var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
Dunkelzahn
October 11, 2009 4:11 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

You'd think there would be a little more data redundancy in situations like this. My HOME computer has more data redundancy than this.


Kind of inexcuseable if you ask me.

Reply
13 replies
\"user-pic\"
FLConsumer
October 13, 2009 4:23 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dunkelzahn: This just a FREE PREVIEW!!! of Windows 7/Windows 2010 Server for T-Mobile users.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Deranged_Kitsune
October 12, 2009 2:35 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dunkelzahn: I have to agree. Does anyone know what happened to cause this?

Because to my mind this implies that, like, the one server farm that ran everything burned to the ground and there were no off-site backups.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pikelet
October 12, 2009 3:13 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Deranged_Kitsune: I read this from an Engadget commenter yesterday:

why not the LS2LS7? @ Oct 10th 2009 4:12PM

I've been getting the straight dope from the inside on this. Let me assure you, your data IS gone. Currently MS is trying to get the devices to sync the data they have back to the service as a form of recovery.

It's not a server failure. They were upgrading their SAN, and they outsourced it to a Hitachi consulting firm. There was room for a backup of the data on the SAN, but they didn't do it (some say they started it but didn't wait for it to complete). They upgraded the SAN, screwed it up and lost all the data.

All the apps in the developer store are gone too.

[www.engadget.com]

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Segador
October 11, 2009 9:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dunkelzahn: \"The one guy we have at our ONE apparently non-RAID server spilled some soda. So sorry.\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
zimmi88
October 11, 2009 8:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dunkelzahn: Agreed. You would think a company that was looking after peoples' data would make archive backups, stored away from the main system, so if stuff like this happens, the worst case scenario is the loss of a day or two of data, not all of it. You'd have to have some sort of espionage or reallllly bad luck for that methodology to fail, I imagine.

(Unless Apple has spies... DUN DUN DUNNNNNNNN!)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
gStein_*|bringing starpipe back|*
October 11, 2009 5:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dunkelzahn: Dear Microsoft: Geek Squad will, for $149.99, connect a hard drive to your computer and back up your data. [www.geeksquad.com] (or, you know, you could go wiht the industry standard, and use RAID.
with colo'd (redundant) servers.
and tape backups that are physically removed from the site each night.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TreyWaters
October 12, 2009 11:04 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gStein: Ummm. Sorry, but RAID != Backup. All RAID does is remove a single point of failure.

And you can backup your data every 10 minutes, but if you never verify your backups are valid, they're still worthless.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
CAJensen01
October 12, 2009 11:36 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TreyWaters: Agreed. We've had a SAN melt down from RAID 6, the system caused a variety of corruption across the drives in the stripe, and were replicated to the drives running mirror. Something we were told couldn't possibly happen.. happened. We spent the next 3 days recovering data from tape.

SANs aren't bulletproof, and RAID redundancy helps reduce points of failure, but it is by no means perfect.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Joeb5
October 12, 2009 12:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gStein:
no best buy system will be able to deal with the amount of data that they have

Reply
\"user-pic\"
frari489
October 11, 2009 5:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dunkelzahn:

completely inexcusable.

While I would never trust a 3rd party to look after my important data, I would have trusted them with day to day stuff like this.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Ronin-Democrat
October 11, 2009 4:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Suckers!!!!!!!

your data is yours.
always.
always.
ALWAYS make backups.

even paper and pen if nothing else.

Next time spring for a device you can sync to your 'puter machine.

This is why I never went with Verizon. they hate Macs and could never sync to them and wanted me to trust them with the only backup of my contacts.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
goodpete
October 11, 2009 6:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Ronin-Democrat:

I also agree.

People need to understand that just because something is stored in the cloud or on an external device or something like that, doesn't mean they have a \"backup\" of it.

The idea of having a backup copy of something is that if you have two copies, then if one copy is lost, you can restore it using the other copy.

So just in case anyone isn't sure what this means. It means that buying an external hard drive and moving all your pictures to it doesn't back up your data at all. In fact, it's more dangerous because external drives that get moved around a lot are more apt to fail. In order to have a true backup of your data, you need to have it in two or more places.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
El_Red
October 11, 2009 5:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Ronin-Democrat: I agree with you. Anything that contains data (computers, cellphones, etc.) should be backed up.

