I too wish they'd offer linux preinstalled as an option... that way my mom could choose Linux when she was buying a new computer... ("Oh I can save some money!"), then her computer would show up and she'd have no clue how to use it. She'd curse linux, beg me to come install something she knows how to use, and you guys may finally realize that my mom doesn't want linux on her home computer.
I can't accept the thinking that a sufficiently advanced race would feel it was neccessary to go out and conquer the galaxy, which pretty much blows this theory out of the water.
There's a reason they were able to advance that far in the first place, and I doubt it was Probe Spamming or Galactic Domination.
I'm pretty sure that you can run Vista Ultimate ($399) on something less than a brand new $7,182 machine.
The statistic might be right on for a student buying Home standard... $10 from the campus book store will require a new $180 graphics card (given they already have a gig of ram).;)
Incidentally, my new box was bolted together shortly after the New Day... and it's running XP64.;)
And of those who did buy Vista, most didn't even want it!
I've helped four friends/family/FOAFs out so far...
So, by your math, there have only been a max of 7 copies of Vista sold, since you refer to the 4 cases you know of as "most"
The (not really) funny thing is, if everything was in the same place, you'd be complaining that it wasn't different enough to waste money on purchasing. It's the same old XP, but it's too different! Eff MS!
Its idiotic to assume that every company will get every detail of any given product absolutely correct the first time, and that nothing should change after the first release.
Thanks for saving me the typing... it's not a windows thing, it's a router thing. Excellent points on responsibility falling squarely on the shoulders of router companies... If windows were to use the method described in the article to force a new, more secure config onto the router... we'd be hearing screams of "Windows broke my router I hate MS!"
This really isn't a bad move on Amazon's part... it was probably carefully calculated, and mostly a good idea.
They're minimizing their losses on the error: even if they don't have a legal leg to stand on with a retroactive "correction" CC charge, they knew that x% of people, having gotten the email telling them to return it, would do so. Amazon eats shipping both ways... which is less than the cost of the box sets themselves. Amazon wins.
Mince it how you will, xx% reduction of loss with a quick email is better than eating the whole loss.
Why didn't they say in the email they would allowed returns of opened sets? That was probably also a calculated decision... if the email said that... xx% of people would open unopened box sets and watch them before returning them. Is it right to say they have to be unopened, given that the customers may have received them before being notified of the error? Probably not... like I said, calculated decision.
Now, where it could get tricky is any actual charges to customer cards. They could apply breakage to it... knowing that not everyone who gets charged will dispute it. As long as total chargeback fees from customers who dispute don't exceed the amount they kept from customers who let them keep it, it may make financial sense, legality and morality aside.
I'd expect that anyone who does return it will get compensation of some sort, a coupon, etc... and anyone who gets charged and disputes it will get to keep their money and their box sets.
There really should be some protection for companies who make honest mistakes (from Amazon to Mom and Pop), especially when their mistakes get posted up on a forum and bum rushed by vultures looking to screw the man. If a brick and mortar store had an error in their cash register that was charging the wrong price, would we really allow someone to stand on the corner with a sign saying "come on in and get free stuff from this place!" until they fixed it?
"Buy" is the operative word there. If you were charged $0.00 for something, I'd say you didn't buy anything, so you shouldn't "get one free" not having completed the "buy" requirement.
Perhaps its because the traffic laws aren't based in reality? 55 MPH through downtown Atlanta... I have never seen a car on the freeway at that speed... if you stuck to the law you'd never get anywhere 65 is much more reasonable, but the average speed in metro ATL is about 75-80.
Perhaps if they posted a limit that was more acceptable to the public and reasonable in terms of balancing safety and using the freeway to get places, more people would want to follow the rules.
Illegal to interfere with the driver's control? What? My new car (and many newer cars on the market) have rear wheel traction control or vehical skid control.
My traction control keeps the rear wheels (in a rwd vehicle) from ever breaking traction. You can power brake it and then stomp it from a light in first gear and the rear wheels will not spin... the system senses the wheels are losing traction and uses a limited rear diff to reapply power, the tranny to limit the power making it to the rear wheels, and the rear brakes (independantly) to slow a wheel until it grabs again. When TRAC is kicking in (flooring it around a tight corner, etc) my engine will redline but the power won't go to the rear wheels, because if it did they'd lose traction and the rear would swing on you.
