Microsoft Antitrust trial; it was also the last few years of the Clinton presidency. I was a supporter of the DOJ’s actions. After the funeral, a group of Elwood’s friends and family were sitting around chatting with his widow, my Aunt Dee. I forgot how the topic even came up, but I mentioned my support of the DOJ. Harry, in all his overbearing bluster, shut me down: “I can’t believe you’d say something like that. This country was built on innovation and the free market. Microsoft is a great American company and the government should keep its hands off.” (Or something like that.) Since this was an inappropriate time for a political discussion, I remember responding, “OK, Uncle Harry.” Later, Dad told me that’s the only way to respond to Harry sometimes. Apparently George W. Bush agreed with my Uncle Harry, since the antitrust suit against Microsoft was quietly resolved after his 2000 “election.”

Fast forward almost fifteen years, it seems the Uncle Harrys of this country have done a pretty good job keeping the rest of us quiescent while they do what they want, particularly when it comes to class. In fact, this country talks a lot about race, gender, and sexuality, but we never seem to have discussions of class — as if it has nothing to do with contemporary America, only Victorian England. Is that a part of the agenda? Is this a tacit understanding: we know there’s inequality, but that’s just the way it is. And, if you get uppity about it, we — you know those that control the government, the jobs, and the media — the 1% — might be forced to do something you won’t like. Even things like facts don’t get in these guys’ way. Just ask the scientists.

I, for one, am glad to see discussions finally being had about class. In a nation that loves its money, class might be the most important issue that we face.

Big business wants to make everything about business. The bottom line of business is the bottom line: money. I don’t want to over simplify, but I’m increasingly seeing a country that is preoccupied with accruing this metaphor of wealth. Money isn’t even a thing — it’s a representation of value. It is a mythological measure of success, influence, power, and respect. A country whose main goal is the accumulation of this ideological construct will tend to look at everything through this green millionaire’s monocle.

I’m not even talking about materialism here, though the relation should have relevance. Yes, ultimately money buys the material, so the story goes. The issue is with abstracts: those who make so much money that it can (1) never be transferred to the material, and (2) relieves others of their life, liberty, and private property. This is what seems to be happening now. Let me amend that: it has been happening for decades, but the world is finally feeling the radical effects of this sort of American corporate greedthink that has penetrated all aspects of our lives.

Where does this greedthink come from? I think it’s a lack of education.

About a year ago, I was invited to a friend’s birthday party. My friend is a lawyer, so there were other lawyers there celebrating. I got to chatting with one of them, and he asked me what I do. I responded that I was an English professor — and that day I just happened to have taught Homer. “Oh, yeah?” he said raising his eyebrows in an act of feigned enthusiasm. “Yes,” I replied. “There are few literary expressions that I would put above the significance of Homer’s epics.” This was a pretty mundane conversation, one that I have had at cocktail parties many times. My last statement is usually a verbal tranquilizer, but he was feeling contentious, and it had the opposite effect: “I don’t have to read Homer. That’s absurd! Homer has nothing to do with my life as a lawyer, and I wasted a lot of time and money in college taking nonsense courses that had nothing to do with life.” (Or something like that.) At this, the rest of the jovial conversations at the table stopped, and they were looking at this guy. I decided this was another Uncle Harry moment. We were at a birthday party after all.

Yet this guy’s attitude is exactly what I’m talking about. What is the most popular undergraduate major? You already know. That’s right: it’s business! Out of the top ten majors listed by The Princeton Review, over half of them would not be considered as liberal arts. In fact, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, business trumps the second most conferred major by double.

Now don’t get me wrong. I’m sure the skills one learns in business courses are great for doing business, but what do they teach a student about being human? About compassion? Empathy? In other words, when the most popular college major in the US is business, we are training a world that is increasingly populated by Uncle Harrys, and we’re surprised at its current state? Is business inherently bad? No. However, when budgets are cut in education, which programs suffer? Take a guess. When we look at the education of our children and young adults as a business, we need to be prepared for what we’ll get.

I think we still need Homer and his scions. I think Elwood would agree.

