text:
How Google Works: Reducing Complexity
With his unruly hair dipping across his forehead, Douglas Merrill walks up to the lectern set up in a ballroom of the Arizona Biltmore Resort and Spa, looking like a slightly rumpled university professor about to start a lecture. In fact, he is here on this April morning to talk about his work as director of internal technology for Google to a crowd of chief information officers gathered at a breakfast sponsored by local recruiting firm Phoenix Staffing.
Google, the secretive, extraordinarily successful $6.1 billion global search engine company, is one of the most recognized brands in the world. Yet it selectively discusses its innovative information management infrastructure—which is based on one of the largest distributed computing/grid systems in the world.
Merrill is about to give his audience a rare glimpse into the future according to Google, and explain the workings of the company and the computer systems behind it.
For all the razzle-dazzle surrounding Google—everything from the press it gets for its bring-your-dog-to-work casual workplace, to its stock price, market share, dizzying array of beta product launches and its death-match competition with Microsoft—it must also solve more basic issues like billing, collection, reporting revenue, tracking projects, hiring contractors, recruiting and evaluating employees, and managing videoconferencing systems—in other words, common business problems.
But this does not mean that Google solves these problems in a conventional way, as Merrill is about to explain.
"We're about not ever accepting that the way something has been done in the past is necessarily the best way to do it today," he says.
Among other things, that means that Google often doesn't deploy standard business applications on standard hardware. Instead, it may use the same text parsing technology that drives its search engine to extract application input from an e-mail, rather than a conventional user interface based on data entry forms. Instead of deploying an application to a conventional server, Merrill may deploy it to a proprietary server-clustering infrastructure that runs across its worldwide data centers.
Google runs on hundreds of thousands of servers—by one estimate, in excess of 450,000—racked up in thousands of clusters in dozens of data centers around the world. It has data centers in Dublin, Ireland; in Virginia; and in California, where it just acquired the million-square-foot headquarters it had been leasing. It recently opened a new center in Atlanta, and is currently building two football-field-sized centers in The Dalles, Ore.
By having its servers and data centers distributed geographically, Google delivers faster performance to its worldwide audience, because the speed of the connection between any two computers on the Internet is partly a factor of the speed of light, as well as delays caused by network switches and routers. And although search is still Google's big moneymaker, those servers are also running a fast-expanding family of other applications like Gmail, Blogger, and now even Web-based word processors and spreadsheets.
That's why there is so much speculation about Google the Microsoft-killer, the latest firm nominated to drive everything to the Web and make the Windows desktop irrelevant. Whether or not you believe that, it's certainly true that Google and Microsoft are banging heads. Microsoft expects to make about a $1.5 billion capital investment in server and data structure infrastructure this year. Google is likely to spend at least as much to maintain its lead, following a $838 million investment in 2005.
And at Google, large-scale systems technology is all-important. In 2005, it indexed 8 billion Web pages. Meanwhile, its market share continues to soar. According to a recent ComScore Networks qSearch survey, Google's market share for search among U.S. Internet users reached 43% in April, compared with 28% for Yahoo and 12.9% for The Microsoft Network (MSN).
And Google's market share is growing; a year ago, it was 36.5%. The same survey indicates that Americans conducted 6.6 billion searches online in April, up 4% from the previous month. Google sites led the pack with 2.9 billion search queries performed, followed by Yahoo sites (1.9 billion) and MSN-Microsoft (858 million).
This growth is driven by an abundance of scalable technology. As Google noted in its most recent annual report filing with the SEC: "Our business relies on our software and hardware infrastructure, which provides substantial computing resources at low cost. We currently use a combination of off-the-shelf and custom software running on clusters of commodity computers. Our considerable investment in developing this infrastructure has produced several key benefits. It simplifies the storage and processing of large amounts of data, eases the deployment and operation of large-scale global products and services, and automates much of the administration of large-scale clusters of computers."
Google buys, rather than leases, computer equipment for maximum control over its infrastructure. Google chief executive officer Eric Schmidt defended that strategy in a May 31 call with financial analysts. "We believe we get tremendous competitive advantage by essentially building our own infrastructures," he said.
Google does more than simply buy lots of PC-class servers and stuff them in racks, Schmidt said: "We're really building what we think of internally as supercomputers."
Because Google operates at such an extreme scale, it's a system worth studying, particularly if your organization is pursuing or evaluating the grid computing strategy, in which high-end computing tasks are performed by many low-cost computers working in tandem.
Despite boasting about this infrastructure, Google turned down requests for interviews with its designers, as well as for a follow-up interview with Merrill. Merrill did answer questions during his presentation in Phoenix, however, and the division of the company that sells the Google Search Appliance helped fill in a few blanks.
In general, Google has a split personality when it comes to questions about its back-end systems. To the media, its answer is, "Sorry, we don't talk about our infrastructure." Yet, Google engineers crack the door open wider when addressing computer science audiences, such as rooms full of graduate students whom it is interested in recruiting. As a result, sources for this story included technical presentations available from the University of Washington Web site, as well as other technical conference presentations, and papers published by Google's research arm, Google Labs.
Also in this Feature:
What Other CIOs Can Learn
While few organizations work on the scale of Google, CIOs can learn much from how the company deploys its technology and the clues it provides to the future of technology. Even if Google falters as a company, or competitors and imitators eventually take away its lead, the systems architecture it exemplifies will live on. "Google is a harbinger in the same way that in the early 1960s, a fully loaded IBM 1460 mainframe gave us a taste of more powerful computers to come," says Baseline columnist Paul A. Strassmann.
Strassmann, whose career includes senior information-technology management roles at government agencies including the Department of Defense, has been advising the military that it needs to become more like Google. This recommendation is partly inspired by his admiration for the company's skill at rapidly deploying computing power throughout the world as it's done the past few years. "Clearly, they have the largest [computer] network anywhere," he says.
Among other things, Google has developed the capability to rapidly deploy prefabricated data centers anywhere in the world by packing them into standard 20- or 40-foot shipping containers, Strassmann says. That's just the sort of capability an army on the move would like to have at its disposal to provide tactical support for battle or relief operations.
According to Strassmann, the idea of portable data centers has been kicking around the military for years, but today exists mostly as a collection of PowerPoint slides. And Google-like rapid access to information might be just what's needed in a war zone, where reports from the field too often pile up unread, he says. The military equivalent of Googling your competition would be for a field officer to spend a few seconds typing a query into a mobile device to get the latest intelligence about a hostile village before the troops move in. "It's Google skinned down into the hands of a Marine," he says.
Google's creation of the shipping container data centers was also reported in November by Triumph of the Nerds author Robert X. Cringely in his blog at Pbs.org. He describes it as a system of "5,000 Opteron processors and 3.5 petabytes of disk storage that can be dropped off overnight by a tractor-trailer rig. [A petabyte is a quadrillion bytes, the next order of magnitude up from a terabyte, which is a trillion]. The idea is to plant one of these puppies anywhere Google owns access to fiber, basically turning the entire Internet into a giant processing and storage grid." Google will not comment on these reports.
Greg Linden, one of the architects of Amazon.com's early systems, is fascinated by what Google has created but wary of the hype it sometimes attracts. "Google definitely has been influential, changing how many companies think about the computers that power their systems," says Linden, now CEO at Findory.com, a personalized news site he founded. "But it might be going a bit far to say they are leading a revolution by themselves."
Although Google's requirements might seem so exotic that few other organizations would need anything like its technology stack, Linden says he spoke with a hedge fund technology manager who said how much he would love to employ the distributed computing software behind Google's data centers to run data-intensive market simulations. And Linden says BigTable, Google's system for managing very large databases, sounds like something "I would have loved to have had at Amazon."
It is, however, something that Merrill can tap into at will. One of five engineering vice presidents, Merrill is Google's senior director of information systems—effectively, the CIO.
For some basic corporate functions like financial management, Merrill chooses the same kind of technologies you would find in any other corporate data center. On the other hand, Google doesn't hesitate to create applications for internal use and put them on its own server grid. If the company's software engineers think they can tinker up something to make themselves more productive—for example, a custom-built project tracking system—Merrill doesn't stand in their way.
Also in this Feature:
The Start of the Story
Google started with a research project into the structure of the Web led by two Stanford University Ph.D. candidates, Larry Page and Sergey Brin. After initially offering to sell the search engine they had created to an established firm, such as Yahoo, but failing to find a buyer, they established Google in 1998 to commercialize the technology. For the first few years of the company's existence, the co-founders were determined to avoid making money through advertising, which they thought would corrupt the integrity of search results. But when their initial technology licensing business model fell flat, they compromised. While keeping the Google home page ad-free, they began inserting text ads next to their search results, with ad selection driven by the search keywords. The ads were clearly separated from the search results, but highly effective because of their relevance. At pennies per click, the ad revenue pouring into Google began mounting quickly.
When Google went public in 2004, analysts, competitors and investors were stunned to learn how much money the company with the ad-free home page was raking in—$1.4 billion in the first half of 2004 alone. Last year, revenue topped $6 billion.
Google and its information-technology infrastructure had humble beginnings, as Merrill illustrates early in his talk with a slide-show photo of Google.stanford.edu, the academic research project version of the search engine from about 1997, before the formation of Google Inc., when the server infrastructure consisted of a jumble of PCs scavenged from around campus.
"Would any of you be really proud to have this in your data center?" Merrill asks, pointing to the disorderly stack of servers connected by a tangle of cables.
"But this is the start of the story," he adds, part of an approach that says "don't necessarily do it the way everyone else did. Just find some way of doing it cheap and effectively—so we can learn."
The basic tasks that Google had to perform in 1997 are the same it must perform today. First, it scours the Web for content, "crawling" from one page to another, following links. Copies of pages it finds must be stored in a document repository, along with their Internet addresses, and further analyzed to produce indexes of words and links occurring in each document. When someone types keywords into Google, the search engine compares them against the index to determine the best matches and displays links to them, along with relevant excerpts from the cached Web documents. To make all this work, Google had to store and analyze a sizable fraction of all the content on the Web, which posed both technical and economic challenges.
By 1999, the Google.com search engine was running in professionally managed Internet data centers run by companies like Exodus. But the equipment Google was parking there was, if anything, more unconventional, based on hand-built racks with corkboard trays. The hardware design was led by Page, a natural engineer who once built a working ink-jet printer out of Legos. His team assembled racks of bare motherboards, mounted four to a shelf on corkboard, with cheap no-name hard drives purchased at Fry's Electronics. These were packed close together (like "blade servers before there were blade servers," Merrill says). The individual servers on these racks exchanged and replicated data over a snarl of Ethernet cables plugged into Hewlett-Packard network switches. The first Google.com production system ran on about 30 of these racks. You can see one for yourself at the Computer History Museum, just a few blocks away from Google's Mountain View headquarters.
Part of the inspiration behind this tightly packed configuration was that, at the time, data centers were charging by the square foot, and Page wanted to fit the maximum computer power into the smallest amount of space. Frills like server enclosures around the circuit boards would have just gotten in the way.
This picture makes the data center manager in Merrill shudder. "Like, the cable management is really terrible," he says. Why aren't cables carefully color-coded and tied off? Why is the server numbering scheme so incoherent?
The computer components going into those racks were also purchased for rock-bottom cost, rather than reliability. Hard drives were of a "poorer quality than you would put into your kid's computer at home," Merrill says, along with possibly defective memory boards sold at a fire-sale discount. But that was just part of the strategy of getting a lot of computing power without spending a lot of money. Page, Brin and the other Google developers started with the assumption that components would fail regularly and designed their search engine software to work around that.
Google's co-founders knew the Web was growing rapidly, so they would have to work very hard and very smart to make sure their index of Web pages could keep up. They pinned their hopes on falling prices for processors, memory chips and storage, which they believed would continue to fall even faster than the Web was growing. Back at the very beginning, they were trying to build a search engine on scavenged university resources. Even a little later, when they were launching their company on the strength of a $100,000 investment from Sun Microsystems co-founder Andy Bechtolsheim, they had to make their money stretch as far as possible. So, they built their system from the cheapest parts money would buy.
At the time, many dot-com companies, flush with cash, were buying high-end Sun servers with features like RAID hard drives. RAID, for redundant arrays of independent disks, boosts the reliability of a storage device through internal redundancy and automatic error correction. Google decided to do the same thing by different means—it would make entire computers redundant with each other, making many frugally constructed computers work in parallel to deliver high performance at a low cost.
By 1999, when Google received $25 million in venture funding, the frugality that had driven the early systems design wasn't as much of a necessity. But by then, it had become a habit.
Later Google data centers tidied up the cabling, and corkboard (which turned out to pose a fire hazard) vanished from the server racks. Google also discovered that there were downsides to its approach, such as the intense cooling and power requirements of densely packed servers.
In a 2003 paper, Google noted that power requirements of a densely packed server rack could range from 400 to 700 watts per square foot, yet most commercial data centers could support no more than 150 watts per square foot. In response, Google was investigating more power-efficient hardware, and reportedly switched from Intel to AMD processors for this reason. Google has not confirmed the choice of AMD, which was reported earlier this year by Morgan Stanley analyst Mark Edelstone.
Although Google's infrastructure has gone through many changes since the company's launch, the basic clustered server rack design continues to this day. "With each iteration, we got better at doing this, and doing it our way," Merrill says.
Also in this Feature:
A Role Model
For Google, the point of having lots of servers is to get them working in parallel. For any given search, thousands of computers work simultaneously to deliver an answer.
For CIOs to understand why parallel processing makes so much sense for search, consider how long it would take for one person to find all the occurrences of the phrase "service-oriented architecture" in the latest issue of Baseline. Now assign the same task to 100 people, giving each of them one page to scan, and have them report their results back to a team leader who will compile the results. You ought to get your answer close to 100 times faster.
On the other hand, if one of the workers on this project turns out to be dyslexic, or suddenly drops dead, completion of the overall search job could be delayed or return bad results. So, when designing a parallel computing system—particularly one like Google's, built from commodity components rather than top-shelf hardware—it's critical to build in error correction and fault tolerance (the ability of a system to recover from failures).
Some basic concepts Google would use to scale up had already been defined by 1998, when Page and Brin published their paper on "The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine." In its incarnation as a Stanford research project, Google had already collected more than 25 million Web pages. Each document was scanned to produce one index of the words it contained and their frequency, and that, in turn, was transformed into an "inverted index" relating keywords to the pages in which they occurred.
But Google did more than just analyze occurrences of keywords. Page had come up with a formula he dubbed PageRank to improve the relevance of search results by analyzing the link structure of the Web. His idea was that, like frequent citations of an academic paper, links to a Web site were clues to its importance. If a site with a lot of incoming links—like the Yahoo home page—linked to a particular page, that link would also carry more weight. Google would eventually have to modify and augment Page's original formula to battle search engine spam tactics. Still, PageRank helped establish Google's reputation for delivering better search results.
Previous search engines had not analyzed links in such a systematic way. According to The Google Story, a book by Washington Post writer David Vise and Mark Malseed, Page had noticed that early search engine king AltaVista listed the number of links associated with a page in its search results but didn't seem to be making any other use of them. Page saw untapped potential. In addition to recording which pages linked to which other pages, he designed Google to analyze the anchor text—the text of a link on a Web page, typically displayed to a Web site visitor with underlining and color—as an additional clue to the content of the target page.
That way, it could sometimes divine that a particular page was relevant even though the search keywords didn't appear on that page. For example, a search for "cardiopulmonary resuscitation" might find a page that exclusively uses the abbreviation "CPR" because one of the Web pages linking to it spells out the term in the link's anchor text.
All this analysis requires a lot of storage. Even back at Stanford, the Web document repository alone was up to 148 gigabytes, reduced to 54 gigabytes through file compression, and the total storage required, including the indexes and link database, was about 109 gigabytes. That may not sound like much today, when you can buy a Dell laptop with a 120-gigabyte hard drive, but in the late 1990s commodity PC hard drives maxed out at about 10 gigabytes.
To cope with these demands, Page and Brin developed a virtual file system that treated the hard drives on multiple computers as one big pool of storage. They called it BigFiles. Rather than save a file to a particular computer, they would save it to BigFiles, which in turn would locate an available chunk of disk space on one of the computers in the server cluster and give the file to that computer to store, while keeping track of which files were stored on which computer. This was the start of what essentially became a distributed computing software infrastructure that runs on top of Linux.
The overall design of Google's software infrastructure reflects the principles of grid computing, with its emphasis on using many cheap computers working in parallel to achieve supercomputer-like results.
Some definitions of what makes a grid a grid would exclude Google as having too much of a homogenous, centrally controlled infrastructure, compared with a grid that teams up computers running multiple operating systems and owned by different organizations.
But the company follows many of the principles of grid
architecture, such as the goal of minimizing network bottlenecks by minimizing data transmission from one computer to another.
