Jump to content

Talk:Geek Squad

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 98.127.168.159 (talk) at 08:31, 7 November 2009 (→‎Companies That No Longer Provide Recovery Discs - A Big Issue). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Staff

The staff section needs to go. It's an advertisement and nothing more.

Agreed, especially since it's presented as a list.69.181.197.214 (talk) 06:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Geek Squad Locations

I would like to propose that entries in this page that refer to Geek Squad being located in FedEx Kinko's stores be amended to read in the past tense as it became official as of March 9, 2008 that the partnership test will end and be pahsed out. This test partnership As I cannot provide the proof at the moment as the document I have is an internal document, I can atest as a Center Technology Specialist for FedEx Kinko's and it will be evident. Metamorphousthe (talk) 23:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Covert Operators

Undercover really isn't that bad. Keep it in mind next time you edit the page from our IP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.192.10.50 (talk) 11:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Issues with the article

This article has way too many spelling and grammatical errors.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.213.214.82 (talk)

So fix them? --OnoremDil 22:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article reads like ad copy.

The article is too opinion based, esp. the controversy section, which shouldn't be implemented into the article except in the links section, despite me agreeing with it or not. Even if I believe every word it says Wikipedia is not an opinion forum; and as such should remain neutral instead of trying to inject negative opinions to counter the positive opinions. This article could use alot of work, making the push towards being neutral instead of leaning heavily as a positive or negative opinion piece. Some examples: Remove controversy section, insert link(s) at bottom. Remove various interjections about the "acheivements" (i.e. GS has served X famous client, etc.) of GS, and provide link(s) at the bottom. This would allow readers to follow the links and pass their own judgement, instead of relying on the judgement of a person who could have (and it is evident in the edits of this page) an overly positive or overly negative image of the business. The page is to inform you on an unbiased level about the business, and not a person's experiences with it, whether it be positive or negative. --Vesper nocte 13:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How is it making Wikipedia an opinion forum... the copyright infringment lawsuit has been reported widely in major newspapers and the competence questions have been also reported to an extent in major media (much to the disgust of bestbuy's corporate who has been editing this article) for corporate gains - we've noted similiar companies that have had lawsuits filed against them - perhaps a re-write of the section but google notability requires inclusion IMHO - would the IP's from their corporate please stop editing without reading this talk page first? -- Tawker 12:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slashdot is a major media outlet? If you can quote me where "major newspapers" have questioned Geek Squad competence I'd LOVE to see it. What some jealous technie nerds post on techie websites does NOT constitute "news." Fact is, Consumer Reports has stated in their look at computer repair that repair companies (including geek squad) have a very high success rate at solving the customer's issues. No one is perfect, especially when you have 12,000 people in a company. Footnoting slahdot is laughable and it SHOULD be deleted.

Whoever edited it last pretty much ripped the agent titles out of there. The titles are one of the fun things about the brand. It appears as though someone from H.R. at Best Buy is being overprotective. Keep the public-facing titles in place, and avoid the internal ones.

Should we have an section dealing with rates/ what GS charges to what the "agent" gets - something to look at I think Tawker 10:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geek Squad precincts in Best Buy stores are also available for servicing or shipping to service items such as appliances, home theater products, and other sorts of electronics that Best Buy sells. Products not purchased at Best Buy can also be taken in to be sent out to repair.
Am I the only one who finds this whole setup incredibly sad?
I believe this article is poorly written and could use improvement. Ajwebb 03:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is disappointing that Wikipedia allows the companies to completely change the encyclopedia and turn it into an advertising message. I posted some information I discovered about Geek Squad about 5 months ago, but it was completely erased and replaced by current content, most likely by some executive at Best Buy, and it now appears to mirror the content on their website. It's sad that Wikipedia is turning into another advertising medium.