Elwood and Dee

I recently did this for a local computer store. I feel the need to reprint my reviews here. I think my friends need to know. I orginally posted about this back in March 2009, but it needs repeating. Here’s my original two-star Yelp review of Quality Computer Systems:

OK, they get two stars, but that’s more than my experience warrants.

First experience: A couple of years ago, I had a 12 PowerBook that I spilled a bit of water on. It immediately went dead and would not boot, even after several hours to let it dry. I thought I hosed the computer, so I took it to QCS for their diagnosis. After it sat there for about three days, they called me and said it was ready. Apparently, just letting it dry for a bit longer was all that was necessary; that’ll be $85. “For what,” I asked. “Well, it did boot, but we ran diagnostics to see if everything was OK.” Fine, I thought, paying the money, but feeling ripped off. I made a mental note at the time never to go back there again. They could have at least called me before they ran those diagnostics.

Second experience: Several weeks ago, my MacBook Pro’s monitor died. It just would not come on, even though the computer booted. I packed up my ailing MBP and headed to QCS. This was a Thursday. Nearly a week later (after they told me it would “tomorrow”), they called me to report my logic board needed to be replaced (the video card is shot, and that lives on the logic board). A new logic board would be about $1200. I told them I’d just come get the computer. “That’ll be $85.” I paid it without a word. While it did take them a week to get to it, it wasn’t their fault my computer seemed beyond repair.

A quick call to Apple, and I had had a new quote: $350. They had a box here the next day, and my computer back to me within a week — less time than it sat there at QCS.

As for QCS: couldn’t they have called Apple for me? The more I think about it, the more upset I get. This is what local customer service has turned in to. I guess, because of geography, they feel they have some sort of monopoly here in central Georgia (is that called an oligopoly?). I think they could have done more. I’m out $160+ from my two experiences with them, and what did I get either time? Really. I will not be going back, and I actually feel like writing to the owner. I would, if I felt it would do any good.

Be careful.

Subsequently (a year-and-a-half later!), their owner has taken a notice of my review and contacted me. At first, it seemed as if he was going to make amends. No such luck. His phone call this morning prompted a review update:

Update: As Brad mentioned, he contacted me about these issues. But, rather then helping me, he begins arguing with me about them. He claims that QCS “negotiated with Apple” for the price I ultimately received on my MBP!? Man, it’s great that they want to take the credit for that NOW!? He claims they informed me, but that is not true. They seem to be trying pretty hard to put a revisionist spin on poor business decisions.

After reading my initial review, I’m embarrassed that I didn’t mention my third experience with QCS. It was when Apple’s Snow Leopard operating system came out last year. I’m always an early adopter of Apple products, and this operating system was supposed to be a major update. I called QCS (I know, but Best Buy was not carrying it, and QCS was the only Apple retailer in town at that time), and the dude told me they have it. The upgrade was supposed to be $29, but when he rung me up, he said $42 (or something close to that). When I asked about the discrepancy, he said the owner added $10 to it to cover shipping. This was strike three. Here’s what Brad said about that:

“I did have to pay apple next day air.  Once I got my next shipment in 3 days later it was $29.  Apple does not “FIX” prices, vendors can charge what they need to to be able to cover costs.  FYI if you charge what apple does on the web site you make 5% if the customer pays with an AMEX there is 3%, whatever to cover it’s share of ground shipping and you are lucky to pay a salesperson to answer the phone.”

You know what: too bad. Was it really worth it, Brad? You already gouged me twice. You want to take advantage of the loyalist Apple customers? You can explain all you want, but it sure looks like you’re were taking advantage of your no-longer unique position of being the only Apple retailer in Macon.

Finally, here’s what he said about the MBP in our last email:

“I do not want you to have a bad feeling about my business.  If you can bring me a copy of the service order from apple with what they did and to fix the problem with pricing, and your full name so I can look you up on my system I would be happy to refund the $85 for the MacBook Pro.”

I have the documents he asked for, but no refund. Instead, he called to harass me — to tell me I was wrong. Great business sense. And I have an even WORSE feeling about your business now, Brad.