Instead, whenever possible, processing instructions are sent to the server or servers containing the relevant data, and only the results are returned over the network.
"They've gotten to the point where they're distributing what really should be considered single computers across continents," says Colin Wheeler, an information systems consultant with experience in corporate grid computing projects, including a project for the Royal Bank of Canada.
Having studied Google's publications, he notes that the company has had to tinker with computer science fundamentals in a way that few enterprises would: "I mean, who writes their own file system these days?"
Also in this Feature:
The Google File System
In 2003, Google's research arm, Google Labs, published a paper on the Google File System (GFS), which appears to be a successor to the BigFiles system Page and Brin wrote about back at Stanford, as revamped by the systems engineers they hired after forming Google. The new document covered the requirements of Google's distributed file system in more detail, while also outlining other aspects of the company's systems such as the scheduling of batch processes and recovery from subsystem failures.
The idea is to "store data reliably even in the presence of unreliable machines," says Google Labs distinguished engineer Jeffrey Dean, who discussed the system in a 2004 presentation available by Webcast from the University of Washington.
For example, the GFS ensures that for every file, at least three copies are stored on different computers in a given server cluster. That means if a computer program tries to read a file from one of those computers, and it fails to respond within a few milliseconds, at least two others will be able to fulfill the request. Such redundancy is important because Google's search system regularly experiences "application bugs, operating system bugs, human errors, and the failures of disks, memory, connectors, networking and power supplies," according to the paper.
The files managed by the system typically range from 100 megabytes to several gigabytes. So, to manage disk space efficiently, the GFS organizes data into 64-megabyte "chunks," which are roughly analogous to the "blocks" on a conventional file system—the smallest unit of data the system is designed to support. For comparison, a typical Linux block size is 4,096 bytes. It's the difference between making each block big enough to store a few pages of text, versus several fat shelves full of books.
To store a 128-megabyte file, the GFS would use two chunks. On the other hand, a 1-megabyte file would use one 64-megabyte chunk, leaving most of it empty, because such "small" files are so rare in Google's world that they're not worth worrying about (files more commonly consume multiple 64-megabyte chunks).
A GFS cluster consists of a master server and hundreds or thousands of "chunkservers," the computers that actually store the data. The master server contains all the metadata, including file names, sizes and locations. When an application requests a given file, the master server provides the addresses of the relevant chunkservers. The master also listens for a "heartbeat" from the chunkservers it manages—if the heartbeat stops, the master assigns another server to pick up the slack.
In technical presentations, Google talks about running more than 50 GFS clusters, with thousands of servers per cluster, managing petabytes of data.
More recently, Google has enhanced its software infrastructure with BigTable, a super-sized database management system it developed, which Dean described in an October presentation at the University of Washington. Big Table stores structured data used by applications such as Google Maps, Google Earth and My Search History. Although Google does use standard relational databases, such as MySQL, the volume and variety of data Google manages drove it to create its own database engine. BigTable database tables are broken into smaller pieces called tablets that can be stored on different computers in a GFS cluster, allowing the system to manage tables that are too big to fit on a single server.
Also in this Feature:
Reducing Complexity
Google's distributed storage architecture for data is combined with distributed execution of the software that parses and analyzes it.
To keep software developers from spending too much time on the arcana of distributed programming, Google invented MapReduce as a way of simplifying the process. According to a 2004 Google Labs paper, without MapReduce the company found "the issues of how to parallelize the computation, distribute the data and handle failures" tended to obscure the simplest computation "with large amounts of complex code."
Much as the GFS offers an interface for storage across multiple servers, MapReduce takes programming instructions and assigns them to be executed in parallel on many computers. It breaks calculations into two parts—a first stage, which produces a set of intermediate results, and a second, which computes a final answer. The concept comes from functional programming languages such as Lisp (Google's version is implemented in C++, with interfaces to Java and Python).
A typical first-week training assignment for a new programmer hired by Google is to write a software routine that uses MapReduce to count all occurrences of words in a set of Web documents. In that case, the "map" would involve tallying all occurrences of each word on each page—not bothering to add them at this stage, just ticking off records for each one like hash marks on a sheet of scratch paper. The programmer would then write a reduce function to do the math—in this case, taking the scratch paper data, the intermediate results, and producing a count for the number of times each word occurs on each page.
One example, from a Google developer presentation, shows how the phrase "to be or not to be" would move through this process.
While this might seem trivial, it's the kind of calculation Google performs ad infinitum. More important, the general technique can be applied to many statistical analysis problems. In principle, it could be applied to other data mining problems that might exist within your company, such as searching for recurring categories of complaints in warranty claims against your products.
But it's particularly key for Google, which invests heavily in a statistical style of computing, not just for search but for solving other problems like automatic translation between human languages such as English and Arabic (using common patterns drawn from existing translations of words and phrases to divine the rules for producing new translations).
MapReduce includes its own middleware—server software that automatically breaks computing jobs apart and puts them back together. This is similar to the way a Java programmer relies on the Java Virtual Machine to handle memory management, in contrast with languages like C++ that make the programmer responsible for manually allocating and releasing computer memory. In the case of MapReduce, the programmer is freed from defining how a computation will be divided among the servers in a Google cluster.
Typically, programs incorporating MapReduce load large quantities of data, which are then broken up into pieces of 16 to 64 megabytes. The MapReduce run-time system creates duplicate copies of each map or reduce function, picks idle worker machines to perform them and tracks the results.
Worker machines load their assigned piece of input data, process it into a structure of key-value pairs, and notify the master when the mapped data is ready to be sorted and passed to a reduce function. In this way, the map and reduce functions alternate chewing through the data until all of it has been processed. An answer is then returned to the client application.
If something goes wrong along the way, and a worker fails to return the results of its map or reduce calculation, the master reassigns it to another computer.
As of October, Google was running about 3,000 computing jobs per day through MapReduce, representing thousands of machine-days, according to a presentation by Dean. Among other things, these batch routines analyze the latest Web pages and update Google's indexes.
Also in this Feature:
Google's Secrets
For all the papers it has published, Google refuses to answer many questions. "We generally don't talk about our strategy ... because it's strategic," Page told Time magazine when interviewed for a Feb. 20 cover story.
One of the technologies Google has made public, PageRank, is Page's approach to ranking pages based on the interlinked structure of the Web. It has become one of the most famous elements of Google's technology because he published a paper on it, including the mathematical formula. Stanford holds the patent, but through 2011 Google has an exclusive license to PageRank.
Still, Yahoo's research arm was able to treat PageRank as fair game for a couple of its own papers about how PageRank might be improved upon; for example, with its own TrustRank variation based on the idea that trustworthy sites tend to link to other trustworthy sites. Even if competitors can't use PageRank per se, the information Page published while still at Stanford gave competitors a starting point to create something similar.
"PageRank is well known because Larry published it—well, they'll never do that again," observes Simson Garfinkel, a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard's Center for Research on Computation and Society, and an authority on information security and Internet privacy. Today, Google seems to have created a very effective "cult of secrecy," he says. "People I know go to Google, and I never hear from them again."
Because Google, which now employs more than 6,800, is hiring so many talented computer scientists from academia—according to The Mercury News in San Jose, it hires on average 12 new employees a day and recently listed 1,800 open jobs—it must offer them some freedom to publish, Garfinkel says. He has studied the GFS paper and finds it "really interesting because of what it doesn't say and what it glosses over. At one point, they say it's important to have each file replicated on more than three computers, but they don't say how many more. At the time, maybe the data was on 50 computers. Or maybe it was three computers in each cluster." And although the GFS may be one important part of the architecture, "there are probably seven layers [of undisclosed technology] between the GFS system and what users are seeing."
One of Google's biggest secrets is exactly how many servers it has deployed. Officially, Google says the last confirmed statistic for the number of servers it operates was 10,000. In his 2005 book The Google Legacy, Infonortics analyst Stephen E. Arnold puts the consensus number at 150,000 to 170,000. He also says Google recently shifted from using about a dozen data centers with 10,000 or more servers to some 60 data centers, each with fewer machines. A New York Times report from June put the best guess at 450,000 servers for Google, as opposed to 200,000 for Microsoft.
The exact number of servers in Google's arsenal is "irrelevant," Garfinkel says. "Anybody can buy a lot of servers. The real point is that they have developed software and management techniques for managing large numbers of commodity systems, as opposed to the fundamentally different route Microsoft and Yahoo went."
Other Web operations like Yahoo that launched earlier built their infrastructure around smaller numbers of relatively high-end servers, according to Garfinkel. In addition to saving money, Google's approach is better because "machines fail, and they fail whether you buy expensive machines or cheap machines."
Of particular interest to CIOs is one widely cited estimate that Google enjoys a 3-to-1 price-performance advantage over its competitors—that is, that its competitors spend $3 for every $1 Google spends to deliver a comparable amount of computing power. This comes from a paper Google engineers published in 2003, comparing the cost of an eight-processor server with that of a rack of 176 two-processor servers that delivers 22 times more processor power and three times as much memory for a third of the cost.
In this example, the eight-processor server was supposed to represent the traditional approach to delivering high performance, compared with Google's relatively cheap servers, which at the time used twin Intel Xeon processors.
But although Google executives often claim to enjoy a price-performance advantage over their competitors, the company doesn't necessarily claim that it's a 3-to-1 difference. The numbers in the 2003 paper were based on a hypothetical comparison, not actual benchmarks versus competitors, according to Google. Microsoft and Yahoo have also had a few years to react with their own cost-cutting moves.
"Google is very proud of the cost of its infrastructure, but we've also driven to a very low cost," says Lars Rabbe, who as chief information officer at Yahoo is responsible for all data center operations.
Microsoft provided a written statement disputing the idea that Google enjoys a large price-performance advantage. Microsoft uses clusters of inexpensive computers where it makes sense, but it also uses high-end multi-processor systems where that provides an advantage, according to the statement. And Windows does a fine job of supporting both, according to Microsoft.
Certainly, Yahoo's systems design is different from Google's, Rabbe says. "Google grew up doing one thing only" and wound up with a search-driven architecture "that is very uniform, with a lot of parallelism." Yahoo has increased its focus on the use of parallel computing with smaller servers, he says, but is likely to continue to have a more heterogeneous server infrastructure. For example, Yahoo launched the company on the FreeBSD version of Unix but has mixed in Linux and Windows servers to support specific applications. While the Yahoo and Google companies compete as search engines, he says, "We also do 150 other things, and some of those require a very different type of environment."
Still, Gartner analyst Ray Valdes believes Google retains an advantage in price-performance, as well as in overall computing power. "I buy that. Even though I'm usually pretty cynical and skeptical, as far as I know, nobody has gone to that extent and pushed the envelope in the way they have," he says. "Google is still doing stuff that others are not doing."
The advantage will erode over time, and Google will eventually run up against the limits of how much homegrown technology it can manage, Valdes predicts: "The maintenance of their own system software will become more of a drag to them."
But Google doesn't buy this traditional argument for why enterprises should stick to application-level code and leave more fundamental technologies like file systems, operating systems and databases to specialized vendors. Google's leaders clearly believe they are running a systems engineering company to compete with the best of them.
Also in this Feature:
Exotic but Not Unique; Would it Work for You?
Google's systems seem to work well for Google. But if you could run your own systems on the Google File System, would you want to? Or is this an architecture only a search engine could love?
Distributed file systems have been around since the 1980s, when the Sun Microsystems Network File System and the Andrew File System, developed at Carnegie Mellon University, first appeared. Software engineer and blogger Jeff Darcy says the system has a lot in common with the HighRoad system he worked on at EMC.
Despite those caveats, Darcy says he also sees many aspects of the GFS as "cool and useful," and gives Google credit for "bringing things that might have been done mostly as research projects and turning them into a system stable enough and complete enough to be used in commercial infrastructure."
Google software engineers considered and rejected modifying an existing distributed file system because they felt they had different design priorities, revolving around redundant storage of massive amounts of data on cheap and relatively unreliable computers.
Despite having published details on technologies like the Google File System, Google has not released the software as open source and shows little interest in selling it. The only way it is available to another enterprise is in embedded form—if you buy a high-end version of the Google Search Appliance, one that is delivered as a rack of servers, you get Google's technology for managing that cluster as part of the package.
However, the developers working on Nutch, an Apache Software Foundation open-source search engine, have created a distributed software environment called Hadoop that includes a distributed file system and implementation of MapReduce inspired by Google's work.
Also in this Feature:
Google, the Enterprise
In the filing for its 2004 IPO, Google included a letter from Page and Brin that declared, "Google is not a conventional company. We do not intend to become one." Maybe so, but Google still has to satisfy conventional corporate requirements for managing money and complying with laws.
In 2001, Page and Brin hired a more seasoned technology executive to be Google's official corporate leader—Eric Schmidt, formerly chief technology officer of Sun Microsystems and then CEO of Novell.
As recounted in The Google Story, one of the first battles Schmidt had to fight was to bring in Oracle Financials to control the company's finances. Page and Brin had been using Quicken, a financial management system for individuals and small businesses. But by this time, Google had 200 employees and $20 million in revenue.
The book quotes Schmidt as saying, "That was a huge fight. They couldn't imagine why it made sense to pay all that money to Oracle when Quicken was available."
So, Google does employ conventional enterprise technology—sometimes. But if you want to understand how the kind of proprietary technology Google possesses can be employed within an enterprise, look at how it's used within Google.
In public presentations, Merrill tries to put Google's technology in the context of how he is using it to address basic business processes like interviewing and hiring the best people, tracking their performance and coordinating projects. "We say our mission is to organize information and make it universally accessible and useful," Merrill says. "We had to figure out how to apply that internally as well."
Consider how Google handles project management. Every week, every Google technologist receives an automatically generated e-mail message asking, essentially, what did you do this week and what do you plan to do next week? This homegrown project management system parses the answer it gets back and extracts information to be used for follow-up. So, next week, Merrill explains, the system will ask, "Last week, you said you would do these six things. Did you get them done?"
A more traditional project tracking application would use a form to make users plug the data into different fields and checkboxes, giving the computer more structured data to process. But instead of making things easier for the computer, Google's approach is to make things easier for the user and make the computer work harder. Employees submit their reports as an unstructured e-mail, and the project tracking software works to "understand" the content of those e-mail notes in the same way that Google's search engine extracts context and meaning from Web pages.
If Google employees found the project tracking system to be a hassle to work with, they probably wouldn't use it, regardless of whether it was supposed to be mandatory, Merrill says. But because it's as easy as reading and responding to an e-mail, "We get pretty high compliance."
Those project tracking reports go into a repository—searchable, of course—so that managers can dip in at any time for an overview on the progress of various efforts. Other Google employees can troll around in there as well and register their interest in a project they want to track, regardless of whether they have any official connection to that project.
"What we're looking for here is lots of accidental cross-pollination," Merrill explains, so that employees in different offices, perhaps in different countries, can find out about other projects that might be relevant to their own work. Despite Google's reputation for secrecy toward outsiders, internally the watchword is "living out loud," Merrill says. "Everything we do is a 360-degree public discussion."
The company takes a more traditional approach with recording financial transactions, however. "Hey, I want those revenues, I really do," he says. That means running financial management software on servers with more conventional virtues like "disks that don't fail very often," he says.
On the other hand, Google runs internally developed human-resources systems on the clustered server architecture, and that's been working fine, according to Merrill: "In general, because of the price-performance trade-off, under current market conditions I can get about a 1,000-fold computer power increase at about 33 times lower cost if I go to the failure-prone infrastructure. So, if I can do that, I will."
Numbers like those ought to catch the attention of any technology manager. Of course, it's true that most corporate enterprises don't run the same applications at the same scale that Google does, and few would find it worthwhile to invest in tinkering with file systems and other systems engineering fundamentals.
But as much as it has poured effort into perfecting its use of those technologies, Google did not invent distributed computing. Companies willing to experiment with commercially available and open-source products for grid computing, distributed file systems and distributed processing may be able to find their own route to Google-like results.
Also in this Feature:
Google Base Case
Headquarters: 1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy., Mountain View, CA 94043
Phone: (650) 253-0000
Business: Web search and supporting information products
Chief Information Officer: Douglas Merrill, vice president, engineering, and senior director of information systems
2005 Financials: $6 billion revenue; $1.46 billion net profit.
Challenge: Deliver technologies to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.
Baseline Goals:
- Build the systems and infrastructure to support a global, $100 billion company.
- Expand data center infrastructure, which, as measured by the property and equipment, more than doubled, from $379 million in 2004 to $962 million last year.
- Maintain high productivity as measured by revenue per employee, which ranged from $1.38 million to $1.55 million in 2005.