The Vehicle Skid Control tries to keep any of the tires from losing traction during turning manuevers. I can take her into a corner way too fast, but the wheels will not lose traction. The computer uses accellerometers at each wheel, the steering wheel, and the car's Center of Gravity, and is plugged into the steering system and speed sensor to determine current intended direction of travel. If the car begins to not go in that direction, it will independantly brake each wheel and apply/limit HP to the drivetrain as needed to ensure you don't go skidding straight through the corner.
These are two very common examples of good technology which limits or takes control of the vehical from the driver in extreme situations. I don't mind having either in my car... They're not illegal. They're Good Ideas(tm)
A Google search? If that's how you determine prior art and the veracity of a claim, I wouldn't be surprised if you actually worked for the patent office yourself.
Patent Officer #1: "How'd the Google search turn out?" Patent Officer #2: "Well, I searched on his name and didn't find any web pages talking about this idea, so it must be new!" Patent Officer #1: "Great! I'll notify Mr. Bezos of his new patent!"
Have you ever considered that not evryone who has a idea first creates a website about it... and if they did have a website they might not provide a link to/.?
True, some developers tend to shoot from the hip, uploading "simple" or "poorly thought through" or "I don't really understand the implications of what I'm doing but look, it flashes and the marketing department loves it!" code to the live environment. Chaos usually ensues. The programmer acted unprofessionally, making an unsanctioned change without getting appropriate permission and following the correct processes.
In my experience, however, more often than not these changes aren't made at the whim of the programmer but at the request, pleading, and sometimes demand or direct order of a manager who does not understand the grand scheme of things. So many times I've heard "Can't you just add a field to the database?" or "Isn't it just changing the text in this one place?" or "What if we just [insert hacked/crazy/incomplete/unworkable solution here]" while the people making these statements hardly ever mean harm, a lack of understanding of the big picture can often turn a seemingly common-sense solution into a ticking time bomb.
Not every programmer is up to the challenge of saying "no" to the marketing director or customer service manager when approached with such a request. Some see it as way to earn kudos or respect from these people; to advance their career, show off their skills, and sometimes "save the day". As you move up the chain of command resisting becomes harder and harder. Heaven forbid the CEO walks in and asks a programmer to handle this "critical issue" ASAP. It seems so simple; our customers/clients/team will love it; it should only take 5 minutes, right?
There are certainly cases which demand an immediate reprioritization of resources. Legal issues, critical issues with technology ("No one can log into the site!"), and even making a small change to close a deal barely even scratches the surface of issues that often demand immediate attention. The trick is assaying the importance of each issue and responding accordingly. If Chicken Little walks in from the call center saying the sky is falling and by the way, they're flooded with calls from customers who can't access the website, make sure it's not just a single phone call that reached a stressed service manager at a busy time of the day. With proper attention and prioritization,
If not carefully managed, however, giving in to off-the-cuff requests can spell disaster for both the short term function and long term viability of any system. A programmer goes out-of-process to quickly respond to a direct request from management once, and the next time a not-so-important issue arises, they're more likely to do the same. They feel like a hero. They're saved the day. On the flip side, management loves to get an immediate response, so they'll go back to that same programmer.
The developer shirks or rushes regularly prioritized tasks to get another feather in the cap... so now we have 2 hacked solutions. In both cases, the amazing 5 minute solution that looks great on the surface can cause problems in the future. Even worse, because of the "ASAP" nature of many such requests, necessary processes such as testing, QA, and proper implementation procedures can be fudged or ignored completely, making the likelihood that an unintended bug is introduced even greater. In addition, failure to plan for capacity, follow a design specification, properly document work, or just plain missing a detail leads to statements like "Oops, we did what with the SSN's?" or "The data hasn't been captured for how long?". The 5 Minute Solution had its day of glory, but has festered out of sight and now is reborn as 2 Weeks of Damage Control.
If the problem is tracked back to the programmer who created the bug with the quick fix for the CEO, who turns out looking bad? It's certainly not the CEO for putting pressure/an unrealistic timeline/an out-of-process request on the developer, who might not have even been the right person for the job. In the end, both the developer, who thought he was going the extra mile to be a team player, and the techno
Yah, it'd be great to have nice roads and bridges... too bad we wouldn't have nearly the level of scientific progress we enjoy today. How many techs are spun off from military projects..? Its just like the space program.
