
AT&T's Rube Golbergian Web Form - jal278
http://blog.joellehman.com/index.php/2011/06/youre-doing-it-wrong-att/
======
attempthrowaway
I work for AT&T. I have an obligation to inform you that what I say doesn't
represent their official blahblah whatever. You should know this isn't an on-
message marketing communique.

AT&T, the company that created Unix and C, could be said to no longer exist,
or more correctly could be said to be a different company than the one now
called by that name.

A little (abridged, simplified) history: AT&T, you may remember, sold its cell
business to Cingular long ago. Bell Labs went to Lucent before that.
Eventually, it even sold its residential phone business off. They backed out
of a lot of markets and dropped the best R&D lab they could have had.

What is called AT&T now is actually SBC, a Baby Bell with a penchant for out-
sourcing. SBC bought Cingular, AT&T, Pacific Bell, lots of other companies.
Their AT&T purchase was motivated in part by the name: everyione has heard of
AT&T.

SBC brought with them metric tons of bureaucracy, all running in IE.
Disgusting. It's not just the external web interfaces. We have to deal with
this BS internally, too. 1990s web interfaces that only work in IE (sometimes
requiring 7, sometimes requiring 6) for every interaction with corporate.
Taxes, mandatory training, time reporting, everything.

We have to grab a spare Windows machine or run a VM with XP in it. Most of the
tech side of company knows and hates the whole thing. The impenatrable
bureaucracy makes it impossible to find out who to complain to. There is no
escape. The article is dead-on about what's wrong, and I know first-hand,
because we have to eat that dog food weekly.

That said, it's a very cool place to work overall. For us, the consultant-
generated tech is a dent in the Porsche. But for a customer trying to give you
money? Even my mom doesn't use IE and she wouldn't understand the problem with
ActiveX controls.

~~~
maqr
Some history from Colbert: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsCp-1hgfxI>

------
ianterrell
Over the last 7 years I've set up more than half a dozen DSL/cable/FIOS modems
and routers (I've moved a lot). I've always used Linux or OS X (which was as
problematic as Linux in 2004).

FWIW, every company I've worked with (AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, others) has a
method of activating everything that does not require installing any software.
If you have a technician on site installing something they can do it for you;
if not you may have to call them to do it.

In my latest round with Verizon FIOS (4 months ago), the technician let me
know that they have the option "in case you just moved in and your computer is
packed away." Use that as an excuse, or say you haven't purchased your
computer yet but your family is over visiting and need to use the WiFi.

~~~
mestudent
I've activated without installing anything with every broadband provider I
have had as well and most of the time it is quite easy.

Cable seems to be activated just by using their modem the last few times and
qwest dsl can be activated by a simple login on a browser and waiting for them
to verify.

------
Swizec
Wow, that is truly horrible.

Although, think of it like this: AT&T is doing what every web developer in the
world wishes they were able/allowed to do. It's getting people off IE6.

Granted, the process should be "If IE, then update, else, just show form"

------
brudgers
> _"In short: a simple web-form system shouldn’t end up installing Internet
> Explorer 8 for you. I think it’s interesting particularly because no lean
> startup would ever ever do this in a million years, yet we aren’t
> particularly surprised when a big company is flushing dollars down the
> toilet in this way."_

I would hardly be surprised if doing it this way saves ATT millions of
dollars. The default browser for Windows XP is IE6 and a large percentage of
new ATT internet customers are highly likely to use whatever browser is on
their system, and even a small fraction of ATT's customers is millions of
people.

Also keep in mind that this default behavior was almost certainly implemented
several years ago when the use of IE6 was even greater than it is today in
order to avoid lengthy technical support phone conversations with people like
your grandparents when they purchased their first computer.

I'll add that it costs ATT very little to only directly support IE - sure a
few calls from Firefox users escalate but that is probably offset by the fact
that as a market segment those users are more likely to be technically savvy.

ATT knows its market segment in a way that most startups would do well to
emulate - and recognizing how their setup procedure goes to their bottom line
is a valuable lesson about focusing on MVP rather than perfect code.

~~~
false
Well, and how these reasoning justifies the need of ActiveX (the solely reason
of IE8 installation) in order to fill in a web form?

~~~
brudgers
I suspect that ActiveX enabled browsers allows them to further reduce support
costs, e.g. installing a 32 bit version of IE8 allows the Flash driver to be
installed thereby reducing calls from grandpa whose new system came with a 64
bit version of Windows 7 and therefor uses the x64 version of IE by default -
not to mention that ActiveX also allows ATT to install more powerful software
on the customers browser for support and tracking purposes.

~~~
Osiris
64-bit Windows actually uses the 32-bit IE by default. You have to use a
special Internet Explorer (64-bit) shortcut to run the 64-bit version. I don't
think that's an issue.

------
nose
_Now: Would DropBox do something this silly?_

Yeah. DropBox installs Growl without the user's permission.
<http://growl.info/thirdpartyinstallations.php>

~~~
rm-rf
And just for kicks, they accidentally open up your files to anyone who knows
your e-mail address.