text:
The 19-year-old Belgian striker has enjoyed a bumper term at the Hawthorns, netting 12 times in the Premier League.
© News Group Newspapers Limited in England No. 679215 Registered office: 1 London Bridge Street, London, SE1 9GF. "The Sun", "Sun", "Sun Online" are registered trademarks or trade names of News Group Newspapers Limited. This service is provided on News Group Newspapers' Limited's Standard Terms and Conditions in accordance with our Privacy & Cookie Policy . To inquire about a licence to reproduce material, visit our Syndication site. View our online Press Pack. For other inquiries, Contact Us. To see all content on The Sun, please use the Site Map. The Sun website in the UK is regulated by the Press Complaints Commission (PCC)
Our journalists strive for accuracy but on occasion we make mistakes. The Sun ombudsman will correct significant errors. Please contact her at firstname.lastname@example.com

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Write Review
Compare Phone/Mobile Services
Sprint Long Distance
out of
, based on
ratings and
reviews & complaints.
Most Popular
More Options >
More filter options:
Billing Stealing That Sprint Allows and Is Involved In
Posted by
KANSAS CITY, KANSAS -- On April 17th 2013, I called Sprint so I can get a calling plan to Mexico my mom was going on and Emergency family trip. The representative told me that they were giving me plan so we can pay the flat rate plus 50cents on calls from Mexico to California, and texts fees were even cheaper along with the plan fee. Trusting the knowledge of my Sprint CSR, we made several calls and texts while my mom was in MEXICO. Then I get my bill this month and I saw the OUTRAGEOUS fees I got charged. I was never advised that this would happen. I was told calls were going to be 50cents to and from and texts some minimal fee. I trusted Sprint to protect me as a consumer and this isn't fair. I have been with Sprint many years and brought my mom, my father, and several friends to Sprint because of the good service I have been provided but this is stealing and stealing at a time when I needed protection and the knowledge from my Sprint carrier and Customer Service Representative to protect and not misinform me. I was told my rate plan I had added would cover us with the charges I have already said. Paying $326.76 is stealing. Please help. This shouldn't be allowed when we trust our carrier to inform us with the accurate rates, plans and fees and this isn't at all what I am getting. I thank you for your time in advance in this investigation. Respectfully, Arlene Mendez
Complaint: 9552788
I am rejecting this response because:
Hi BBB
I wanted to see if I can update my current conversation with Sprintâs Executive Services Supervisor Karonda.
She called me at 7:37am spoke to me for about 2:06 minutes, was rude, unprofessional, if sheâs a supervisor know I know why Sprint's Representatives have no training to help a Customer or Consumer. She said he heard a so called detailed conversation, I told her that conversation wasnât with me because I spoke to the person and our call plans to Mexico was $5.99 discount rate. When I asked her to allow me to hear the voice recording of this alleged PERFECT call with me she rudely told me to GET A COURT SUBPEOENA then hung up on me. Serious I need to get a court order to hear a recorded conversation?
Supervisor Karonda called back 7:40am and told me I can cancel my phone service with them and pay early termination fees while I allow them to steal and rob consumers, that call only lasted 1:38 minutes. I donât think its fair that this supervisor Karonda is OK with making sure Sprint loses business, and thinks its fine that she steals from us. That is stealing, how can I protect myself from Sprint and their corruption?
Please help. What she made me feel today was extremely little, violated and robbed. And this coming from a Supervisor Please see attached phone call screen shot so you can see how she hung up, called back and un under six minutes told me its OK to Steal from the Consumers? Below is her call to me and the minutes she took to tell me She Approves to be ROBBED
I feel that I am by law, entitled to receive or hear this alleged conversation BECAUSE I Have confirmed it wasn't me and I was not provided accurate information as Sprint says. They are lying and they are trying to steal from me. Should they have trained personal as they say I wouldn't be going through this violation and assault done by Sprint. I hope the attached snap shot shows how Karonda was rude hung up on me told me I need a court order to hear this alleged conversation. That means they are lying and are hiding the fact that this conversation NEVER TOOK PLACE.
Please help protect the consumers from corrupt people like Karonda and Sprint.
Arlene Mendez ( my contact immediate # is 909-975-1174 )
Was this review helpful?
Read 1 Replies
Add reply
Review Link:
User Replies:
Old Timer on 06/21/2013:
Thanks for letting people know of Sprints questionable way of doing business.
Just an FYI, this site is not Sprint. Unless you point someone from Sprint to it, they will probably never see this report and complaint.
Good luck with your dealings with these dogs.
Close comments
Add reply
Sprint Steals
Posted by
Sprint changed our account number on us and we were not aware of it. Our automatic bank payment to the old account number was sent to a company that doesn't even exist in Arizona. After a year of complaints, repeatedly faxing in proof of our payments to them, they never repaid us over $100.00. After 18 years as their customer we will never deal with Sprint again. We are still out our money, despite repeated attempts by Chase and us to get the money back. They said we had to call their subsidiary to get the money back, who said that since we didn't have account number with them, there was no way to know where the money went. I kept track of EVERY representative I spoke with, not one ever returned my call as promised, had to go over every detail every single call, to every single representative Pathetic excuse of customer service, not to mention theft. They also never responded to email attempts either.
Was this review helpful?
Add reply
Review Link:
Beware Of Sprint International Calling
Posted by
This feature of Sprint "International Roaming" for Blackberry Tour does not work.
I called Sprint to add this package to my plan before I traveled to Europe for 12 days. I agreed to pay the charge for the plan approximately $14.00 for the plan plus the per minute charge that range from $1.29 to $1.69 per minute depending on which country (Spain, France, Italy).
My phone calls would not go through and after making several attempts, I called the Sprint International Support. I asked the lady if this phone call is charged to me and she said "NO" because this is Sprint International Support I was calling. Eventually after several transfers and 28 minutes on the phone with her she said she will have to reformat and reset my phone on my side. She called me back. At least my phone rang and it worked. After that conversation, my phone did not work again.
By saying my phone does not work I mean after you dial the number with the correct code, the other phone does not ring or connect. I wait and wait and eventually, it will say failed to connect. To be fair, I was able to call the Sprint International Support 2 times and I received 1 phone call from my sister and able to connect to my son in California once but he could not hear me at all on the other line. Half of the time the e-mail was working.
When I came back, 2 days later, my phone still doesn't work here in California and I had to call the Sprint Support for help which they had to reset it again.
Here's the funny part. I have a total of $129.99 charges for the International calls alone. $47.32 of that charge was the 28 minutes with Sprint International Support.
I called the Sprint Customer to explain and request for the International calls to be waived from my bill since they were attempts and calls that did not go through. I requested for the supervisor and Josh with employee # J0289270 said that they cannot waive the charges as it shows that I used the phone even when I'm calling the Sprint International Support. And there is not way for them to check if the phone calls went through and all Sprint cares about is that it shows that I attempted to use the phone. He said the International calls works intermittently and not all the time but nevertheless will be charged for attempts. And even though I'm talking to Sprint International Support reporting that my phone does not work I'm still being charged.
The moral of the story….DO NOT USE SPRINT FOR INTERNATIONAL BECAUSE THIS FEATURE DOES NOT WORK AT ALL. THEY ADVERTISE THIS TO WORK INTERNATIONAL BUT TRUST ME IT DOES NOT WORK AND YOU WILL GET STUCK WITH CHARGES. AND PLESE DO NOT CALL SUPPORT BECAUSE YOU WILL EVEN BE CHARGED MORE.
I will be contacting the Better Businesss and continue to post this on the internet to warn others. Sprint will not let me talk to their Managers as I'm only passed on to two Supervisors who insist the charges are valid including the calls to Sprint Support.
Was this review helpful?
Read 1 Replies
Add reply
Review Link:
User Replies:
Anonymous on 08/21/2013:
Had the same experience, only much worse. I traveled to Hong Kong for four days and signed up for the maximum voice/data plan. When I came home, my bill was upwards of $900. They eventually offered to waive 75% of the fees but that still leaves me with almost $200 in charges (not to mention the four phone calls and hours I waited on hold while being bounced from supervisor to supervisor just to get the 75%). I went on the same trip the previous year with AT and T service. My plan cost $30 and I had not one dollar in additional expense. Moral of the story, STAY AWAY FROM SPRINT when traveling internationally. If you do get stuck tell them you are calling the Better Business Bureau and they will connect you to a supervisor and you might have better luck than I did!
Close comments
Add reply
Watch out for your Billings on Sprint Long Distance
Posted by
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON -- I've had Sprint Long Distance for a year now and the last 4 months have been HORRIFIC with their billing. It has stressed me out, given me headaches, and a total waste of time trying
to resolve. And it is interesting to read how some other people have experienced the same,
so at least I know I am not alone, but disturbing to know what I go through is so frequent
among others.
Here is my story. I signed up for Sprint LD because they had some special where if you are
with their Sprint PCS plan you get 50 min free long distance. So I signed up at SprintPCS
with all my information. I lived with my parents at the time, so I put this long distance
on their home phone, and my payment option was charge direct to my credit card.
In Oct. I noticed my bill was almost $40 for long distance alone. Turned out my dad had
called to Canada, but I clearly remember asking Sprint how much a call to Canada would be
and they said .10 cents a minute so the $40 did not add up. I called Sprint and the Rep
said a mistake was made, it is .10 cents a minute so she would credit me $25.27.
Come next month I find that my credit card is charged/debited an additional $25.27 rather
than credited! So I called Sprint and I can't even begin to count how many people I talked
to or was put on hold as I got passed around. No one seemed to know what the heck they were
doing. So I finally spoke with a supervisor who could not explain why I was charged an
additional $25.27 on my card when they owed me that amount! So after looking she says..
well the original Rep was wrong and calls to Canada are $1+ a minute! It was an outrageous
rate!! So I just felt like whatever... just clear up this extra charge you gave me now and
leave it as it is. So she told me OK she would fix that additional charge they just tacked
on my card. I went on to dispute this charge with my credit card copmany, and they told me
after clearing with Sprint, this charge was disputed in my favor. After all this, I decided
to cancel my account in November 2003.
Come February 2004, I noticed a .39 cent charge on my credit card from Sprint again and I
thought it was odd since the account was closed and canceled and confirmed. I go online to
look at this account, and in January they once again tacked on the $25.27 charge to my
account for no good reason and the .39 cent was a late fee!! A late fee? A late fee for
what?? It did not make sense at all. It was like a bad wart that would not go away. So I
call Sprint. The customer service guy was sooo rude, asking me all these irrelevant
questions and could not provide me any answer as to why I was being charged $25.27 for no
good reason. Finally he says, it's an error and he would fix it.
For some gut reason I did not believe him and called Sprint again. This time I got some
lady on the phone who had NO IDEA what to do and put me on hold for 20 min. to forward me to
her manager, who also had NO IDEA what to do, who then put me on hold for another 15 min. to
forward me to accounts receivable. Accounts receivable then tells me they have nothing to
do with this, and Customer Service is doing the charge. But this lady tried to help me,
although she had no clue either on what to do. She told me my account was all screwed and
that I needed to stop this credit card payment option, which she said she did for me. Then
she tells me that I have to wait for the next billing cycle to get a paper statement and
then call Customer Service again to dispute the balance I had.
After I hung up I realized that solution will not work because the next billing cycle will
credit my charge card this new balance I owe out of nowhere, and I did not want them
touching my credit card anymore. Plus how do I dispute with Customer Service if they themselves has no clue why I have this unknown balance.
So I call again. This time I got this rude guy on the phone who told me he could not discuss this account with me because it was not under my name?!!! I could not believe this! I've just spoken with Sprint for the last 1.5 hours regarding this account? I set up this account with MY name, SSN and cell phone??!! Apparantley, the bill was under my mother's
name, since the local phone bill is under her name. However, when I log in online to see my
account, my name is on there as clear as day! But for some reason "their" databse did not
show that. So I asked to speak with a supervisor who was just as rude. We basically got into a frustrating screaming match as I told her I have called Sprint numerous times to talk
about this account with no problem and I was the one that setup this account with my info. But nope, she said nowhere does it say that and that I had to have my mother call to discuss this. So I asked her why does my name show up on the online account? And she just kept saying, it's not in our database and that she could not discuss anything further with me and accused me of looking at the wrong account! At this point I was livid.
I hung up and called again and this time got someone to try to help me again. However she
had no clue what to do and once again put me on hold for 15 minutes to get forwarded to
accounts receivable. Almost sounds like I got forwarded to the guy who refused to help me
earlier because the account "suuposedly" was not in my name. I tried to explain what was
going on, but he was extremely rude accusing me of oweing Sprint money and then telling me I
had to tell Customer Service about this and ask them about the charge. I told him Customer
Service was the one who transferred me to them. But he told me there was nothing he could
do and transferred me back to Customer Service.
So I was put on hold for 15 min. again and some lady looked at my account and put me on hold
for 15 min. again. She came back to tell me my account was all screwed (like as if I didn't
know that already) and that everyone previously helping me has made it worse and that her
supervisor is passing it to management center to fix. And that I was lucky I got forwarded
to that center because they were the "fix it" center. So if they are the "fix it" center,
then what the heck is Customer Service? So I left it as that and she told me to call back
in one week to check. She sounded somewhat more convincing but I will not hold my hopes high that this will be resolved.
After wasting 4 hours with them, it is very clear to me that Sprint is incompetent and rude.
Anyone know what else I can do about this incident? Perhaps what else I can do if this does not get fixed still? How we can shut them down?
Everything they have done has just been purely ridiculous and a waste of time.
Was this review helpful?
Read 1 Replies
Add reply
Review Link:
User Replies:
angeltides on 02/04/2004:
By the way I forgot to add, I am planning to cancel ALL my Sprint services. I DO NOT want to go through this again.
Close comments
Add reply
Fraudulent Billing
Posted by
STERLING, VIRGINIA -- I spent 6 months attempting to correct fraudulent billing issues upon cancellation of my Sprint long distance service in November of 2005. I was so frustrated with misinformation and their inability to resolve my issues I cancelled two home phones and one cell phone with nearly a $200 credit they refused to credit despite multiple clear statements to the contrary. Imagine my surprise when two years later I receive a "Welcome to Spint" notice in my mail. Believe me I would walk to a pay phone before I would ever subscribe to Sprint. I immediately called only to receive the same conflicting information I was accustomed to receiving from Sprint. One person told me I had been a customer that entire without year time but could not explain why I had received no bills but had no balance prior to that day, the other insisted I had just activated the service the prior month. (I had made no changes to my phone service since cancelling Sprint two years prior, in fact I had a block on my phone to prevent them being added). One Sprint representative even insisted the block was to maintain Sprint as my long dsitance carrier and I could not have them removed ever. Wrong answer. After more frustrating conversations I was assured by both my local phone service as well as Sprint that I had no active account with Sprint. February 8, 2007, two years and three months after initially cancelling Sprint service with a significant credit balance I was never able to receive refund for I receive yet another BILL from Sprint. Sprint is worse than AOL in their inability to resolve their mistakes and permit cancellation of service. It is like a fungus that won't go away, no matter how many times you eliminate it, it just keeps coming back. I hope to post an update that I do not receive further bills but my experience with Sprint tells me that will not be forthcoming.
Was this review helpful?
Add reply
Review Link:
Over bill
Posted by
Terrible customer service, TERRIBLE, I'm looking at my bill and SPRINT is charging me more than 83 dollars for a call supposedly international, which is to New york.
I'm trying to explain to the supervisor that there is no charge on the bill for an international call through the Sprint network and there was no international call, but he wouldn't listen and kept saying "YOU HAVE TO PAY". THEY DON'T HAVE THE RECORD OF THE CALL AND THEY WANT TO CHARGE ME ANYWAY......
A very unsatisfied customer and probably soon ex customer of SPRINT.
Was this review helpful?
Read 4 Replies
Add reply
Review Link:
User Replies:
Anonymous on 12/21/2009:
Exactly what does the bill show in the call area? What is the location of the call? If it is on the bill there has to be a record of it. Unless it went through another long distance company to be connected, then Sprint would only be a billing agent.
Sort of like At&T customers who get a bill from Tell Com or whatever other carriers connect calls in certain areas.
*Brenda* on 12/21/2009:
I think the OP's point was it doesn't show anything in the call area. Just a charge in the summary.
bcd on 12/21/2009:
My Sprint bill lists every call (including minutes).
Anonymous on 12/21/2009:
BDC, so does my daughters. That is why I asked what the summary showed.
Close comments
Add reply
International Service
Posted by
Sprint is the worst! They told us we'd get cell service in the Caribbean and Mexico. We had absolutely no service whatsoever in the Caribbean. Everyone around us was texting and calling from their cell phones, and ours was dead! Mexico was sporadic.
They misrepresent their service, and I am cancelling my contract as soon as its done.
Was this review helpful?
Read 1 Replies
Add reply
Review Link:
User Replies:
bcd on 07/29/2009:
The coverage map on Sprint's web site indicates no coverage for Mexico and the Caribbean except for eastern Puerto Rico. I see no misrepresentation.
You should have checked the coverage map and not taken the word of a sales representative.
Close comments
Add reply
Accepting Long Distance Collect Calls
Posted by
I live in the US and earlier this year I accepted two collect calls from my daughter up in Toronto, Canada. Unknown to me these calls cost a whopping $3.50 a minute. So I got hit with a $172.00 US phone bill. I complained, but they said Sprint doesn't regulate their calls so they charge WHATEVER THEY DARN WELL WANT TO, and they don't tell you this before you accept the charges, that would be too logical. Needless to say I don't accept any collect calls from Canada which is unfortunate since my daughter is disabled and it's about the only way she can call me. I am on a small pension and can't afford to speak to her for this price. If that wasn't bad enough the phone company cut off my long distance calling abilities and I can't use any of those 1010987 or 1010220 numbers, they won't let me... It's a "rip-off" plain and simple and Sprint Canada should get their act together and stop gouging people.
Was this review helpful?
Read 3 Replies
Add reply
Review Link:
User Replies:
Aember24 on 08/23/2004:
I'm sorry to hear that you have not been able to speak with your daughter in Canada..have you thought about maybe purchasing a calling card they are usually very inexpensive and you can get a good two hours of conversation. Also look over your sprint contract and see if there is anything documented regarding there long distance plan see if you can find any loopholes that may get you out of paying that extremely high bill.
JoeyZ on 08/23/2004:
Thanks Amber, she now has a phone card, thing is she doesn't believe me when I told her how much I paid, I'm going to send her a copy of the bill. We tried talking to Sprint but didn't get anywhere, they charge what they charge and you like it or lump it. So I paid it...I am the wiser now.
YourWorstNightmare on 01/18/2005:
"I understand...whoever would've thought that collect calls could be expensive? (especially those international ones...what a scam)" she says with a sad shake of the head
Close comments
Add reply
Customer service - no and yes
Posted by
Grandma Babs
CALIFORNIA -- I had difficulty placing an overseas call, so called Sprint, which is my current long distance carrier. The woman just said she would place the call, no other assistance. I called back later, talked with a gentlemand to try to determine why I could not place a call [operator error - me] and he not only went over why and how, he also explained the various costs. Now I am into a huge bill for the non-completed call that woman placed and have no recourse. The gentleman clearly explained options I might look at, depending on my overseas calling frequency! So, I believe I have seen perhaps the worst and best of "customer service" at Sprint - in under one hour!
Was this review helpful?
Read 1 Replies
Add reply
Review Link:
User Replies:
PeskyKittyButt on 07/13/2004:
It's really a pity when the range of customer service reps for a company is such a large range. If only there could be more consistency...
Close comments
Add reply
Top of Page
Next Page >
Consumer Resources
Company Responses
Site Rules
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
About Us