There is no such thing as 100% reliable (enter gadget name here)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Colonel Jack O'Neill
October 11, 2009 4:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Ronin-Democrat:
\"even paper and pen if nothing else\"
I think people forgotten those thing still exist.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
TheRedSeven
October 11, 2009 4:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this error seems to be on Microsoft/Danger's side, and not on T-Mobile's. I get that T-Mobile is the exclusive service provider for the Sidekick, but can you blame them when MS/Danger fail to have adequate server backups?


My guess is that T-Mobile was getting jerked around by MS/Danger for those 10 days with promises of 'temporary' etc. That is just an uneducated guess, but still.


My hatred would be pouring out to Danger/Microsoft/Sidekick rather than to T-Mobile.

Reply
8 replies
\"user-pic\"
lmarconi
October 11, 2009 9:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TheRedSeven: ...yeah seems Microsoft/Danger is at fault. At this point, I'm not sure why TMobile isn't pointing fingers a little louder. They should not have to take the hit to their brand for something that Microsoft/Danger did - Microsoft should be taking the brand hit.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
wrjohnston19283
October 11, 2009 5:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@G.O.B.: Come on!:

T-Mobile is on the hook because they are the party that consumers contracted with to provide a service (from what I've read). T-Mobile then contracts out with Danger/MSFT to provide services.

If my Gmail account is deleted, my ISP has nothing to do with that. I have not contracted with my ISP to provide email. I have an agreement with Gmail that requires google to provide email that is accessible through any ISP.

If I ran a daycare that you brought your kid to, and I then turn around and send these kids to people's houses, who would you sue if something happened to your kid? Me, who you are paying to watch your kid, or the person I sent your kid to? The person who hurt your kid may face criminal charges, but from a civil standpoint you have no grounds to sue them.

Same principle applies here - consumers contracted with T-Mobile for a service (data backup), and T-Mobile can not deliver that service. Doesn't matter why T-Mobile can't. T-Mobile can not hold up their end of the contract.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Difdi
October 12, 2009 12:03 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@wrjohnston19283: By that argument, you might not have standing to sue someone who randomly kicked your kid while walking by on the street, since you don't have a business relationship with that random stranger.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Veeber
October 12, 2009 12:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@GearheadGeek: Well, I think using a lawsuit is a bad example. In general you sue everyone whom might be involved and then let the court sort it out.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
GearheadGeek
October 11, 2009 6:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@wrjohnston19283: I am not a lawyer, but I believe that your example of standing in the daycare case is wrong. I think the parent would have standing to sue both the daycare provider and the third-party subcontractor over harm to their minor child. Reduce it to something the law sees as a property issue like kennel service for your dog or a valet parking company and you can make that analogy work.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
FigNinja
October 11, 2009 6:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

`@wrjohnston19283: Yep. T-Mobile resold the service and should make good. I'm sure they'll be suing MS if there isn't already some sort of stipulation in their contract for reimbursement.

@Razor512: I would be shocked if T-Mobile's contract with MS/Danger didn't include a requirement for data backup. Having a contract doesn't guarantee that people will do as they promise. I would be curious to find out how often T-Mobile checked up on them, if at all.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Razor512
October 11, 2009 5:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TheRedSeven:

nope, no self respecting company providing servers/hosting will host any content with out first having a backup, not unless you go with their cheapest package that doesn't cover having a backup of the server made daily

so it is t-mobile's fault for not getting a safe hosting plan.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Veeber
October 11, 2009 4:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TheRedSeven: The error may be with MS, but T-mobile is the one who made the promises to its customers. They chose to contract the services out and didn't make the assurances necessary to ensure that MS was taking the appropriate steps to backup and test the backup data. I'm sure some made a risk management decision to not invest the money into a proper backup and testing schedule. They figured it would cost more to implement than to repair the damage (lose customers...) Not sure it was the right decision... .

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dunkelzahn
October 11, 2009 4:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TheRedSeven:


Agreed. Definite failure by Danger/Microsoft.


Me and a friend are wondering who lost their jobs for not managing data properly, especially if the speculation that a botched network upgrade is to blame.


While T-Mobile should step up to the plate and offer more than a 'shut you up here's 1-month of free data', we shouldn't blame T-Mobile directly.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
greatgoogly
October 11, 2009 4:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Although a failure like this may seem unfathomable, it is an example why you should always have your own backups of data. I use Gmail, Google Calendar, etc. constantly, but once a week make a backup of everything and keep that backup in two different places, home and work. The servers cold go down and my house burn to the ground and I would still be able to get at all my info. Same for my Blackberry.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
AreYouConfusedYet?HowAboutNow?
October 12, 2009 4:50 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@greatgoogly: AFAIK, Google keeps backups of emails all over the world.