This is additionally sad because this particular company is insulting the tech community. I believe the word defamation is appliciable to this marketing. 156.12.56.236 16:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel something SHOULD be on here, go ahead and throw it up. If it falls under the controversy category, put it there. Label it as 'theory' or whatever. But put it up. - flag it as such in the "Edit summary" so we can easily and quickly dig it back out should someone remove it. Worst case, it'll be put to a vote. Kcbnac 18:32, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's a very interesting comment at slashdot, which possibly covers some of the same ground? -Quiddity 01:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, it is interesting but I don't know if it fits in a WP entry, possibly we could add something like "former employees have raised concern about Best Buy focusing on sales instead of technical competency" or something like that, but I don't know if that would be NPOV or OR, /. really isn't a tier one source -- Tawker 01:29, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That would fall under the 'controversy' category. Give it a shot if you think it belongs.Kcbnac 13:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to edit my grammar and citation usage for my addition to the controversy section, as I am not a literary scholar. --AgentUC 15:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just some thoughts on content additions. We could do the services of Geek Squad, and the positions within Geek Squad. We should also talk about Geek Squad City more to create an understanding of what exactly it'll be used for in Geek Squad. Dotuser 07:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some minor edits. What I fail to see is how this page is advertising anything. It's explaining various parts of a company. No where does it push services or elevate Geek Squad's status over other tech service companies. Additionally, rant residue from other websites have no place in what is supposed to be an encyclopedia entry. No offense meant, just my two pennies. JKor 03:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to disagree on the rant being excluded. It's not just slashdot it's pretty much every tech related website out there. From what I've found in a couple quick searches it sounds like Geek Squad really was a good competent company however after the BestBuy buyout and subsequent expansion it seems like things hit the tube then and it was widely noted. I've seen stuff on digg, slashdot, ars technica, usenet, dslreports etc. I think I saw an article in a local printed paper to that effect as well, lemme dig thru my archives. -- Tawker 12:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As a person who just happened to come by (and made a link correction), I also agreed that this article does not look like an ad. As for view problem, I would keep myself neutral since I'm not from the US. --Samuel Curtis 06:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geek Squad History

What is the official history on Geek Squad. When was it bought out by Best Buy.. was it ever publicly traded? I'm having problems finding any information on this company/subsidiary Binarypower 07:23, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticisms, Lawsuits, and other negative content

Geek Squad's reaoning in the Fox News entry regarding the Geek Squad agent that was because it was placed in the first paragraph of the page. This isn't a good place to put something like that. In order to keep with the flow fo the page, we should determine a better position to locate that paragraph. I'm NOT against putting it on the page, but I do think we should discuss where we should place it at on the page. B2bomber81 21:29, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why take out the "Peep Squad Lawsuit"? It is real history, it really happened. Type in "Geeksquad Shower" into Google and see how many results there are for the same story. I placed this under the other lawsuit, a suitable place for it. jasonr724 19:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think whoever reverted your edit may have been intending to just remove the portion that was at the top of the page. I think the content and location of your entry is fine. I've reverted it and it is back on there. B2bomber81 01:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from 71.141.74.46

I'd like to know why THIS company can have an entry on this website but other companies cannot. This is total bullshit. Make a rule and stick with it. If one company can have a commercial listing then all companies should be able to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.141.74.46 (talk)

It might help if you were more specific...but I'd say that you could find your answers somewhere in WP:CORP and WP:RS. --OnoremDil 02:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MRI CD

Maybe this article should cite something about the MRI CDs that geek squad uses to fix computers? (Google it for more info) -- Patrick Flynn 06:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Geek Squad City

Would someone like to add a section about Geek Squad City? It's said to be the world's largest computer repair facility in Brooks, KY. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.138.40.15 (talk) 02:09:47, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

I to think this article would benefit from information like this. Penman 1701 03:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Companies That No Longer Provide Recovery Discs - A Big Issue

Geek Squad makes these recovery discs for about 60 USD. However, some companies don't tell you that they put recovery disk creation software onto the machine itself good enough so that the average person would know to not buy the Geek Squad Service to create them a recovery disk. Such a company is Gateway. I don't know if this should be mentioned on the gateway article or here, but it's obviously a scam ployed out by best buy not to tell people that Gateway offers a recovery disk creator now that they don't offer recovery disks. 68.185.166.207 (talk) 13:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Every PC brand except for Dell come with recovery disc creation software (Dells come with the actual disks or a recovery partition). That said, not all of us Geeks are dishonest about the process. At my precinct we tell our clients that they could make the discs themselves, but we almost always get the sale as we truthfully tell them that the discs will take several hours to burn, and that if their hard drive fails they WILL need them. People are generally lazy enough that they see the value in getting them done rather than putting it off. You wouldn't believe how many people decline the service, saying they'll do it themselves, only to come back a six months later with a dead hard drive and no recovery disks. If you want to talk about scams, point your finger at the computer manufacturers using sub-par components designed to break in two years or less. (68.246.57.183 (talk) 04:01, 23 July 2009 (UTC))[reply]


I deleted the previous person's comment for being a dick. And besides, he didn't bother to check his facts. Recovery discs are $29.99, not $60. And if you contact the manufacturer you will be charged between $10 and $30 for a new set - which, if your GS discs fail, will be covered. 98.127.168.159 (talk) 08:31, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]