text:
Find out about exhibitions, activities, tours and talks at Birmingham Museums
Aston Hall, Blakesley Hall and Soho House provide a choice of spectacular and elegant locations for your dream wedding.
3rd August 2012
Did you know that many of our museums offer free admission on the first weekend of the month (Saturday or Sunday depending on venue)? You can also enjoy a wide range of fascinating events and activities for all the family at all of our sites this weekend, including the ever-popular Big Brum History Buz.
Saturday 4th August
Free admission to the Museum of the Jewellery Quarter
10.30am – 4pm
Sunday 5th August
Free admission to Aston Hall, Blakesley Hall , Soho House and Sarehole Mill
12noon – 4pm
At Sarehole Mill you will also get a chance to meet Mick the Miller and let him give you an insight into his age-old craft.
Big Brum History Buz
Also on Sunday the Big Brum History Buz will be running its 'Manufactories and Mansions' open-top guided bus service to Aston Hall, Soho House and the Pen Room Museum.
First bus 11.30 from Victoria Square.
Tickets: £3 adults, children free. No prebooking available.
Manufactories and Mansions Timetable Sunday 5th August 2012:
Timings may vary due to unavoidable circumstances with an estimate of 20 minutes between pick up stops.
Community Museums will be FREE OF CHARGE on these dates.
Operated by Birmingham Tours.
You can follow news from this museum through the RSS 2.0 feed.