I do believe there was an article on here the other day explaining how the military led the development (and demand) of microchips and other electronics that are the basis of modem day cellphones and other "cool" tech.
I've seen lots of posts stating "companies love rebates because not everyone fills them out" but I haven't seen anyone use the proper term for that yet: It's called breakage.
Any time you're issued something that doesn't have immediate value, or requires you to take one more step to gain value from, companies gain breakage. The model for Airmiles, Malborough Bucks, and hundreds of other "point systems" rely heavily on breakage as part of their success. Something like only 20% of Skymiles issued are ever redeemed for free flights.
This is also the reason you won't see "easy online redemption" any time soon... it would drastically decrease the breakage on rebates and cost the companies a ton more money.
Your statement will only be valid when there is a PayPal ATM that I can drive up to in my car and withdraw money from my PayPal account.
Do you think that the ATM fairy just flits about at night, dropping magical ATM seeds into the ground which, by the next morning, sprout into full grown ATMs full of money and grow wires back to the home office?
It costs money to have that ATM in that parking lot, stock it with money every day, capture security cameras, make sure its in working order, and faciliate the transactions back to your home bank to make sure you have money to pull out. That's operational and infrastructual cost, and it's not free. Why doesn't your own bank charge you an ATM fee? They're making money off you already... fees, float off your funds, etc. All their ATMs and no ATM fees are an added incentive to choose them as a bank.
If you could walk up to ANY ATM and get money for free... there would be no incentive for anyone to ever make ATMs. When you get money out of another bank's ATM they charge you because they're not going to provide you with a completely free service... they haven't made a dime off you so far since you don't have an account with them.
Paypal, of course, doesn't have this problem because you cannot get money out of your account. If you can find a bar you can walk into and pay for your tab with PayPal instead of cash, I'll be truly impressed. Paypal is a great way to send funds electronically, but until it exists in some physical manifest (cash card, SpeedPay, etc) it will never replace the dollar bill.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, thats right, I'm reading /. ;)
I too wish they'd offer linux preinstalled as an option... that way my mom could choose Linux when she was buying a new computer... ("Oh I can save some money!"), then her computer would show up and she'd have no clue how to use it. She'd curse linux, beg me to come install something she knows how to use, and you guys may finally realize that my mom doesn't want linux on her home computer.
There's a reason they were able to advance that far in the first place, and I doubt it was Probe Spamming or Galactic Domination.
pshaw! My phone's desire to land on the living room coffee table when I get home won that fight.
Who did you trick into paying you to do IT work? I have some ocean front property over in Arizona...
The statistic might be right on for a student buying Home standard... $10 from the campus book store will require a new $180 graphics card (given they already have a gig of ram). ;)
Incidentally, my new box was bolted together shortly after the New Day... and it's running XP64. ;)
Maybe they learned from their mistakes? Give them a small bit of credit, at least.
I've helped four friends/family/FOAFs out so far...
So, by your math, there have only been a max of 7 copies of Vista sold, since you refer to the 4 cases you know of as "most"
The (not really) funny thing is, if everything was in the same place, you'd be complaining that it wasn't different enough to waste money on purchasing. It's the same old XP, but it's too different! Eff MS!
Its idiotic to assume that every company will get every detail of any given product absolutely correct the first time, and that nothing should change after the first release.
Pshhhhh, there was no level grind in Dragon Warrior!
It was more of a "slap the metal slime until you hit him" grind. ;)
Thanks for saving me the typing... it's not a windows thing, it's a router thing. Excellent points on responsibility falling squarely on the shoulders of router companies... If windows were to use the method described in the article to force a new, more secure config onto the router... we'd be hearing screams of "Windows broke my router I hate MS!"
They're minimizing their losses on the error: even if they don't have a legal leg to stand on with a retroactive "correction" CC charge, they knew that x% of people, having gotten the email telling them to return it, would do so. Amazon eats shipping both ways... which is less than the cost of the box sets themselves. Amazon wins.
Mince it how you will, xx% reduction of loss with a quick email is better than eating the whole loss.
Why didn't they say in the email they would allowed returns of opened sets? That was probably also a calculated decision... if the email said that... xx% of people would open unopened box sets and watch them before returning them. Is it right to say they have to be unopened, given that the customers may have received them before being notified of the error? Probably not... like I said, calculated decision.
