MS gets it, but BA doesn't

British Airways (BA) is the only airline I know of that offers a decent online service. In addition to the fairly common online booking facilities, BA enables passengers to request a seat drag-and-drop style, check-in online, and even print boarding cards on certain routes.

Many other airlines, including our own national carrier, could learn a thing or two from BA when it comes to online services. The convenience of BA's self-service facilities has made it my airline of choice.

BA's true online check-in alone makes it a winner. If not for this particular facility, I would have missed more than one flight because of unforeseen delays in getting to airports.

The same is not true for other airlines such as Virgin Atlantic. Unlike BA, Virgin's online check-in does not mean "ready to fly". Virgin still requires airport check-in at least an hour before departure. Late arrival means getting bumped from the flight despite online check-in.

In short, I am a BA fan. However, BA's Web site had me singing a slightly different tune last week.

I could not understand why neither of these BA representatives would accept the possibility that there could be a bug in the system.

Warwick Ashford, technology editor, ITWeb

Preparing for a flight to London, I logged on to BA.com as usual to see if there were any seats with a bit of extra legroom available.

I immediately noticed that since my last visit the look and feel of the Web site had changed. I also noticed that it took longer to load into the browser. That should have been my first warning signal. Unperturbed, I initiated the online check-in procedure.

Step one of the four-step process enables passengers to check details including seat allocations.

As usual, I chose the seat request option to display the seating plan. Although the flight summary said no seat had been allocated, the seating plan showed otherwise. That should have been my second warning signal.

Unfortunately, the seat that had been allocated was not good. As no better seats were available, I decided to abandon the process and try again later.

It was about an hour later that my first mistake became clear. Instead of displaying the seating plan, the system indicated that I was already checked-in.

Impossible!

I was just about to panic, but then remembered the new look and feel. I reasoned that the inevitable bugs that accompany any change of code had caused the error. How else could my status have been updated without confirming anything? I had not even made it past step one.

That's when I made my second mistake. I assumed that BA would resolve the problem easily and speedily the following morning when I called the Johannesburg office to explain in detail what had happened.

No such luck.

"The system says you are already checked in," the agent responded. Well, of course it did! Had she not been listening to what I'd been saying? "I know what your system says, but I did NOT check in," I insisted, suggesting she log a fault. "You are already checked in," the agent repeated.

There was absolutely nothing wrong with the old Web site, so why did they have to change it? As the saying goes: if it isn't broken, don't fix it. But fix it they did, with inevitable consequences.

I tried to stay calm. Really, I did. "Your Web site has just been updated," I ventured, changing tack. "Yes," the agent confirmed. "Well, there's probably a bug that hasn't been picked up yet, so please reset my status so I can get in to request a seat," I prompted.

"You are already checked in, there is nothing I can do," came the agent's unchanging reply.

Clearly, I was getting nowhere and realising that I was not going to take "no" for an answer, the call was escalated.

Given the opportunity of a fresh ear, I tried to explain to the agent's supervisor that there seemed to be a bug in the new system, but the response was the same: "The system says you are already checked in," the agent's supervisor said without hesitation.

OK, I admit, by this time I was no longer calm.

I could not understand why neither of these BA representatives would accept the possibility that there could be a bug in the system. Not many days before, even a local Microsoft representative had conceded that wherever humans are involved in computer programming, bugs were possible.

At the start of the final countdown to the release of the Windows Vista operating system, Microsoft demonstrated it was finally getting real about the inevitability of bugs. It was no longer denying the possibility, but instead making plans to deal with the situation if it arose.

A similar strategy would have worked well in helping to resolve my problem. I could not help wondering: If Microsoft could get it, why couldn't British Airways?

I honestly doubt whether anyone who has ever written and tested computer code would deny that even the slightest change could introduce a bug or two. Yet, even the supervisor was refusing to humour me with the slightest possibility in the wake of a major Web site update!

Before I had time to reason that the supervisor had probably never written a line of code in her life, however, she recognised that the time had come to make the problem go away. A quick call to the airport was all it took. Without the hint of an apology, I got the aisle seat I needed.

The lesson is a simple one. In computer programming, in customer relations, and in life in general, planning to deal with the inevitabilities suggested by experience is a better strategy than denying their existence.

My subsequent use of the BA.com Web site on the rest of the trip was thankfully uneventful. I managed to enjoy the convenience of checking in for my next three flights without uncovering any more potential bugs.

However, I would still like to suggest the addition of the following link to BA.com and indeed every Web site on the planet: Click here to report bugs.