Slashdot Mirror
Mobile Users Plug-in Anywhere They Can
jasonla writes "The New York Times looks at mobile technology users who leech power from restaurant and airport outlets while on the road. The article looks at the habits and 'culture' of people who use portable devices -- such as laptops, iPods and cellphones -- and what the businesses think of power hungry customers." As interesting as the phenomena of customers leeching power from the businesses they frequent is the self-imposed etiquette of many users.
people who use a businesses' air, light and even gravity?
In some cases, those staking a claim do so by plugging in a device - even a $2,000 laptop - only to leave it unattended while fetching a $4 coffee.
... as their insurer takes care of that pesky dead battery problem.
They don't bat an eye at helping yourself to serviettes or sugar but a little juice gets a 'leeching' tag?
If I'm having an overpriced cup of coffee at Starbucks and paying for WiFi, they damn well better let me plug in ...
what, 50 laptops? The point is, public-ish facilities that want or depend on public traffic don't lose much by being accommodating, and no doubt generate some good will among the lithium-ion set. The guy that uses a lot more paper towels or flushes twice in a public bathroom is chewing up a LOT more overheard than the lady who's trickle-charging her laptop (let alone her cellphone).
/.ing
I'd say the bigger cost is the risk of liability when one Starbucks customer trips over the power cord of another customer's laptop. You know, the one the user has stretched from the pillar in the middle of the room over to his table, where he's
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
...he could simply meet the person face to face.
Seriously, doesn't anyone else here think 3 hours of cell phone yammering every day might be a bit excessive?
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
In the good ol' US of A, the main point is that it's up to the person who owns the table/outlet/electricity to decide who gets to use it and how. Now, if that business thinks their bottom line is getting eaten alive by people charging cell phones, they're crazy. However: it's up to them to decide that.
The other thing that we have in the US of A is a long history of watching foolish businesses go OUT of business. That's the miracle of capitalism! Sounds like Brazil already gets it (in terms of businesses providing these services), but I'd rather that we talk in terms of the companies involved getting it or not, not the country.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
What is it going to take to get /. editors from using links in stories that actually LINK TO the article/story they are referring to, instead of ones that prompt for some stupid login.
If it requires a login, its a private site, and isnt public news. If its public news, the same story *WILL* be posted on a public site that doesnt waste peoples time with login nonsense. It would take an editor posting a story 15 seconds to hit google news, and find such a link for a story, to substitute for where a story submitter has included a link to such a private news site. Instead of each view having to either do that or waste time either maintining a login or making up a disposable one for every story.
WHY IS SLASHDOT SUPPORTING THE NEW YORK TIMES OBNOXIOUS, PRIVACY-INVADING, AND GENERAL PAIN IN THE ASS REGISTRATION POLICY? How much are they paying, and to who?
If this is going to continue, it would be damn nice if instead of the (intermittent) '(free reg required)' comment on these stories, that fact was stored in a boolean field in the story database, so that viewers could have a prefs option to choose to just have those stories completely supressed from their slashdot experience.
And if enough people set that pref, perhaps the eds will finally realize that posting stories with that type of link is a complete waste of time.
Your charger isn't 100% efficient, but your point is still valid. The cost here is in pennies per day.
However, what about the cost of adding more outlets to your building to accomodate your customers? You don't have to do this, but it might get more people in the door.
Or alternativily you could argue that todays consumer electronics haven't designed their products well enough to take into account the clearly known limitations of current battery technology (it's not like the mainstream market has changed very much recently). Sure they've made efforts, but the direction has been (until recently) on bigger, better, faster and more powerful rather than lower heat output and reduced power consumption.
Or you could blame product managers and consumers. One for actually considering that a product with a 3 hour battery life is marketable and the other for actually proving them right.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
i'd say (without RingTFA) that a lot of the concern is just that you do sit there and drink only 2 coffee's in a hour. at 3 pounds/euros/dollars, it's not that same as if it was a bottomless cup of drip brew for 1 euro/dollar/pound. you are taking up a whole seat, but probably actually taking up a whole booth with your papers and laptop ... a booth that could better accomodate 3 people each buying 3 euro coffee's and only planning on staying for their cigarette, and going back to their workplace.
...
...
i have a hard time believing that shops are concerned with the minimal ammounts of power cellphones and laptop requires, but when you camp out with them waiting for your device to power up fully, you are costing them 'geniune' revenue (unless you are producing it for them, by having a meal over that span of your two hours).
personally, not being able to smoke in coffee shops (most, in america i've found, especially the west [i call it the 'left'] coast) prevents me from spending any real ammount of time in them (20 minutes for two coffee's, and probably only one to go)
it's the same reason mcdonald's chairs are so uncomfortable: they don't want you there. not just you (the geek with the laptop), anyone. they want you to drive through, or eat and get the hell out, cause more people could be sitting there
It's a bit of a fuss about nothing. Quote: "Somebody's got to pay for that electricity." Yes, the customer. They might say "if everybody came in and did it..." well, for 12 hours, there are 10 people drawing 100W, that's 12kWh, that's about 70p for the day. Boohoo.
again, not about the electricity: and 40 pounds/hr lost to the booth(s) lost by people camping and treating a restaurant as a workplace.
now i fully appreciate all the wifi spots about, and places like that are fully EXPECTING people to stay put for a few hours (hourly wifi access), but shops with less than 15 chairs are not making a fortune (or possibly even survivng) by having you work in a corner all afternoon.
you can't have everything, where would you put it?
Restaurants definitely pay for their air.
The air you breathe is processed, filtered, temperature and humidity regulated. That costs money and customers are people who are willing to pay for "atmosphere" which usually does include special lighting.
They pay for water, for toilets, for square footage.
That gravity that's holding your ass to the seat, that's called "real estate". Underneath your fat ass is dirt and that is where the gravity comes from.
What's so far off the mark? Another poster noted that restaurants are in the service industry, not the food industry. He is exactly on target. Power is just another potential service that they can market just like any utility(service) company. Hell, they could even improve the power and advertise "uninterruptible" for a premium if they thought there was a market for it.
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
- W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
For everyone who thinks this is OK, how about putting an extension cord out your window and publishing your address.
When I walk into someone's house with my laptop, I immediately plug it in. They don't mind. They invited me into their home, and use of all the facilities (bathrooms and power plugs included). When I'm invited into a business, I'm also given free use of the restrooms, so why not the power outlets as well? Use of the restroom is much greater cost than plugging in a laptop for the duration of my stay.
When you invite people into your house, do you charge them to use the bathroom? Do you charge them to get a glass of water? Would you charge them to plug in a cell phone? If so, you must not have any friends, if not, why would you expect to be treated more poorly when invited in by a business?
Learn to love Alaska