------
joezydeco
Rule #1 when calling AT&T DSL support: Always, ALWAYS say you're running
Windows with IE. Lie. Fake it. Whatever.

If you say anything else you'll derail your support. Your goal is to get
through the level 1 did-you-plug-everything-in-lets-restart-your-machine
gauntlet.

That, or go to the forums at dslreports.com and hope you can contact a
sympathetic AT&T engineer.

~~~
mscarborough
This seems to be a good rule for calling any cable/phone ISP.

The last time I mentioned using a Mac the support person ignored that I had
already tried pinging certain gateways to check connectivity, and proceeded to
condescendingly walk me through going to Applications->Utilities->Network
Utility so that I could run ping from a tab there.

Of course I quit after 15 min of this, tried to access again in a couple
hours, and it was just a network failure in my area, anyway. Geez.

~~~
joezydeco
I'll add Rule 1A: _Never talk net-speak with tier-1 support_.

"I've run some traceroutes and packets are getting lost at your router in
Elmhurst. When I do get through, ping times are over 700 millseconds"

"Okay, sir, what I'm going to need you do to is close your browser and restart
it"

~~~
Anechoic
_I'll add Rule 1A: Never talk net-speak with tier-1 support._

If only "shibboleet" worked in real life...

------
ilamont
How many people give up before reaching the form, and end up calling someone
at AT&T for help? The costs must be enourmous.

~~~
brudgers
ATT has a pretty good infrastructure for handling phone calls from customers -
being that they are a phone company with more than 120 years of experience in
doing so (founded 1885).

So it is probably not as expensive as one might think at first blush.

~~~
Kejistan
From my experience with their phone support I'll agree that it probably isn't
expensive, but only because it seems to be chronically understaffed. Multi
hour wait times appear to be the norm when dealing with AT&T.

------
melling
So, you must have had IE6 or IE7? As much as I hate being forced to run any
particular browser, one less machines running these old browsers is a good
thing.

~~~
dimarco
Typically, "upgrade your browser" techniques are welcomed in HN. Google drops
support for IE6, then IE7 - smiles all around. Apps block off IE6 - "good for
them".

AT&T does something similar and it's met with frustration?

Requiring IE* should be frowned upon. But anything that says "upgrade from
IE6", in end-user land, is probably a good thing.

~~~
jal278
My frustration was because IE*, and thus some form of Windows was required. I
use modern browsers, just never IE, and windows only when I must.

So I agree with your point about upgrading being a good thing, but the
underlying absurdity is that something inherently platform independent (a
webform) was perverted into something entirely specific to not only a
particular OS, but a particular browser.

My ire with IE being updated was that I was never going to use IE ever again
(by choice), whether it was 6 or 8; and so whether it was upgraded or not
would not affect my browsing experience on sites other than this particular
instance. So for me, it was just one additional hoop that I had to grudgingly
jump through.

------
underwater
I just signed up for AT&T and their whole signup process is incredibly broken.
Their customer section is divided into three sections: Wireless; Internet and
Phone; and U-verse. Each has it's own login system. One use sequential IDs for
logins, one usernames and the other email addresses.

I spent ages fighting the login and ID recovery system before I found out my
DSL connection came under "U-verse" and not "Internet". Their login page even
has a helpful picture of a TV to illustrate the U-verse link:
<http://www.att.com/accounts/?source=IC4425j4900s2000>

I still have no idea what "U-verse" is and what differentiates it. I just
assume that some crappy marketing manager thought the name was cute.

~~~
Hoff
Four sections. The iPad plan has its own login hidden off to the side.

------
zephjc
Why is the form asking for gender as a required field?

~~~
sp332
It's probably just a language thing, so the forms can say "him" or "her"?

Edit: or in support calls, they sometimes accidentally say "sir" to a woman
etc., this might help with that.

~~~
mikle
Or they are selling this info to a third party... I've heard of a story of a
guy that used his British girlfriend's identity to sign up to one of your
American internet (or cable) providers and than got a lot of spam for her,
even though that's the only place he used her name.

(Yes, I know this sounds like an urban myth, but I can dig up where I heard it
straight from the guy, he has a podcast).