I know that installing Google Apps, more than one of the mail servers is *.googlemail.com instead of *.google.com

Reply
\"user-pic\"
someToast
October 13, 2009 8:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AreYouConfusedYet?HowAboutNow?: To clarify, they may or may not keep backups of emails all over the world (I think it's safe to say there's some backup plan in place) but the existence of multiple domain names doesn't automatically equate to the existence of multiple machines.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
AreYouConfusedYet?HowAboutNow?
October 13, 2009 9:55 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@someToast: True, but it just seems likely that it's not all one server.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
jwalker095
October 11, 2009 4:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Still drinking the Microsoft kool-aide..

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
lunasdude
October 11, 2009 4:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Im afraid I agree with \"Ronin-Democrat\".
I have T-mobile and a Nokia E-71 that I back up to my imac & a laptop.
I upload photos to Flickr but I also back them up on an external HD just in case.
No matter what service you use you should ALWAYS have at least one back up.
Not just with phones but with every thing you do that you give a dam about.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
viper2000
October 11, 2009 4:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is my biggest problem with \"cloud computing\"
Sure, I trust my email to google, my website to HG, but information like phone numbers, appointments, ect, no thanks. I will not buy a phone that stores all of its info on some server somewhere. I am content with my non-cloud-connected palm treo. All my info is stored on my phone, and backed up to my computer.
For future smartphone purchases, my main requirements are the ability to sync all data to my computer, and all the data actually has to reside on the device. So things like this cant happen.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
AirIntake
October 11, 2009 4:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why would you even want your phone data stored on a remote server instead of locally. Nowadays it's pretty cheap to have 8 gigs on a micro SD card in your phone, which will store almost anything you ever need on it. Since people generally have their phones with them all the time anyways, what's the advantage of having this data saved on a server?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
veronykah
October 11, 2009 5:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AirIntake: My guess is the theory is you have a backup should your phone and your 8gig card get lost or stolen you have your info somewhere else.
I backup my Blackberry on my mac as well as on T-Mobiles servers, giving me 2 backups in addition to the SD card in the phone and in all probability I have most of my #s written on paper somewhere as well.
Sad part is, I don't think most people ever think of things like this or know they should be backing up their info.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
coss3n
October 11, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is why you should never partner with a company called \"Danger\". They might as well have called themselves \"Use at Your Own Risk\" or \"Extremely Shoddy\".

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
stormbird
October 12, 2009 4:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coss3n: Some rejected names for the company:

Craptacular
Turn Your Head and Cough
All Your Data Are Belong To Us
Three Stooges Computing (now 100% Moe free!!!1!!!!11!!!)
Computers & Electromagnets Together
Oh, They Have The Internet On Computers Now?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Paladin_11
October 11, 2009 4:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Shouldn't that be \"Danger! Microsoft!\"? Sort of like the Robot talking to Will Robinson?

One day I hope people wake up and realize that \"cloud computing\" is not their friend.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
vgeroh
October 12, 2009 12:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Paladin_11: thanks for the laugh to start my week ;)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Colonel Jack O'Neill
October 11, 2009 4:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is why cloud computering sucks, cause of stuff like this and all your data is lost.
And who came up with the idea to have all your info on the servers and not on your phone, that's was just a stupid idea.

You can never relay on a third party server, always do your own backups, even if they tell you they do it.

And one more thing, FUCK Perez Hilton

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
October 12, 2009 2:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Colonel Jack O'Neill:


+1 on Perez Hilton


He probably had to have it explained to him by a minon why his address book list didn't work...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
chrisdag
October 12, 2009 12:31 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Colonel Jack O'Neill: This has nothing, and I mean *nothing* to do with cloud computing.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Joeb5
October 11, 2009 11:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Colonel Jack O'Neill:
not only that there is to much lock down in the cell phone market.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Razor512
October 11, 2009 5:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Colonel Jack O'Neill: Tmobile did this because when sidekicks came out they were the most stolen cellphone. Not because they were cool, because they were not, but because you had buses full of idiots holding out a flash phone with blinking lights and crap out in the open for hours on end text messaging, and I would frequently see this on the bus

one person will be on their sidekick texting away and another person will rush by and grab the phone and run off the bus with it and will be long gone by the time the person got up to react to the situation. In cases like that you can use your other cellphone (many of then had a normal cellphone also since the sidekick sucked for voice calls), and t-mobile will stop the service to the stolen sidekick and the criminal will loose access to the info on it, but in this case they don't care because they can use the same sidekick with another service plan or unlock it and sell it on ebay.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Gracegottcha
October 11, 2009 4:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Remember.........Jesus saves!