Now, I have just two words for QCS: Peach Mac! Let me say them again: PEACH MAC! PEACH MAC! PEACH MAC!

Unfortunately, I have to revise my last review: run run run — take your computer elsewhere — buy your computers elsewhere. Peach Mac just opened up the road. They are WAY better than this sorry excuse for a business. In fact, I’m going to make sure Apple gets a letter about QCS, too.

Way to go, Brad. Needless to say, my original two-stars is now just one.

Now, I’m going for a bike ride.

Since Apple is a hardware and software company, the two ‘wares work well together. Apple’s design principles stress ease-of-use, elegance, and professional results. I’m speaking, here, of the MacOS, an operating system I have used for about 25 years. The current MacOS is built on open-source software and is perhaps the best available for any price. I know Windoze users will argue, and I frankly don’t care, nor is Windoze v. Mac even relevant here. Essentially, Windoze and the Mac are the same: they are both proprietary operating systems written by corporations for the sole purpose of making their respective companies wealthy and powerful.

At the heart of this debate is the perennial open source software versus proprietary software question. I have an iPhone for some of the same reasons that I prefer to use the MacOS. Since it’s proprietary, certain standards in interface and design keep my computing experience consistent and predictable. The iPhone (and soon, iPad) are new products, so I’m more willing to cut them the slack I wouldn’t with a traditional computer operating system. They’ll hammer out the wrinkles soon. Where the iPhone gets in trouble is new territory: not only is the operating system proprietary, Apple now controls what we — the users — can do with it in a draconian way, it seems.

Unlike the MacOS, the iPhoneOS is even more closed; I might even call it super-proprietary. On the former, I cannot change the code of the OS, but I can download programs that can significantly alter the operating system and how I use it. I can install modifications and other software that the powers-that-be might not like me having, like BitTorrent, pornography, warez, cracks, and other socially unacceptable forms of software that give the middle finger to any company (or person) that doesn’t like it. This is a question of my personal ethical codes and scruples. Apple supplies the container, but I can put anything in that container that I want, including elements that might not be good for it or me. I purchased a computer complete with operating system. And even though it comes with a proprietary end user license that I have to agree to before using said computer, I’ve never read the license and am pretty certain I’ve violated it many times. The point is: even with a proprietary operating system as we have known them from the beginnings of the personal computer until now, I can choose to ignore the licenses and the legal limits the corporations try to impose on me. I choose, not them.

Yet, it seems that these sorts of mostly open operating systems allow customers — users, programmers, hackers, and crackers (are we all just criminals?) — too much freedom. Enter the iPhone and the super-proprietary operating systems, or what we might more accurately describe as the closed-source-to-modification systems. With Apple’s app store as gateway to my iPhone/Pad/Pod, I can no longer really decide what to put on my computer — Apple decides for me and then gives me a pretend choice. This is analogous to Burger King being the only restaurant in town and saying “have it your way.” This is not a real choice, is it?

Tim Bray, Google’s newest Android bitch, puts it this way:

Yes, he is a corporate spokesman, but he is also exactly right.

Every fiber of my being should be resisting Apple and their path to techno-tyranny. I have championed Apple over Microsoft for years, but it seems that with the success of the iPod, then iPhone, and soon the iPad, they are becoming just as evil as corporations I’ve demonized in the past. I keep hoping that it will not turn out this way, but every day I seem to read something to the contrary. First came news of alleged stock malfeasance, then Jobs’ reputation as a techno-despot, then Fair Play DRM, then its rigid restrictions on how I use my iPod, then its exclusive deals with cell provides, to the iPhone/PadOS. As much as I wish it wasn’t, Apple seems to be changing into a typical ’Merican corporation.

So what are my responsibilities as a citizen and a consumer? I do have an iPhone, but my contract with AT&T is up in June. No matter what I do, it seems a necessity to sign a two-year contract with a cell provider (boooo!), but I could get an open-source phone, like one that runs Android. That leaves me buying hardware from another corporation, like Motorola or HTC. Are they really any different? Yes, Apple controls the applications I can put on my phone, but there are still more to choose from that I will ever need or want. Yes, Apple’s developer license is crap, and it needs to be fixed. Apple did get rid of their music DRM. Is it as bad as Bray and others make it sound?

