/ Health, Technology

This week in comments – Macs, salt and spam

Did you think Apple’s Macs were ‘immune’ to viruses? Are restaurants adding too much salt to our food? And why shouldn’t complaints be treated as spam? You’ve been debating these issues and more this week.

Ready-salted restaurant meals

Is food too salty? The aptly-named Lessismore thinks it is:

‘I remember buying a Marks & Spencer’s primavera pasta sauce some years ago. I then added more peas and more peas and more peas until the whole pack was in there and it didn’t taste salty any more. I wonder how salty I’d find it now, several years on.

‘I also find that some pies are really only edible because of all the unsalted vegetables that we eat with them. I suspect it is the gravy that is over-salted.’

Commenter Murphybear also picked out gravy as their bugbear:

‘We have a local carvery which has the most wonderful local Devon beef. It was completely ruined by the gravy; I think they had cooked it using salt water. Even more amazing are the number of customers who liberally sprinkle their meals with salt without even tasting the food first.’

Apple admits it – Macs aren’t immune to viruses

William comments on Apple changing its tack on describing its Macs as immune to viruses:

‘The only reason Macs have been seen as the “safer” option is purely down to the fact that there aren’t armies of hackers trying to break them like there is in the Windows market. Come the day when there are as many Macs being used in the world as Windows PCs then let’s see if Apple’s claim rings true.’

However, David thinks Windows PCs are more susceptible to viruses due to design:

‘I have always believed that Windows is insecure by design because it allows the user to do anything without security barriers in place. All security measures are inconvenient, but not having the security built into Windows from “day one” has resulted in a worldwide spread of literally millions of viruses that target Windows.’

Has NatWest’s glitch sent your bank account into meltdown?

Stan Silversmith praises NatWest for going the extra mile to deal with his payment problem:

‘I emailed NatWest yesterday regarding a bill payment which they rescheduled because of the software problems. This has made the payment late and will incur a penalty. NatWest rang me this morning and apologised. They have also credited my account with twice the penalty charge.

‘I am quite happy with the way and speed with which they have dealt with my problem and feel that they are getting knocked in a lot of cases unfairly. We hear all the extreme cases the media can dig up, lets have some balance and less hysteria.’

Customer service 101: complaints aren’t ‘spam’

Tom calls out Three Mobile for reporting customer complaints as spam on Twitter:

‘This smacks of incompetence rather than deliberate malice. Three have every right to ignore their own customers (even if does not make good sense to snub your customers), but abusing the “mark as spam” feature rather than clicking the other button to block them just shows ignorance as to the difference.

‘That said, would I trust a company whose “social media experts” can’t figure out how Twitter works with all my telecommunication, or internet access needs? No. Not in a million years. Someone needs to read the instruction manual before they are let lose on the internet again.’

A little tipple abroad could trip up your travel insurance

And our Comment of the Week goes to Jackie B, who muses over travel insurers including terms to exclude those who have accidents while drinking on holiday:

‘It would appear on the surface that such a penalty is incorporated to limit claims from so-called “lager louts” or anyone who chooses to really get trollied. I suspect most people have done this at one time or another, both at home and whilst on holiday. Rightly or wrongly, at home the NHS deals with the worst cases, where there are no exclusions to my knowledge based on the amount of alcohol imbibed.

‘I would suggest therefore that it is reasonable to expect insurance to cover you for such eventualities whilst on holiday in a foreign country. It would seem to be another way of increasing premiums. By increasing exclusions at the expense of the majority whether for holiday insurance or for other types of cover, such actions may well hoist insurance companies by their own petard and potentially render insurance a laughable extravagance.’

Comments have been edited due to length, so make sure to read them in full on their relevant Convos (by clicking on the red title link).

Comments