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
October 12, 2009 2:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Gracegottcha:


In God We Trust, All Others Pay Cash...


Thanks to Shep...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
stormbird
October 12, 2009 4:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Gracegottcha: Jesus Saves, but not Microsoft. Microsoft/Danger was using Win 666, I presume.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dunkelzahn
October 11, 2009 4:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Gracegottcha:


Apparently T-Mobile/Microsoft/Danger don't follow the Bible....

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Razor512
October 11, 2009 4:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

shouldn't the company have insurance for this, in which if your servers fail, the fees for a professional data recovery company to recover the data from the possibly dead hard drives will be covered, or did they think servers never fail and decided to get rid of all safety to increase profits and now they don't want to pay the fees to have the data recovered.

I have worked with companies which have had fires in which a server was caught in it and much of the drive was physically damaged, blackened due to the flames, they paid certain monthly fees and were covered and a professional data recovery company took the drives and were able to recover almost all of the data.

T-mobile probably didn't have any of this done and they didn't pay for backup servers either.

To any other companies with servers, always have a off site backup of your servers that can be shipped to you when needed.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
coloradogray
October 11, 2009 6:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Razor512: \"T-mobile probably didn't have any of this done and they didn't pay for backup servers either.\"


Your absolutly right. T-Mobile didn't do this. That's because Danger/Microsoft own, run, and manage the servers. T-Mobile doesn't touch them.


Danger/Microsoft should have done a back-up before they did their upgrade, but they didn't, and that is sad for T-Mobile and Sidekick users.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Razor512
October 11, 2009 7:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coloradogray: by paying for backup servers I mean in their hosting package from microsoft, many hosting companies will offer additional servers for backups for a added fee.

tmobile must have thought that it would be cheaper to just offer their customers a free month of data since it cost of running the network is costing them next to nothing, than to pay for having the hosting company do proper backups.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
headhot
October 11, 2009 5:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Razor512:

Its my understanding that it was a failed SANs (Storage Area Network) upgrade. There are ways to mess up disks with RAID and partitioning to make recovery impossible. I.E. The disks are completely written over, preventing a restore.

That being said, I would expect there to be multiple systems, where you break the mirror, upgrade one, test it, then rebuild the mirror. Even then there are ways to screw it up.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Razor512
October 11, 2009 5:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@headhot:

they should at least have offsite backups. Even the one of the small companies I currently work for does it, surely a company as big as t-mobile or microsoft could do it also.

Daily backups are simple to do and only impact server performance slightly when the backup is in process and it is done at off peak hours.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
twophrasebark
October 11, 2009 5:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That's weird. I didn't hear them say something like \"Free month of service for everyone!\"

They must have said that. Right?

Right????????

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Dunkelzahn
October 11, 2009 5:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@twophrasebark:


They, according to something read on another site, offered '1 free month of data service' a.k.a. 'shut up and take it with no lube'.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Razor512
October 11, 2009 5:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dunkelzahn:

I wonder how many people here can actually remember each and every phone number in their address book to re enter it again, it will take longer than a month because you will have to contact the ones you do know and wait for the ones you don't know to contact you so you can add them again. a month of data doesn't help.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
G.O.B.: Come on!
October 11, 2009 5:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is what happens when you out-source I.T. They (Danger/Microsoft) had an outside firm do their upgrades. Clearly that firm did two things:
1. They fucked up the upgrade massively.
2. They fucked up without doing a back-up.

This is also why cloud computing can go piss off.

It's hard to see why T-Mobile should be on the hook for anything. All they really do is have the device on their network. Danger controls the server infrastructure behind the Sidekick. It's akin to getting pissed at your ISP if your Gmail account gets wiped out.