I currently use Ubuntu on a cheap Acer laptop I bought last November, and it’s fine. But, I find myself missing my Mac more everyday.

Apple, I used to only love you, but your actions lately have been inspiring a lot of hate, consternation, and thoughts of jumping ship. Maybe you should consider that, change some of your policies, and make amends. Please don’t push me away. We’ve been together too long.

Capitalism is the unquestioned, de facto economic system of the United States. It makes propaganda out of the belief that “all men are created equal.” By selling this idea to typical American citizens, it maintains the status quo: 5% of Americans have more wealth than the other 95% put together. Capitalists pay lip service to the American dream of wealth and prosperity — that, if you work hard enough, one day you just might make it, too. And the only way to make it is to embrace the system that has produced the world’s wealthiest people: capitalism.

Capitalism has turned America into a plutocracy, or rule by the wealthy. If you have any doubt, just look to the recent Supreme court decision that grants corporations even more power to influence the politics of this country. This debate is called “corporate personhood” and turns my stomach.

Moore illustrates how the capitalist system is amoral at best, and immoral in its routine practices. It upholds wealth over welfare. Its practices are counter-Christian, though ironically capitalism’s strongest proponents claim to be the most devout. Moore’s narrative even upholds the Catholic church as anti-capitalist, without going into their 2000 history of oppression. Maybe Bill Maher already made that film? Capitalism, like religion, is a mass delusion that helps only a few while hurting the majority.

Moore suggests that democracy might be a better economic model, or at least a more equitable one. One where the CEO makes the same money as the assembly line worker. Where all decisions are made my everyone that they will affect. Where all workers are treated the same, since they have the same stakes in the success or failure of the company. All are human beings with equal rights.

This sounds good, and just might work in economics where it has failed in politics. We Americans, perhaps as a result of capitalism, love money. The almighty dollar seems to be the measure of all success in this country. Therefore, when money’s on the line, people might pay more attention than they would when voting on some more abstract idea. Money is real. Politics are, well, not for most Americans. Democracy only works when citizens are engaged and educated about the issues and potential consequences of those issues on their everyday lives. If anything, much of America lives in the corporate fantasy world (PDF) of Fox News and MSNBC. No wonder democracy seems to be failing.

The best part of Moore’s film was the end, when he shows President Roosevelt’s last State of the Union address. FDR proposes the second bill of rights, perhaps the most progressive political statement I have heard from the twentieth century, and it was in 1944. It’s worth repeating in its entirety:

It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people — whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth — is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.

As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

• The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
• The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
• The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
• The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
• The right of every family to a decent home;
• The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
• The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
• The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.

Can you imagine if Obama suggested such a thing today? Glenn Beck‘s head just might explode all over his chalk board. These rights are antithetical to capitalism, a system that has one goal: profit at any cost.

At one point, Moore implicitly asks the question: what’s wrong with socialism? Why does it seem to be so demonized in the media? In many ways, it’s what the defeated countries of the second World War received: constitutions that made the government on the side of the people, not of the corporations. Instead, we the people continue to support that which dehumanizes us and even profits from our deaths. When will it stop?

The film suggests that the election of Obama could be a turning point, but there remains doubt. I, for one, am dubious though hopeful. Can Obama really go against the corporate interests that helped get him elected? So far, it seems not.

Americans, what’s wrong with socially progressive political and economic policies?

I liked Moore’s closing statement, and I’m paraphrasing: I refuse to live in a country that allows such a flagrant disregard for the lives of others. And I’m not going anywhere. Can’t we do something?

Well, the administrators acted quickly. Our chair called an emergency meeting of the faculty with the directive to ask us what we think. While I appreciate the gesture, I don’t think the administration has ever listened to me, nor do they ever seem likely to. Granted, I, like my colleagues, am an expert in my field, but that field is not economics, marketing, nor management. Perhaps this is why they asked.