------
mmahemoff
Of course, a lot of this is plain incompetence, but there is a security motive
explaining why enterprises only support specific browser versions, even if
it's an irrational one. Enterprises fear people will blame them even when the
browser is at fault. Celebrity's AT&T account gets hacked? "ZOMG AT&T doesn't
care about its users' data."

It's not entirely crazy either, when you consider how mainstream media and
consumers perceive security incidents. The problem, though, is when
enterprises tend to be overly conservative, not acknowledging "reasonable
risk". And being out of touch with browser trends, ie assuming that only a
particular version of IE is safe. (In this case, IE is probably required
because the developers didn't know any better, but in other cases, an out-of-
date understanding of browsers is the rationale for supporting only IE.)

------
soulinafishbowl
There is (or was) a similar system profiler program that installs itself from
Windstream's DSL service, and will not allow itself to be removed from a PC by
any means I am aware of. Totally unacceptable on my machines that I
purposefully kept perfectly clean!

~~~
pasbesoin
It's not what you see, it's what you don't see.

Comcast installation was/is similar -- done in my case during the course of
the Comcast technician's visit. I got rid of their crap when I reimaged the
machine. Didn't affect service in any perceptible manner. (It did get rid of
their branding from the IE window title, though -- another useless annoyance.)

If I have to go through similar, again, I'm going to do it in a disposable
virtual machine image (reverting back to the last snapshot).

~~~
koenigdavidmj
<http://support.microsoft.com/kb/176497>

You can change the 'Microsoft Internet Explorer provided by Yoyodyne' string
to whatever you want.

~~~
pasbesoin
Yeah, I'm more bothered by the services their default process installs. They
can monitor their modem, if they must. They can keep their nose out of my
system. Though branding the IE windows title is just downright annoying,
particularly for non-technical users. In addition to taking up space and being
distracting, every screenshot they make carries it, like it or not.

People are reminded of you every month when they pay their bill, Comcast.
Don't push it. /rhetoric

------
chopsueyar
Should be 'Goldbergian'. There is a 'd' in there.

------
jonah
So what I want to know is whether the ActiveX control is actually doing
anything _necessary_ [1] to automate the install process. Is it telnetting to
the modem or something like that?

Other commenters mentioned you can call them to activate your account. What
info do you have to give them that's not collectible via a web form?

[1] I'm assuming the whole ActiveX thing is to push a download of IE8 because
the code whatever tool they used to build the signup form only works in IE8.
But it just boggles.

------
planb
The landing page [...] plays some audio instructions [...] There is a five
minute pause as AT&T’s website “checks my system.” [...] my browser is not
supported — well, I use chrome on ubuntu [...] Firefox. Wrong. It requires an
ActiveX control [...] Windows XP [...] IE [...] ActiveX control. I’m getting
frustrated by this point.

Wow, this is one patient guy. I would have gotten frustrated by the second
point already and would have thrown something against the wall by then!

------
jeffclune
I noticed a surge in traffic to EndlessForms.com and realized it was coming
from this post. Thanks to Joel for mentioning our site[1]! For those of you
that don't know what I am talking about, see Joel's comment on the original
post where he recommends EndlessForms.com, where you can design objects with
evolution and 3D print them. Thanks all for checking it out.

[1] <http://endlessforms.com>

------
sdkmvx
I didn't run an ActiveX control. I did it from my Mac. Granted this isn't
Chrome on Ubuntu, but I would be very curious to find out what would happen if
you have Chrome on Ubuntu report it's user agent as Safari on Mac.

It would be even better if AT&T could somehow be convinced to run the same
code that runs in normal browsers anytime the user agent isn't IE. Even better
if they could somehow be convinced not to even run ActiveX in IE.

------
wjflywheel
Hmmm.. Random un*x variant. Then the backup plan is an OS from 2001. Sounds
like the plot from Woody Allen's Sleeper...

------
aohtsab
A faster approach would be to spoof your user agent -- announce yourself as IE
8 on Windows XP.

~~~
ori_b
That would work if they hadn't used ActiveX

~~~
terinjokes
I wonder if the form would have worked anyways. People bring work laptop home
that IT might have configured to not use ActiveX

Though you're probably right, probably would have failed.

------
kingkilr
Only where AT&T is involved could we rush to the defense of IE6.

------
meow
Who said dinosaurs are extinct... They are hiding in plain sight...

------
gcb
spent two days trying to subscribe using linux after I found out they are the
only ones around... I finally found a phone number that has a short wait and
somewhat knowledgeable people

1-800-288-2020

------
lhnn
Cui Bono.

What if Microsoft pays AT&T on the side to force a large number of people to
use their platform? Even if most people already do, it instills in people the
believe that that Line-ux thing doesn't work with the Internet.