T-Mobile told users they didn't need to back-up their data because it has probably never been possible. One of the selling points of the Sidekick is that if you lose your device, all of the data can be retrieved on a new device by pulling it from the server. If personal, user-made backups were at all possible, they would be telling Sidekick owners to do them now.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
BacteriaEP
October 11, 2009 6:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@G.O.B.: Come on!:

It's an unfortunate case of kill the messenger. Whiel T-Mob has probably never even seen those servers people will undoubtedly blame them for everythng that has gone wrong.

They are the face of the Sidekick.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
FooSchnickens - Full of SCAR
October 11, 2009 5:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Like I said over on Giz: All the more reason to buy a real adult's phone!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
tinky XIII
October 11, 2009 5:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is why I use bitpim. For the cost of a transfer cable on eBay (all of a dollar), I can back up my entire phone myself. Should anything unfortunate happen to my Scoop, I can restore the data myself.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
October 11, 2009 6:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You'd think someone naming their company/division Danger, Inc. would work twice as hard to make sure its product wasn't dangerous.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Razor512
October 11, 2009 6:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep:

but wheres the danger in doing that? :)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
October 11, 2009 6:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

And just like I said before, try to call T-mobile and cancel without an ETF because of this mess. I can just about guarantee you they won't let you do it.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
dotyoureyes
October 11, 2009 6:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If I were a Sidekick customer, I'd be on the phone to T-Mo's termination department right now, demanding a free Android phone and at least 6 months of service credits. Seems like that would be fair compensation for screwing over customers so badly.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
El_Red
October 11, 2009 11:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dotyoureyes: I doubt that you will get anything else besides a week worth of credits.

If a user never backed up their gadget, well that's not company's problem. Outage - yes; personal data - no.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
BacteriaEP
October 11, 2009 6:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dotyoureyes:

Hah! Hahaha!

That's a joke right?

First of all let's narrow down the blame a little bit: this is Danger/Microsoft's bad. T-Mobile just gives the service, they don't store your information. This is an unfortunate case of kill the messenger since these are actually T-Mobile customers, but I doubt anybody from T-Mob has even seen those servers.

Second, you demand a free $500+ phone and free service for 6 months for losing some contacts and calender information and... maybe... some photos? How much do you think that stuff is really worth? I know if it happened to me it'd be about an hours worth of work setting everything else up again.

Finally, you should ALWAYS back up your important information. Let's not pretend like this is the first time this kind of thing has happened before. Entire websites have been lost, data been erased, and now contact and calender information is gone as well. If you've heard it once, you've heard it about a thousand more times from techies all around the world: BACK UP YOUR STUFF. Otherwise you'll lose it when something like this happens.

What happened sucks. I don't deny it. I'm a T-Mob customer now, but with a G1 instead. I'd be very pissed if my service was out for days and in turn it cost me a bunch of my personal contacts/calendar information, but it's certainly not worth demanding outrageous compensations for fairly minor losses.

For the record, I do feel for the people who had serious opportunities lost to them due to this outage. I really do.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jamar0303
October 12, 2009 6:28 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BacteriaEP: I wouldn't call that outrageous; it's the least they can do for erasing just about all your personal data with no hope of recovery. Hopefully they know better than to put their name to something they have no control over next time.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
BacteriaEP
October 12, 2009 2:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jamar0303:

So you honestly believe that everybody who has a Sidekick now deserves 6 months of free service and a free $500 phone?

Well I guess when something even bad happens, even minor things, a person's entitlement skyrockets by about ten fold. This is America, afterall; land of the frivolous \"I spilled hot coffee on myself, now give me $150 million\".

I'm not saying no compensation can be given and I'd see a free month of service as being a very generous offer from T-Mob. It's longer than the outage time and it covers any loss in data (about 15-20 days extra) but 6 months and a free smart phone is ridiculous.

Call me when everybody's sidekick explodes and then we'll talk seriously about this kind of compensation.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jamar0303
October 13, 2009 8:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BacteriaEP: When the data is in their care and I'm paying for such to be the case you bet I expect proportionate compensation for everything disappearing.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
BacteriaEP
October 13, 2009 3:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jamar0303:

Except the data was NOT in their care. T-Mobile never had your data, doesn't own those servers, and was not in charge of maintaining or upgrading those servers.

T-Mobile is the seller of that specific phone and the service provider of phone and data (as in internet/sms not your calendar and contacts).