I wasn’t able to make the emergency meeting. I didn’t get the email, since the Directory of Operational IT decided to cripple the email system by turning off POP3 and IMAP last summer, I no longer get my mail on my iPhone. Not only that, he ignores my emails about other matters and refuses to work with me and the other faculty to find a solution. See why I might be dubious about the administration’s intentions? Yet, I digress.

As I mentioned: I didn’t make the meeting, and I didn’t talk with anyone who did. However, I do have a suggestion that I think has the potential to save the university system quite a bit of money. It might sound like a radical solution, but I think it would also solve many of the technology issues our campus seems to be struggling with.

Let’s get rid of all unnecessary proprietary software, including most Microsoft licenses.

I can’t find any hard numbers on what the university system pays for licenses each year (I wonder why? A friend who’s in-the-know said I’d be “shocked”), but it has to be pretty sizable. Why do we need to pay that? Why do we need Windows and Office? Why do we need proprietary email servers? Why do we need Bing? Seriously. Why?

Yes, I do see the need for some proprietary software. I have been a long-time Mac user, but I recently decided to save some money and go Linux. I’m typing on my open-source laptop right now. It is solid, fast, and does everything I need it to for my daily computing needs. I go to my ailing Mac for Aperture, and I plan on teaching myself Final Cut Pro one of these days. Therefore, I do not think that all proprietary software is unnecessary. That which is needed specifically for various curricula should stay. Yet, I find it hard to believe that all of the open-use computers in, say, the Academic Resource Center, need to have proprietary software running on them.

Replace Windows with with Ubuntu. Replace Office with OpenOffice. If we did this to all open-use computers throughout the 35 universities and colleges in the USG, I’m sure we would save a considerable chunk of change.

We could take this a step further by eliminating all of the Exchange servers, too, and moving to Google apps – for free! Our OIT department obviously can’t handle the challenges of running a mail server that offers its users true access and a modern web interface, so let Google do it. I would love to have a Gmail front-end for my campus mail. I would love to use Google’s calendaring department-wide. I would love to see students use Google Docs. This could be one of many choices.

Yet, they will never even consider this. I wrote to our Director of OIT about this and he did what he usually does: ignore me. Even if it got to a discussion, they’d talk about security concerns, about “sensitive student data,” about losing connectivity, about student learning curves. You know, all the stuff right out of the Microsoft FUD manual.

I have always argued that students are better served by learning a general computer literacy, rather than a specific one. When all students get is Microsoft to use, it becomes transparent. They learn to live with the poor solutions and the frustrations, and come to depend on them. They no longer look at the system, but see through it to what they think is important: their actual work. However, I’m seeing  McLuhan’s insight more each year: “medium is the message.” When technologies become such a part of everyday life, we no longer look at them in a critical way. Therefore, they begin to control how it is we work and play in both subtle and profound ways.

One of my literature students brought up Linux in class yesterday: “What is it?” To me, this seems an absurd question. Linux has been around almost 20 years, and no one in that class had even heard of it. That’s what we need to teach students in higher education: that they have choices and they should investigate them fully. But instead we feed the beast and teach students to be consumers of all things Microsoft. Not only is this expensive for the bottom line, but it’s also expensive ethically and culturally.

Fix the budget: eliminate (most) proprietary software.

I responded: “No, it’s not. There might be business done in the college, but it is an institution of higher education.”

I know that many in this state — and perhaps around the country — are trying to sell this idea. Our current chancellor is from the private sector, for example. The University System of Georgia currently has a “customer service” initiative going on, and we occasionally get emails about how to make the university experience more friendly to our “customers.”

This is dangerous and, frankly, nauseating.

Business — at least how I see it practiced in the US — is all about closing off possibilities; it’s about drawing lines, securing boundaries. It’s about closed systems, elite hegemonies, keeping things status quo; business de-emphasizes the human in favor of the machine. Education is the opposite: it wants to open up possibilities. It’s about teaching students that they have choice and using their critical capacities in exercising that choice. It’s about being the best human beings that we can. These seem to be opposite goals.