text:
Widget and Gadgets Support
Hammon, OK 73650
WeatherBug PhotoBug Widget Support
Below are answers to some common questions about the WeatherBug PhotoBug Widget. If you do not see your question here, please fill out a Support Request Form or visit the WeatherBug Forums.
- Where can I get the PhotoBug Widget?
Download the PhotoBug here. Follow the installation instructions on the page.
- Can I view other photo albums/categories?
Yes. Simply click on the 'i' in the lower right corner of the widget. Utilize the drop-down menu to choose which album you would like to view.
- How do I uninstall the widget?
If you are unhappy with the widget for any reason, please let us know. Please be sure to select 'PhotoBug Widget' as the appropriate product, so we can respond as promptly as possible.
Simply uninstall this widget as any other on your Mac Dashboard. Click the '+' in the bottom left corner. Then click the 'Manage Widgets' button that subsequently follows - this will open a window that lists your current widgets. Then click the red '-' to remove the widget.
WeatherBug Featured Products
Weather News
Other Top Weather Headlines
At Least 4 Dead In Southern Storms, Tornadoes
Multiple tornadoes touched down across the U.S. southeast Tuesday afternoon resulting in the deaths of at least four people…More >
Drought Update: Rains Continue To Pour Over The West
Drought Update: Heavy rain continues to pelt the West with welcomed Pacific…More >
What Are The Snowiest Cities In The U.S.?
The snowiest cities in the U.S. may surprise…More >
Weather Near Hammon, OK
Camera for Oklahoma City, OK
Be Prepared, Know Before
Get faster alerts and better forecasts from the exclusive neighborhood-level WeatherBug network.Learn More


