... they just want the damn thing to work after you pay lots of money for it.
I couldn't agree more. I'd like to see a way of quantifying this type of pain and aggravation (dealing with pre-installed trialware/crapware) into the cost of a PC.
Once they became publicly traded, the onus became profit first - that is American law. Besides,"do no evil" was marketing fluff - always has been. My "evil" and your "evil" are 2 different things.
The income statement seems like UHC is doing ok...Net Income of $2,977,000,000 in 2008.
I need to understand more why 3.4% is bad, and why I should mistrust my theory that there is quite a bit of money to be made as a provider of health insurance
Since when is making money to be scoffed at? You sarcastically refer to 3.4% - isn't that a profit? Who made up the rule that anything under double-digit profit margins equates to failure?
If the margin is unacceptable, perhaps it would be best if it weren't traded publicly. Healthcare plans find such a margin acceptable to continue doing business.
I looked up the cash flow for UHC - my current provider. Looks like 2006 was a good year, 2007 and 2008...not so much. What this doesn't tell me is how much of their financial shortfall has to do with insuring folks and paying claims.
"were just looking for any reason to have to stop forking over pay." And therein lies an issue. I pay them to "fork over pay" when I need it. Period. They advertise such a product and sell it to me. This is an example of bait-and-switch, and all too common. I'm buying health-care insurance. I didn't buy a "chance to maximize profits for the shareholders and executives of a publicly traded company".
There is quite a bit of money to be made as an insurance provider. Enough that it would be attractive even if it wasn't publicly traded. A turn-a-profit-at-all-costs attitude doesn't serve the customer. Capitalism uber alles doesn't seem to serve me as well as I thought it would when I was younger...
VMS isn't "friendly to use"? Really? I guess maybe it isn't if English isn't your first language, but what could be more friendly than DCL? If I need help, I type "help". If I need to copy a file, the command is "copy". If I want to rename a file, guess what the command is? You guessed it - "rename"
Plus, the uptime is tremendous, which is a VERY friendly attribute.
But it DOES. Management decides what is Productive, Competent, and Effective. I don't always agree with their assessment, but it's their job to make those calls. That's why their job title is "Boss", and mine is "Employee".
If it's intolerable, then perhaps consider working somewhere else. It really is only a JOB.
Manager's have too much other work? I disagree.The first order of business is to mange the people you are paid to manage. Either that, or get out of management.
"tyranny of small towns". I like that. Any group of people, any society, has certain unwritten expectations and rules. Deviations are punished (at least if they are viewed as a threat).
This was viewed as a threat, and treated accordingly.
I've noticed that the privacy question was ruled on, but the emotional question will go before a jury. So it's not over.
Here's my take on the article - "Whah. Apple does things their way. And they have enough influence that we have to kiss their ass, instead of their PR dept kissing ours."
This is a media cry-fest masquerading as an insightful opinion piece. Problem is, the opinion being championed is important to media, not shareholders.
Slashdot Mirror
... they just want the damn thing to work after you pay lots of money for it.
I couldn't agree more. I'd like to see a way of quantifying this type of pain and aggravation (dealing with pre-installed trialware/crapware) into the cost of a PC.
Once they became publicly traded, the onus became profit first - that is American law.
Besides,"do no evil" was marketing fluff - always has been. My "evil" and your "evil" are 2 different things.
Well said! The worst vice I can think of is the compulsive need to mind other people's business
I expect they do read email and (possibly) listen to calls, when I use their computer and their phone.
Not saying I like it, just that I wouldn't be shocked.
All the same, I'm not that important. To monitor my calls and/or emails would be a bit wasteful, for them. But, it's their stuff, and their money.
I'd probably balk at a chip, though. To me, a chip is not acceptable. A uniform, however, wouldn't be as objectionable. YMMV.
Marxism: An attempt to create Christianity without Christ
Damn! I mistook those for Ninjas...
Still looking at UHC
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=UNH&annual
The income statement seems like UHC is doing ok...Net Income of $2,977,000,000 in 2008.
I need to understand more why 3.4% is bad, and why I should mistrust my theory that there is quite a bit of money to be made as a provider of health insurance
Since when is making money to be scoffed at? You sarcastically refer to 3.4% - isn't that a profit? Who made up the rule that anything under double-digit profit margins equates to failure?
3.4% on billions does add up.
If the margin is unacceptable, perhaps it would be best if it weren't traded publicly. Healthcare plans find such a margin acceptable to continue doing business.
I looked up the cash flow for UHC - my current provider. Looks like 2006 was a good year, 2007 and 2008...not so much. What this doesn't tell me is how much of their financial shortfall has to do with insuring folks and paying claims.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/cf?s=UNH&annual
What contract?
"were just looking for any reason to have to stop forking over pay." And therein lies an issue. I pay them to "fork over pay" when I need it. Period. They advertise such a product and sell it to me. This is an example of bait-and-switch, and all too common. I'm buying health-care insurance. I didn't buy a "chance to maximize profits for the shareholders and executives of a publicly traded company".
There is quite a bit of money to be made as an insurance provider. Enough that it would be attractive even if it wasn't publicly traded. A turn-a-profit-at-all-costs attitude doesn't serve the customer. Capitalism uber alles doesn't seem to serve me as well as I thought it would when I was younger...
Perhaps you meant MVS? MVS is downright hostile!
VMS isn't "friendly to use"? Really? I guess maybe it isn't if English isn't your first language, but what could be more friendly than DCL?
If I need help, I type "help". If I need to copy a file, the command is "copy". If I want to rename a file, guess what the command is? You guessed it - "rename"
Plus, the uptime is tremendous, which is a VERY friendly attribute.
Then I'll see you in hell!
Modded "Insightful"?. Mods need to get out more... only on ./
Any chance this is a case of assholes being more noticeable? Where I ride & drive, the majority of cyclists obey the traffic laws. YMMV
Modding this as a troll is bullshit. BlueStrat makes an interesting point that contributes to the discussion
Why? Are you looking to move from frying pan to fire?
But it DOES. Management decides what is Productive, Competent, and Effective. I don't always agree with their assessment, but it's their job to make those calls. That's why their job title is "Boss", and mine is "Employee".
If it's intolerable, then perhaps consider working somewhere else. It really is only a JOB.
Manager's have too much other work? I disagree.The first order of business is to mange the people you are paid to manage. Either that, or get out of management.
...and black helicopters
Principal and principle are not synonymous.
"tyranny of small towns". I like that. Any group of people, any society, has certain unwritten expectations and rules. Deviations are punished (at least if they are viewed as a threat).
This was viewed as a threat, and treated accordingly.
I've noticed that the privacy question was ruled on, but the emotional question will go before a jury. So it's not over.
The definition of Common Sense changes, depending on your age. Teens do things all the time that adults find foolish.
Here's my take on the article - "Whah. Apple does things their way. And they have enough influence that we have to kiss their ass, instead of their PR dept kissing ours."
This is a media cry-fest masquerading as an insightful opinion piece. Problem is, the opinion being championed is important to media, not shareholders.