Danger/Microsoft were the ones who fucked up. But everybody is so damn obsessed with their \"gimmes\" and \"I want mines\" that they don't want to blame Microsoft because they KNOW that if they blame Microsoft then they won't be able to get all the free service and phone upgrades, etc. from T-Mobile who is, by and large, an innocent bystander... they were the messenger.

Look, I'm all for consumer rights; in fact, I'm a damn socialist. I got a barcode tattoo'd on my body to remind myself, everyday, that no matter how much I'm forced to depend on them, corporations are always out for money and never my well being. But I know, I understand, where blame should be directed to.

Everybody wants their own little special prize package for this inconvenience, and they're gonna get it too: [www.engadgetmobile.com] But while your savoring your little prize and the blame is getting passed on to the company who had nothing to do with it; the REAL culprit is getting off scot-free from public disgrace. Do you think Microsoft has learned a lesson from this fiasco? Do you REALLY think this will now prevent them from saving money and attempting another outsource of their server maintenance again?

No, it won't. Because they aren't being held accountable for their royal fuck up. T-Mobile is...

Enjoy your pretty little compensation prize. Maybe you'll get another when this happens again.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jamar0303
October 14, 2009 12:55 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BacteriaEP: Then perhaps they shouldn't have charged extra for Sidekick service? They were, in effect, taking money for this. The data wasn't necessarily in their care, but I'm paying them for my data to be in someone's care even if it's not them. I'd expect them to be a little more careful who that someone is. And besides, if someone blamed Microsoft I bet you'd accuse them of trying to start another OS flamewar.

And me? I actually have no dog in this race. I was talking in the hypothetical. I have a Japanese Sharp (Sharp makes the Sidekicks; I liked the hardware but not the whole \"cloud\" thing for reasons that are obvious now so I went for the other option). Oodles of text/call filtering and security features and I can back up all my contacts/texts to miniSD. And I do. And the AQUOS screen makes it a joy to look at. I'm looking forward to upgrading to the new model that just came out with built-in solar panel (10 minutes' charging gets 1 minute talktime or 1 hour standby- not bad) and waterproofing (3ft- pretty good for a phone).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
BacteriaEP
October 14, 2009 4:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jamar0303:

\"And besides, if someone blamed Microsoft I bet you'd accuse them of trying to start another OS flamewar.\"

Are you serious? Are you really degrading this argument down to this because you have no points left to make?

Yeah, that's exactly what I'd do if somebody actually started blaming the real people behind this fiasco. Let's turn everything concerning Microsoft into an Apple vs. Microsoft debate!

/sarcasm

T-Mobile takes money for data as in INTERNET DATA. It's a service, where in, you get internet and other internet like services. Everybody pays for it if you want to use internet features on your phone. I pay T-Mobile so my G1 can have data too, but if my infomration was suddenly gone I'd know instantly that it was Google's fault... not T-Mob's.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jamar0303
October 15, 2009 2:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BacteriaEP: I am not degrading the argument so much as being sarcastic about the chances that someone could blame MS and \"get away with it\". But while I do believe some of the blame lies with them (oh come on, they became good enough for around 9 out of 10 computers on earth to use their software and they can't even properly take care of a cellphone data storage system? Something went wrong, and maybe it wasn't an accident.) but T-Mobile put their name to it. \"If you want something done right, do it yourself\" is how the saying goes, after all.

And Sidekick plans are priced differently from regular data plans. I noticed that when returning in America after a long time in China and I wanted to get a short-term prepaid account. (I didn't; roaming with my Chinese number actually turned out to be CHEAPER than getting a prepaid T-Mo SIM in all ways except incoming voice calls at US$.68/min. I just called back instead of picking up. Even IDD calls back to China were cheaper. And I get full internet versus just T-Zones. And I got the coverage of both AT&T and T-Mo. But that's another tale for a differnt day).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jamar0303
October 14, 2009 2:05 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jamar0303: Correction- 3m, not 3ft. 3ft is actually nothing special.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
JulesNoctambule
October 12, 2009 4:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BacteriaEP: Do yourself a favour and read up on that 'frivolous' hot coffee case.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Skaperen
October 12, 2009 1:01 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BacteriaEP: T-Mobile failed to do due diligence.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
stopcrazypp
October 11, 2009 11:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BacteriaEP:

Even though I agree that the OP is asking too much and shouldn't expect to get that kind of compensation, what do you mean narrowing the blame?