text:
Which TV Class Could You Ace?
Would you get gold stars in Mr. Shue's Spanish class? Or would you be better at discussing To Kill a Mockingbird with Mr. Fitz, or exploring the darker side of history with Alaric? Take this quiz to find out!
By Kara McGrath
Page 1 of
Your quiz has been added to your profile page.
Sign InClose
Click here if you forgot your username or password.
If you don't have an account, join now for free
New Quizzes You'll Love


text:
Re: Achievements
on AchievementsFri, 06/28/2013 - 03:00 — Slayer120
There would only be #1 Elves Presly in this world who leaves a very remarkable and memorable hits in the music industry. Nowadays, we can still see how people relive the memory of Elvis as they impersonate them with his looks, his voice and even to his charming moves. It's sad to say that his gone in this world but I know his music and memories will still remain.


text:
Time-proven comfort, performance, and style.
After more than fifteen years on the market, the Vans Women's Hi-Standard Snowboard Boots are still leading the way for comfort and performance. The choice of so many Vans pro riders year after year, the Hi-Standard has a lightweight design and soft flex to help it excel in the park and dominate the streets.
The traditional lacing system has an instep lace lock-out that allows both the lower and upper zones to be independently tightened for a custom fit. A heat-moldable TriFit-X liner gives nailed-in heel hold and the cushy feel of soft interior cushioning foam. A V2 dual-density EVA footbed supports and cushions your riding experience with high-rebound impact relief pads at both the forefoot and heel. The ClassicLite outsole has an oversize inverted waffle tread for superior traction, and it features a special rubber compound in high-wear areas for more durability and better wear.
- Traditional lacing with OTW Lace Lock
- Soft flex
- TriFit-X liner
- V2 footbed
- ClassicLite outsole
- Pleasure cuff
- Internal web harness


text:
Buy a ticket for $26 or more before fees and receive a free ticket for a show of your choice at a FancoFou price.
Available only at the box office Metropolis. Limited quantity.
By selecting the "Share my Francos show selection" option, I allow my concert selection,
comments, name, and photo to be made accessible to all the FrancoFolies de Montréal Web site visitors.
I also accept the terms and general conditions of the Web site of Les FrancoFolies
de Montréal.
Your email address
has been validated.
Your email address has not been validated.
To make your comments accessible to other festival-goers, you must validate your
email address first.
A confirmation message is sent to
when your account is created. Please click on the "Validate my email address" activation
link in this message. Your comments will then be made be accessible to friends and
Lost this message? Click here to receive it again.
By checking this box, I allow the publication of my comments as messages on my Facebook wall.
Open a session with your Facebook account
Or use your FrancoFolies.com password
Don't have a user account?
Create a User Account
Forgot your password?
Email password again
Copyright © 2014. All Rights Reserved. Les FrancoFolies de Montréal.