The business folks wear the ties and get things done. Their main goal is money and the power that comes along with it. This is not the same for educators. If these were our goals, none of us would have chosen education as a career path.

Higher education is not a business. It is not. I will not fall for this myth, neither should anyone else.

We’ve started modestly by having a blog front-end to the site to which we intend to add images and narratives regularly. Behind-the-scenes, we’re using Photoshelter to house our archive and galleries. My opinion of Photoshelter is currently mixed (they are pricy), but as I use it, I like it more, particularly for the right management features that Zenfolio simply doesn’t have (yet!). More on this later.

So, check out Regional Imagery, LLC. Leave a comment. Watch us grow. And, if you are a photographer who might have some images to contribute (we share any money made), let us know. Oh, and follow us on Twitter.

Recently, Autumn noticed that you can add a page for your business, and she encouraged me to add one for what can now accurately be called my “side” business. Gerald R. Lucas, Photographer now has a “fan” page on Facebook. I’m not quite such how I’m going to use it, but having another place to highlight my work can’t be a bad thing.

Stop by and become my fan.

Despite my better judgment, I took it to the local computer place: the so-called Quality Computer Systems on Riverside Drive in Macon, Georgia. I link to them, not to send them business, but to hopefully let my experience reflect on their business. What I mean by “better judgment” is based on my first experience with them. A couple of years ago, I had a 12″ PowerBook that I spilled a bit of water on. It immediately went dead and would not boot, even after several hours to let it dry. I thought I hosed the computer, so I took it to QCS for their diagnosis. After it sat there for about three days, they called me and said it was ready. Apparently, just letting dry for a bit longer was all that was necessary; that’ll be $85. “For what,” I asked. “Well, it did boot, but we ran diagnostics to see if everything was OK.” Fine, I thought, paying the money, but feeling ripped off. I made a mental note at the time never to go back there again. They could have at least called me before they ran those diagnostics.

Well, flash forward a couple of years to my current monitor problem. Apparently, I have forgotten about my experience with them or was just distracted by my current dilemma. I packed up my ailing MBP and headed to QCS. This was a Thursday. Nearly a week later, they called me to report my logic board needed to be replaced (the video card is shot, and that lives on the logic board). A new logic board would be about $1200. I told them I’d just come get the computer. “That’ll be $85.” I paid it without a word. While it did take them a week to get to it, it wasn’t their fault my computer seemed beyond repair.

I began looking for another computer thinking I could sell my MBP for parts. Autumn just got a new MacBook, and we decided we could share that as well as a new 24″ iMac for the house. Since the blogosphere was a-twitter with rumors of imminent new iMacs, I decided to wait. When they were finally announced a couple of days ago, I was underwhelmed with the offerings. Had the upgraded iMacs had LED monitors, this story might have ended differently.

“What the hell,” I thought, “I’ll give Apple a call about my MBP.” Giles reminded me of the number: 800-SOS-APPL. I called, and I was almost immediately connected with a guy named Anthony. I explained the problem, and he was sympathetic. He checked the price of a new logic board, and came up with the same number that QCS gave me. “Hold on,” he said, “let me check one other thing.” He was gone for a minute, and when he came back, he had a better price for me: $350. Apparently, since I had not abused my computer, this is the adjusted out-of-warranty price. I had a box the next day and received my fixed MBP yesterday from Apple. Sweet.

I gotta say: I was not expecting such a positive outcome. My experience with Apple and customer service lately has not been what it used to be when they were not on top. I am pleasantly surprised, and my faith in my favorite computer company has been renewed. Thanks, Apple.

As for QCS: couldn’t they have called Apple for me? The more I think about it, the more upset I get. This is what local customer service has turned in to. I guess, because of geography, they feel they have some sort of monopoly here in central Georgia (is that called an oligopoly?). I think they could have done more. I’m out $160+ from my two experiences with them, and what did I get either time? Really. I will not be going back, and I actually feel like writing to the owner. I would, if I felt it would do any good.