First of all, on the customer side, the only contract they have is with T-mobile. And with the sidekick, you can't get the same kind of service anywhere else besides from T-mobile, it even has their logo on the phone. Any support questions/issues go to T-mobile, not to Microsoft/Danger. This means no matter who caused the problem down the line, T-mobile has to compensate for the customers. T-mobile can choose to get payment from Microsoft/Danger, but first they have to handle the customers. Also by your same logic, since Microsoft/Danger itself contracted out the upgrade (rumored to Hitachi), should Hitachi be responsible for paying back customers directly? I don't think so.

So yes Microsoft/Danger (and the contractor they hired) caused the problems, but T-mobile has to take the responsibility.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
BacteriaEP
October 12, 2009 3:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@stopcrazypp:

I understand WHY T-Mob is catching the blame, but they still don't deserve it.

T-Mobile is the service provider. They didn't make the phone, they just sell it. It would be like blaming Best Buy for the problems with your Xbox 360. Or blaming Best Buy when your notebook dies. The only difference here is that T-Mobile is providing an ongoing service of data and phone to these people and as such maintains a constant relationship with them, unlike with the Best Buy/360 example, and therefor paints T-Mob as a culprit when, in reality, they just sell the phones and have nothing to do with the servers, backups, and everything else.

Yes it is Danger/Microsoft's fault as well as Hitachi's (if they were the company) but the bulk of it goes to Danger/Microsoft because they OWN the server. They must maintain it and they, ultimately, were the ones who decided to outsource the upgrading of the server to Hitachi. T-Mob had nothing to do with any of that.

T-Mob's only fault in all this was originally marketing the device as \"never needing to be backed up.\" But, by now, everybody should know hat you always always always back up your stuff.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Verucalise (Est.February2008)
October 11, 2009 6:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm still old school. After having 4+ cell phones... nothing beats an old fashioned address book.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
hardcle
October 11, 2009 6:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Looks like the blame for this can be laid at Microsoft's feet. After Microsoft acquired Danger, they pulled a lot of the people supporting Sidekick to work on Microsoft's new mobile platform \"Pink\". Which Microsoft is now in the process of killing. The full story is here:
[www.roughlydrafted.com]

Here's the relevant passage:
\"The final operator who is going to be pissed is T-Mobile, who has been just as loyal of a partner to Danger as Sharp has been. I don't know exactly what Microsoft has been telling them, but they have no doubt realized that they've been cut out of this deal in favor of their largest competitor. What's worse is that apparently Microsoft has been lying to them this whole time about the amount of resources that they've been putting behind Sidekick development and support (in reality, it was cut down to a handful of people in Palo Alto managing some contractors in Romania, Ukraine, etc.).

\"The reason for the deceit wasn't purely to cover up the development of Pink but also because Microsoft could get more money from T-Mobile for their support contract if T-Mobile thought that there were still hundreds of engineers working on the Sidekick platform. As we saw from their recent embarrassment with Sidekick data outages, that has clearly not been the case for some time.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
stopcrazypp
October 11, 2009 11:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hardcle:
The biggest problem with this is Danger never had backups in the first place; it's a flawed system from the start. If the system was designed to have regular backups, then the worst that will happen is recent contacts get lost.

I agree though, that since Microsoft now owns Danger, they are responsible for what happens at Danger.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ShiningSquirrel
October 11, 2009 7:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hardcle:
That's stretching it a bit there.
Development has nothing to do with the daily backup of servers. Danger is the one responsible for the day to day operation of the servers. Danger and thier employees are the ones ultimitly responsible for the backups and the verification of said backups daily, or in the case of data like this, multiple times a day.
Try to say that because MS had less developers working on the platform so it's thier fault is REALLY grasping at straws.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
hardcle
October 11, 2009 11:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ShiningSquirrel: You didn't read all of it. It was development *and support*.

There's more on this from AppleInsider by the same author.
[www.appleinsider.com]

Reply
\"user-pic\"
GearheadGeek
October 11, 2009 7:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ShiningSquirrel: Danger is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Microsoft, so the problem really does eventually belong to Microsoft. I'm not sure T-Mobile is big enough to slap Microsoft around as much as they deserve on this one, but I hope they do. Customers will certainly be slapping t-mobile around as much as they can manage.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
GearheadGeek
October 11, 2009 7:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Reading things like this makes me feel better about at least the part of my OCD that makes me back up all sorts of data all over the place. I sync my crackberry to Outlook AND Google Calendar as well as making device backups. I backup my photos, email and other documents to an external hard drive where I maintain as many versions as I have space to keep and most of my photos and email also exist in \"the cloud\" for a 3rd copy.