text:
1 (800) 628-1693 M-F 9-5 Eastern
Looking for a truly unique thong? Well, you've found it with PPU's Thong, available in green, blue, white, and black. Features a T-back and a very prominent cut-out in the pouch to allow this thong to act as a twist on a c-ring thong.
Note: Based on feedback from our customers, PPU sizes run small. You may want to order one size larger.
says Darren
Thursday, December 26, 2013 - Smaller Than ExpectedIn the past, I've modded some of my huge underwear collection to have sexy underwear like these. I love these thongs and have both blue and white (will be ordering green soon). Love how they put everything on display while still having the element of wearing colourful accenting underwear. Its so much fun to wear low rise jeans that show off the waistband, then slipping them down for the full reveal. My only complaints would be a slightly longer back string and a bit more "depth" of material in the front. These are definitely for the uninhibited :)
Was this helpful? Sign in to vote.
says Jeremiah
Thursday, September 26, 2013 - Larger Than Expectedjust seems kinda pointless
1 of 1 thought this was helpful. Was this helpful? Sign in to vote.
|Small (S)
|Medium (M)
|Large (L)
|Extra Large (XL)
Here are some of the most popular products (by sales volume) for this style:


text:
Please login to get more out of this site
You are currently not logged in, do so now to add comments, like articles as well as photos, submit to competitions, translate articles and gain access to unlimited photo upload! If you are not registered yet, go here to find out more about Lomography and join now! If you just want a limited account for now you can use Twitter or Facebook. We would love to have you as a member here!
2 people like this photo
Liking photos helps us to present the best ones to you and others. 2 people like this photo. 2 people like this photo: isda and tsingtao.
No comments yet, be the first
Where is this?
Nearby popular photos – see more
Nearby LomoLocations
Boboli's Garden, Firenze
In Firenze you got a lot of beautiful things to see and Boboli's garden is one of these amaz…
Ponte Vecchio & Arno River in Firenze
Firenze wouldn't be so magical without the river Arno and the world famous "Ponte Vecchio". …
Santa Maria del Flore, The "Duomo" of Firenze
It's perhaps the most know building of Firenze all around the world and every tourist wants …
San Miniato al Monte
If you ever go to Firenze, you'll probably get fed up with tourists. Then it is your turn: t…


text:
Hi everyone,
I have been practicing Anapanasati regulary now. I keep my eyes open because that's how i first practiced and it's stuck with me now,my focus is in my nostrils.My body is calm,my mind is calm,i experience bliss but why does my mind keep seeing dark mental images such as,a dark cloak,dark shadows,or like a dead person in front of me,beside me,behind me etc..It's not unnerving anymore.especially when i am calm.I just note it because it's just my mind making up stuff.It just bugs me that my mind can't come up with "better" things to fabricate like "nice" things like light or flowers or maybe nothing.I mean my minds natural tendency when i meditate is to start seeing these images in my mind sometimes it's just unclear buts sometimes it's crystal clear like sharp.But it's always the same dark theme.(I also have to add its the same when i go to sleep,my dreams have dark themes in it too,no matter how much i purify my sila or send metta or meditate,always dark areas in it).
It's quite puzzling because i have made sure to keep the precepts,i do dana,develop sila,do metta.So quite naturally i expect nice and friendly things to surround me.Then one day right when i have just seated into a half lotus position,my cell phone rang.I picked it up and it was my mother and she immediately,like no hello or nothing.. told me she had a dream about me,That i was helping someone.So i thought well that's good right.But she kept sounding disturbed so i urged her to tell me what's wrong,and she told me i was wearing a black cloak.
The dream made her pretty upset so i calmed her down.jeez..
I mean i know it's just a random dream but she felt unnerved even though she didn't know i keep seeing that during my meditations.I still didn't tell her.
What i have tried is, to ignore it.So if i see it i just keep my mind on my focus point.I keep my focus inside,inside,inside i never focus on it.Coz i tried once and didn't feel calm at all.
Does it go away?
No not really..i mean one time it literally sat down next to me to meditate.i give up.I don't know what it is and i don't care i just keep focusing on my point.But i do feel intrigued to ask if any of you have these experiences..with no teacher really i would appreciate any from of solid guidance..
And you can PM me too!
These are just mental images i have to add i don't see them with my physical eye like i've seen a ghost no nothing like that..if i saw a real dead body/person in front of me i would have ditched meditation all together.. but it's very clear and very constant in my minds eye.More clearer than if i imagined something.
Please Advice
Thank you


text:
9 Energy-Efficient Products for Your Home
Stop wasting resources (and start saving money!) when you invest in one of these environmentally responsible products tested by the Good Housekeeping Research Institute (GHRI).
By Bonnie Vengrow
Tide Coldwater Laundry Detergent
Fight ketchup spills, lipstick traces, and grass stains with Tide for Coldwater Liquid ($8.49 for 50 oz., amazon.com). This detergent will tackle your most stubborn messes without running up your water-heating bill. Plus, this Green Good Housekeeping Seal holder proved to be environmentally responsible in numerous other ways when we evaluated it for our green emblem