Now, where it could get tricky is any actual charges to customer cards. They could apply breakage to it... knowing that not everyone who gets charged will dispute it. As long as total chargeback fees from customers who dispute don't exceed the amount they kept from customers who let them keep it, it may make financial sense, legality and morality aside.
I'd expect that anyone who does return it will get compensation of some sort, a coupon, etc... and anyone who gets charged and disputes it will get to keep their money and their box sets.
There really should be some protection for companies who make honest mistakes (from Amazon to Mom and Pop), especially when their mistakes get posted up on a forum and bum rushed by vultures looking to screw the man. If a brick and mortar store had an error in their cash register that was charging the wrong price, would we really allow someone to stand on the corner with a sign saying "come on in and get free stuff from this place!" until they fixed it?
"Buy" is the operative word there. If you were charged $0.00 for something, I'd say you didn't buy anything, so you shouldn't "get one free" not having completed the "buy" requirement.
Well of course it is =P, but for the purposes of his argument he only cared about the length... which requires 2 dimensions to contain. ;)
Joe Hacker does not describe 95% of the population.
What a pain, and I can't even get there in a flying UPS truck. ;)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the meter stick be a 2d object?
You must be French.
Perhaps its because the traffic laws aren't based in reality? 55 MPH through downtown Atlanta... I have never seen a car on the freeway at that speed... if you stuck to the law you'd never get anywhere 65 is much more reasonable, but the average speed in metro ATL is about 75-80.
Perhaps if they posted a limit that was more acceptable to the public and reasonable in terms of balancing safety and using the freeway to get places, more people would want to follow the rules.
Hrmm.
.5in, and the cops can see it just fine.
Color, anyone? Like the registration tag on my license plate... which is only 1in by
Illegal to interfere with the driver's control? What? My new car (and many newer cars on the market) have rear wheel traction control or vehical skid control.
My traction control keeps the rear wheels (in a rwd vehicle) from ever breaking traction. You can power brake it and then stomp it from a light in first gear and the rear wheels will not spin... the system senses the wheels are losing traction and uses a limited rear diff to reapply power, the tranny to limit the power making it to the rear wheels, and the rear brakes (independantly) to slow a wheel until it grabs again. When TRAC is kicking in (flooring it around a tight corner, etc) my engine will redline but the power won't go to the rear wheels, because if it did they'd lose traction and the rear would swing on you.
The Vehicle Skid Control tries to keep any of the tires from losing traction during turning manuevers. I can take her into a corner way too fast, but the wheels will not lose traction. The computer uses accellerometers at each wheel, the steering wheel, and the car's Center of Gravity, and is plugged into the steering system and speed sensor to determine current intended direction of travel. If the car begins to not go in that direction, it will independantly brake each wheel and apply/limit HP to the drivetrain as needed to ensure you don't go skidding straight through the corner.
These are two very common examples of good technology which limits or takes control of the vehical from the driver in extreme situations. I don't mind having either in my car... They're not illegal. They're Good Ideas(tm)
A Google search? If that's how you determine prior art and the veracity of a claim, I wouldn't be surprised if you actually worked for the patent office yourself.
/.?
Patent Officer #1: "How'd the Google search turn out?"
Patent Officer #2: "Well, I searched on his name and didn't find any web pages talking about this idea, so it must be new!"
Patent Officer #1: "Great! I'll notify Mr. Bezos of his new patent!"
Have you ever considered that not evryone who has a idea first creates a website about it... and if they did have a website they might not provide a link to
True, some developers tend to shoot from the hip, uploading "simple" or "poorly thought through" or "I don't really understand the implications of what I'm doing but look, it flashes and the marketing department loves it!" code to the live environment. Chaos usually ensues. The programmer acted unprofessionally, making an unsanctioned change without getting appropriate permission and following the correct processes.
In my experience, however, more often than not these changes aren't made at the whim of the programmer but at the request, pleading, and sometimes demand or direct order of a manager who does not understand the grand scheme of things. So many times I've heard "Can't you just add a field to the database?" or "Isn't it just changing the text in this one place?" or "What if we just [insert hacked/crazy/incomplete/unworkable solution here]" while the people making these statements hardly ever mean harm, a lack of understanding of the big picture can often turn a seemingly common-sense solution into a ticking time bomb.