I am now tempted to go make a 4th copy of everything....

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
psm321
October 11, 2009 7:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My theory from the tone of the letter is that they have a way to recover the data, but it's going to cost them lots of $$$ to do so, so they're floating this out there to see how much outrage there is and whether it's worth it to spend the money.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
GearheadGeek
October 11, 2009 7:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This might end up being good for Sprint... it seems like most t-mobile customers are cost conscious, AT&T is having service troubles and Verizon is not cheap (good service, but not cheap.)

The Sidekick never appealed to me that much as a device, but with its keyboard it seems like its users who want to abandon t-mo over this would most like a crackberry or the Palm Pre, or perhaps one of the Android slider devices with a big landscape keyboard.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
strathmeyer
October 11, 2009 7:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The amount of people saying this isn't T-Mobile's fault or problem helps me realize why stupid people buy such shitty products.

Why is everyone on twitter complaining they can't cancel their service without having to pay the cancellation fees? Isn't failure of service and non-delivery of goods a reason for a chargeback?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
nybiker
October 11, 2009 9:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I am hoping (wishing?) that everyone who reads about this experience will now take the time to backup their stuff. Burn your 'My Documents' folder (or wherever you store your docs) to DVD. And do it twice, so you can keep a copy with you and a copy with a friend across the country.

So, remember: Create data; Backup Data; Repeat Backup. Create data.....

The files you save might be your own.

Another thought would be the 6 P's: Prior Planning Prevents Piss-Poor Performance.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
SaraFimm
October 11, 2009 10:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Went shopping at our Wal*Mart Super Center today and there was a T-mobile representative hanging out with the phone geeks/cashiers. Anyone else seeing this?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Tijil
October 11, 2009 10:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Even my MacBook has multiple automatic backups.

It's main drive is backed up with a Firewire RAID mirror and also via a separate WiFi RAID stack that does hourly incremental backups of everything on my LAN.

Daily backups are made to an off-site server.

...and that's just a personal laptop. A commercial service with hundred of thousands of customers paying millions of dollars in fees for the service should be at least as well backed up as a personal laptop.

Good show, Microsoft! Right on top of things, once again, I see.

Tomas
University Place, WA

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
outlulz
October 12, 2009 1:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tijil: Your idea of backups for a personal laptop are a little more extreme than the average person who just uses an external and something like Time Machine.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
4phun
October 12, 2009 1:35 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Other sources on the web imply that Microsoft may have mislead T-Mobile as to the amount of real support they were providing for the SideKick simply to increase profits (greed). T-Mobile pays for that support.

Meanwhile Microsoft was planing to introduce a similar concept called Pink on Verizon to help Verizon compete against the iPhone, taking away the T-Mobile exclusive deal.

Many think of those who had a SideKick as being mere kiddies exchanging text messages all day long on a 'toy' phone. That may have been Balmer's viewpoint too and maybe why he allegedly didn't spend much money supporting the SideKick.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
PølάrβǽЯ
October 12, 2009 3:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

While I understand this isn't T-mobile's fault, it IS their responsibility to provide the service. Thus, since they can't provide the service, sounds like an easy contract out to me. Have a sidekick and want to cancel? Call them up and tell them since they can't provide the service, you can't provide payment anymore.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
enine
October 12, 2009 3:15 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I was burned many years ago by msn/hotmail and a couple years later by MSMoney, I learned my lesson and it took a few more years to make the switch but I finally went Microsoft free.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
chauncy that billups
October 12, 2009 5:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That Perez Hilton lost all his sidekick data almost makes this whole thing worthwhile.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
spikey_korean
October 12, 2009 6:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Gizmodo Rumor: \"T-Mobile Lets Furious Sidekick Users Ditch Their Contracts for Free\" [gizmodo.com]

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
thekooldude215
October 12, 2009 6:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Sadly every single sidekick has been efected including mine.The night before the upgrade my battery side so when it powerd on for ocne in over a year it asked me to type in my sign in password little did I know intel ever photo and contact on my phone was gone.

Thanks a lot T-Mobile

Your Mad Costomer,
Michael

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Meathamper
October 13, 2009 1:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I hear every teen girl in the nation crying.

Reply
","","","","","");