text:
Yes, it's another INSANE week in the world of urban fantasy, paranormal romance, sci fi and YA and all the other spec genres. I think the paranormal romance releases this week are especially interesting.
Monday, April 2, 2012
New Releases April 1-6 and Reader's Choice C*ontest
Yes, it's another INSANE week in the world of urban fantasy, paranormal romance, sci fi and YA and all the other spec genres. I think the paranormal romance releases this week are especially interesting.
69 comments:
Holy moly! You're right, it is a crazy week for releases! I'd have to go with GRAVE MERCY -- am hearing great things about it.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 twitter follower
This week is almost as bad as last! Sheesh! I'd love a copy of Gini Koch's Alien Diplomacy. Thanks for the giveaway!ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 Twitter follower (@RebeLovesBooks)
+1 Tweeted (https://twitter.com/#!/RebeLovesBooks/status/186819763572445184)
It's a toss up for Black Heart or Grave Mercy! Both are on my TBR list!ReplyDelete
+1 for comment
+1 for blog follower (May-Day_Aura)
+1 for twitter follower (@MayDay_Aura)
+1 for tweet: https://twitter.com/#!/MayDay_Aura/status/186820706913357826
I've been waiting for Devil's Punch to come out.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 follower
sgiden at verizon.net
I had a hard time choosing between Above and Grave Mercy.. but I think I'd choose the latter. Thanks!ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follower (dea sauva)
+1 twitter follower (@ellevaed)
sauvadeavelle @ yahoo dot com
My pick this week isReplyDelete
Magic Without Mercy- Devon Monk
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 twitter follower
+1 tweet
Man..there are same great books. I just added quite a few to my TBR list. If I win...I'd like to have The Vampire Shrink by Kismet Knight. I actually really enjoy its cover. Thanks for the chance to win as always.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 gfc follow as Tanyaw1224
+1 twitter as Tanya1224
+1 tweeted at https://twitter.com/#!/Tanya1224/status/186835255179755520
Hmm, that Bentley Little book is sooo my sort of thing.ReplyDelete
+ Comment
+ Twitter follow ( @sfmanning)
+ Email
I'm lusting for a story with a sexy shape-shifter now, so I'd like to win Untouched by Sara Humphreys :)ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 twitter follower (@vojalyn)
+1 blog follower (mikki-mano)
+1 tweet: https://twitter.com/vojalyn/status/186836402338668544
Thanks for the chance,
It just doesnt get any better than Doc Jess. I will have to go with Magic Unchained!!ReplyDelete
Thanks so much!
+1 comment
+1 twitter alicia0605
+1 GFC alicia0605
+1 tweet
A tough choice this week. I'll go with Untouched by Sara Humphreys.ReplyDelete
+1 blog follower
+1 Twitter follower- MommyRebel
I would love Hunger, the second book in the Gone series by Michael GrantReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follower: Throuthehaze
+1 twitter follower: @raelena85
throuthehaze at gmail dot com
Way too many to choose from this week! I have 3 that I'm really interested in. Either Crystalfire, Enraptured or Bloodright. You rock Suzanne! Thanks for the giveaway! firstname.lastname@example.com +1 Comment, +1 FollowerReplyDelete
I just got "Unleashed" by Sara Humphreys recently in the mail, so I would love to enter to win "Untouched". Thanks so much for the giveaway!ReplyDelete
+1 Comment
+1 Blog Follower: Amber Hughes
+1 Twitter: @ReadingAddict17
+1 Tweet: https://twitter.com/#!/ReadingAddict17/status/186855578151292928
I would love a copy of Above if I win :D Thank you. <3ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follow
Love, Carina ~ email@example.com
I'm super excited for Above and Grave Mercy! I love all the urban fantasty titles too though. Fantastic covers.ReplyDelete
+4 (Lori M Lee for all follows)
Difficult to choose just one again this week!ReplyDelete
If I win I would like Untouched by Sara Humphreys please.
+1 comment
+1 GFC follow - irgl7
+1 twitter - poodle666
- StacieDApril 2, 2012 at 1:15 PM
I would love to win Savage Awakening! Thanks so much for the giveaway!ReplyDelete
geishasmom73 AT yahoo DOT com
+1 comment
+1 Twitter follower @GeishasMom73
+1 Tweeted the link
Great releases this week! I'd love to win Above. :)ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 GFC follower: Agnieszka Nashi
+1 Twitter follower: @nookofbooks
+1 Tweet: https://twitter.com/#!/nookofbooks/status/186882366260789249
What a great list of books, but I think I'd really like Untouched by Sara Humphreys.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 Twitter - @armyma32
+1 Tweeted - https://twitter.com/#!/armyma32/status/186881795072069632
thanks for the constest, I would love to win Magic Without Mercy (Allie Beckstrom, Book 8) by Devon MonkReplyDelete
+1 Comment
+1 Blog Follower: Melliane
+1 Twitter: @betweendandr
+1 Tweet:https://twitter.com/#!/betweendandr/status/186884222563258368
Hum either untouched, magic without mercy or one book of gini koch. Not sure at allReplyDelete
thanks you a lot for this giveaway
+1 comment
+1 blog follow
Wow Suzanne, you really went all out! I had no idea so many books were being published this week! So many of those series are still on my wishlist. I believe the only one I pre-ordered from that bunch is the Gini Koch book.ReplyDelete
What would I like to win? Hmmm. Difficult choice, I would go for Untouched by Sara Humphreys. Such a great cover.
Oops, forgot this:ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 twitter follower
auriansbooks at gmail dot com
I'd love Inara Scott's or Grave Mercy:)ReplyDelete
Thanks so much
ccfioriole at gmail dot com
GFC follower Christina Kit.ReplyDelete
ccfioriole at gmail dot com
Twitter follower @christinafiorioReplyDelete
ccfioriole at gmail dot com
I tweeted: https://twitter.com/#!/christinafiorio/status/186897482448506880ReplyDelete
ccfioriole at gmail dot com
- Marie-ClaudeApril 2, 2012 at 2:38 PM
I want to read Grave Mercy!!!!ReplyDelete
+1 comment
Oh my! So many terrific books this week, it pains me I can't get them all on my shelf! (but if I did it would pain me that I can't read them right away either, sigh, can't win ;-) lolReplyDelete
I haven't read Theresa Meyers' Legend Chronicles but it looks so good I would love to read that!
And everyone keeps praising Grave Mercy, so I'm excited about that one as well :-)
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 Twitter follower (@Stella_ExLibris)
+1 Tweeted here: https://twitter.com/#!/Stella_ExLibris/status/186903429514412032
Thank you! :-)
stella.exlibris (at) gmail (dot) com
Fantastic giveaway! I'm torn between Above, Grave Mercy, Banner of the Damned, and The Marked!ReplyDelete
GFC follower: Leanne Goon
Twitter follower: @leannessf
Tweeted: https://twitter.com/#!/leannessf/status/186904550328901632
Please, oh, please Sacre Bleu!ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 Twitter follower
Thanks again Suzanne. you rock!ReplyDelete
So, if i win, i would choose Bloodright by Karin Tabke.
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 Twitter follower
+1 RT https://twitter.com/#!/Suzanne_Johnson/status/186807998927224832
Would love to read Grave Mercy, thanks for the giveaway!ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 twitter follower
Above sounds like it might be a cool read.ReplyDelete
+4 comment, follower, Twitter follower, tweeted.
I want to read Grave Mercy.ReplyDelete
+1 follower GFC & email
pefrw at yahoo dot com
What an awesome list! Adding to my wishlist in The Book Depository, don't want to miss some of them.ReplyDelete
I'd love a copy of Lessons After Dark, by Isabel Cooper.
*pls pick me!*
+4: comment, GFC follow, twitter follow, tweeteed: https://twitter.com/#!/LindaThum/status/186957438119985156
I'd love to win a copy of Black Heart. Thanks for the giveaway!ReplyDelete
+1 blog comment
+1 blog follower
+1 twitter follower (@sara_UFblog)
Sara M
sara_UFblog [at] yahoo [dot] com
Thanks for the giveaway! I'd love to win the first of the Gone series by Michael Grant.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 Twitter follower
susanna DOT pyatt AT student DOT rcsnc DOT org
I would love to read ABOVE. The cover is beautiful and the premise interests me.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 GFC follow: Na
+1 Twitter follow: Fieryna
+1 RT: https://twitter.com/FieryNa/status/186975420162375680
I would love to read Sacre Bleu!ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 GFC: Molly Frenzel
+1 Twitter: dg_molly
+1 RT: https://twitter.com/#!/dg_molly/status/187004788620271618
would love to start with Gini Koch's Touched by an Alien. Thank you.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 follower
So many good ones.ReplyDelete
I would choose Black Heart. Great series.
+1 comment
+1 follower
+1 twitter follower
+1 tweet - https://twitter.com/#!/DonnaS1/status/187033216312553473
bacchus76 at myself dot com
i want enrapture by elisabeth naugthonReplyDelete
+1twitter follower
+1tweet : https://twitter.com/#!/Eli_Yanti/status/187061945298452481
The Haunted, by Bentley Little please..ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 follower
+1 twitter follower (@becunique)
uniquas at ymail dot com
I'd love to win Grave Mercy, by R.L. LaFevers. Blood thirsty murder-nun? I have to read it!ReplyDelete
Thank you for the giveaway!
+1 comment
+1 GFC follower as Sofija Kapranova
+1 twitter follower as @soni_sonik
+1 tweeted:https://twitter.com/#!/soni_sonik/status/187083500246147073
I have to say I'm torn between Black Heart and Sword&Blood - both on my wishlist :)ReplyDelete
1 commment
1 follower
impy80 at hotmail dot com
I would love to read Above!ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 gfc follower
oh dear.. as always, this week i have several books i coveted >__< but this time... i'll choose Vampire Shrink.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 follower
this week is totally crazy! I'd love either above or grave mercy!ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follower
+1 twitter follower
aliasgirl at libero dot it
I'd like to opt for Black Heart, by Holly Black!ReplyDelete
+1 Comment (firstname.lastname@example.com)
+1 Follower (@NikkiEgerton)
+1 Retweet
thank you!
I'd like Black Heart by Holly Black.ReplyDelete
+1 Comment
+1 Follower (jennifer)
+1 twitter @jlkalman26
+1 Retweet
jlkalman26 at gmail dot com
Oh gosh, you're right, this is a very good release week - it's so hard to choose. I'd like to win either Magic Unchained, Lessons After Dark, Untouched, Alien Diplomacy or Enraptured...ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follow
+1 retweeted as @chibii9
Wow, so many on my "must read" list this week! I'd be thrilled with any of the following: Sharon Shinn - The Shape of Desire; Ann Aguirre - Devil's Punch; Devon Monk - Magic without MercyReplyDelete
+1 for comment
+1 for blog follow
+1 for Twitter follow (tialessa)
+1 for Retweet
tialessa [at] yahoo [dot] com
I'd like Black Heart by Holly Black.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 follower
+1 twitter follower
+1 I see Bentley Little on the list, so I'll throw my name in the hat for his new novel.ReplyDelete
+1 GFC follower
+1 Twitter follower (@wagthefox)
+1 Retweeted: http://twitter.com/WagTheFox/statuses/187557548902187009
therabidfox at gmail.com
I just zoomed through the first three books of the series in the last week, so Gini Koch's Alien Diplomacy would definitely be my choice. (Also, what took me so long to start this series? It's fab!) :)ReplyDelete
rissatoo (atGmail dotCom)
+$: commenter, follower, follower, retweeter...
Immortal CityReplyDelete
I follow the blog.
Thanks for the giveaway.
I'd love to read Lessons After Dark by Isabel Cooper.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 twitter follower
+1 blog follower
+1 tweet: https://twitter.com/marieimy/status/187703036066533376
marieimy (at) gmail (dot) com
I'd love to win Grave Mercy, by R.L. LaFevers! It seems amazing :)ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 twitter follow (@fetadesu)
+1 blog follow (GFC: disincentive)
+1 tweet: https://twitter.com/#!/fetadesu/status/187877853453500416
I like the look of Sword & Blood: The Vampire Musketeers but I'm slightly apprehensive also (not sure what it would be like).ReplyDelete
thanks for the giveaway
+1 comment
+1 follower
Lots of great choices this week. I would pick Black Heart. Thanks!ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 follow blog Andrea Thompson
+1 follow twitter @BookishAndrea
+1 tweet
OMG SOOOO Many good books this week, how is a girlbto choose?! Lil. If I win, I will have to think long and hard :)ReplyDelete
+1 commented
+1 gfc follower
+1 twitter follower
+1 tweeted. https://mobile.twitter.com/#!/joleneallcock/status/188330319651422208
So many choices I don't know which one to pick! So I think I'll pick Bloodright by Karin Tabke.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 twitter (beckerjo)
+1 tweet
I would love to read Grave Mercy, by R.L. LaFevers. Thank you for this chance! :DReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 GFC (Giada M.)
+1 twitter (@hatshepsut0011)
fabgiada (at) gmail (dot) com
So many good books this week....I think I'd pick Black Heart. :)ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 GFC Cayce
+1 Twitter: Cayce_23
+1 tweet: https://twitter.com/#!/Cayce_23/status/188704621542387713
cayce006 at yahoo dot com
I would love to win Black Heart.ReplyDelete
+1 Comment
+1 Blog follower
+1 Twitter follower: Sparima
+1 Tweet: https://twitter.com/Sparima/status/188761647928717312
What great choices this week. I would love to win a copy of Untouched. Thanks.ReplyDelete
+1 comment
+1 blog follow (GFC- Joanne B)
+1 Twitter follow (@JoanneBalinski)
Joanne B
Black Heart please! Thanks for the giveaway.ReplyDelete
+1-twitter follower
+1-blog follower


text:
Privacy Policy
$10 - $30
$30 - $50
Over $50
Machine Wash
Over 40% Off
Up to 40% Off
Sure Fit Furniture Friend Linen Color Sofa Protector
$29.03Up to 42% Off
Sure Fit Furniture Friend Linen Color Loveseat Protector
$21.77Up to 43% Off
Sure Fit Soft Suede Waterproof Sofa Throw Cover
$54.83Up to 39% Off
Sure Fit Soft Suede Waterproof Love Seat Throw Cover
$41.12Up to 37% Off
Sure Fit Taupe Quilted Suede Sofa Protector
$36.29Up to 44% Off
Sure Fit Taupe Quilted Suede Loveseat Protector
Site Map
Store Site Map
Affiliate Program
Links and Linking Policy
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
California Privacy Rights
California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010
Regular and sale prices, offers and selection on petco.com may vary from those of Petco stores and the Petco Local Ad.Prices and offers are subject to change. Pricing Policies
©2014, Petco Animal Supplies, Inc. All rights reserved. Petco.com is a trademark of Petco Animal Supplies, Inc.


text:
'this is a great duvet and is anti-allergy. it washes easily and can be tunble dried too.'
ejrev - Essex
In the colder months, you'll need a quilt to keep your little one snug. Find top quilts from Silentnight, Lollipop Lane and Fogarty right here at Kiddicare. Shop 'til 8pm Monday to Thursday for next day delivery.
©Kiddicare 2014


text:
Please log in or register to manage your account
Model: 16062 Item: AVE16062
Now there's an equally impressive solution for creating custom dividers for alternative binding systems. Clear labels virtually disappear when applied to divider tabs. Use the Easy Apply™ label sheet to apply the divider tabs all at once. Tab Style: 5-Tab; Tab Color(s): Clear; Index Divider Size: 11 x 8 1/2; Form Quantity: 5.
Avery® Extra-Wide Heavy-Duty View Binder w/One Touch EZD Rings, 1-1/2" Capacity, White
$10.91$698 / each
Avery® Extra-Wide Heavy-Duty View Binder with One Touch EZD Rings, 3" Capacity, White
$14.87$1041 / each