Not every programmer is up to the challenge of saying "no" to the marketing director or customer service manager when approached with such a request. Some see it as way to earn kudos or respect from these people; to advance their career, show off their skills, and sometimes "save the day". As you move up the chain of command resisting becomes harder and harder. Heaven forbid the CEO walks in and asks a programmer to handle this "critical issue" ASAP. It seems so simple; our customers/clients/team will love it; it should only take 5 minutes, right?
There are certainly cases which demand an immediate reprioritization of resources. Legal issues, critical issues with technology ("No one can log into the site!"), and even making a small change to close a deal barely even scratches the surface of issues that often demand immediate attention. The trick is assaying the importance of each issue and responding accordingly. If Chicken Little walks in from the call center saying the sky is falling and by the way, they're flooded with calls from customers who can't access the website, make sure it's not just a single phone call that reached a stressed service manager at a busy time of the day. With proper attention and prioritization,
If not carefully managed, however, giving in to off-the-cuff requests can spell disaster for both the short term function and long term viability of any system. A programmer goes out-of-process to quickly respond to a direct request from management once, and the next time a not-so-important issue arises, they're more likely to do the same. They feel like a hero. They're saved the day. On the flip side, management loves to get an immediate response, so they'll go back to that same programmer.
The developer shirks or rushes regularly prioritized tasks to get another feather in the cap... so now we have 2 hacked solutions. In both cases, the amazing 5 minute solution that looks great on the surface can cause problems in the future. Even worse, because of the "ASAP" nature of many such requests, necessary processes such as testing, QA, and proper implementation procedures can be fudged or ignored completely, making the likelihood that an unintended bug is introduced even greater. In addition, failure to plan for capacity, follow a design specification, properly document work, or just plain missing a detail leads to statements like "Oops, we did what with the SSN's?" or "The data hasn't been captured for how long?". The 5 Minute Solution had its day of glory, but has festered out of sight and now is reborn as 2 Weeks of Damage Control.
If the problem is tracked back to the programmer who created the bug with the quick fix for the CEO, who turns out looking bad? It's certainly not the CEO for putting pressure/an unrealistic timeline/an out-of-process request on the developer, who might not have even been the right person for the job. In the end, both the developer, who thought he was going the extra mile to be a team player, and the techno
Yah, it'd be great to have nice roads and bridges... too bad we wouldn't have nearly the level of scientific progress we enjoy today. How many techs are spun off from military projects..? Its just like the space program.
I do believe there was an article on here the other day explaining how the military led the development (and demand) of microchips and other electronics that are the basis of modem day cellphones and other "cool" tech.
I've seen lots of posts stating "companies love rebates because not everyone fills them out" but I haven't seen anyone use the proper term for that yet: It's called breakage.
Any time you're issued something that doesn't have immediate value, or requires you to take one more step to gain value from, companies gain breakage. The model for Airmiles, Malborough Bucks, and hundreds of other "point systems" rely heavily on breakage as part of their success. Something like only 20% of Skymiles issued are ever redeemed for free flights.
This is also the reason you won't see "easy online redemption" any time soon... it would drastically decrease the breakage on rebates and cost the companies a ton more money.
Your statement will only be valid when there is a PayPal ATM that I can drive up to in my car and withdraw money from my PayPal account.
Do you think that the ATM fairy just flits about at night, dropping magical ATM seeds into the ground which, by the next morning, sprout into full grown ATMs full of money and grow wires back to the home office?
It costs money to have that ATM in that parking lot, stock it with money every day, capture security cameras, make sure its in working order, and faciliate the transactions back to your home bank to make sure you have money to pull out. That's operational and infrastructual cost, and it's not free. Why doesn't your own bank charge you an ATM fee? They're making money off you already... fees, float off your funds, etc. All their ATMs and no ATM fees are an added incentive to choose them as a bank.
If you could walk up to ANY ATM and get money for free... there would be no incentive for anyone to ever make ATMs. When you get money out of another bank's ATM they charge you because they're not going to provide you with a completely free service... they haven't made a dime off you so far since you don't have an account with them.
Paypal, of course, doesn't have this problem because you cannot get money out of your account. If you can find a bar you can walk into and pay for your tab with PayPal instead of cash, I'll be truly impressed. Paypal is a great way to send funds electronically, but until it exists in some physical manifest (cash card, SpeedPay, etc) it will never replace the dollar bill.