Better than the MySQL alternative where unused table space can't be reclaimed at all. The only solution is to use the inno_db_file_per_table feature, which puts every table in it's own table space. When you want reclaim the space, you basically have to rewrite the entire table, indexes and all, which, like PostgreSQL will lock up the table until it is finished. It really should be possible to clean up unused space without locking the table. I'm pretty sure that SQL Server has been able to do it for since at least SQL Server 2000.
This might be the reason it never took off the fist time around, 15 years ago, and why it's still failing to take off. For VR to work, you have to design the game specifically to work with the VR hardware. But the VR hardware has always been so expensive that only a few people are willing to buy it, and therefore there is not incentive to spend the time developing for it. And since there's no development going on, there's very little reason for people to spend so much money on it. Big circular problem that's hard to fix. Really they only way I can see this coming to an end is for the hardware to get really cheap ($200), and then have some huge powerhouse behind it who can push it and get great games on the shelves at release time.
$10 million doesn't get you very far anymore. My city has spent over $10 million trying to construct a pedestrian bridge. The initial estimate was over 6.5 million. For a bridge. That people walk on. I think it allows for bikes too. Crazy. And it still hasn't been completed. Who knows how much it will cost by the end of it.
The downside of not being able to issue loans like this is that either people will have to go without the loan and without the car, or they will find somebody who is going to loan them the money illegally. Having a loan where the car disables itself if the payment is late is probably a lot less dangerous than having people get loans from illegal sources.
Also, if you depend on a car for your day to day life (get to work, get to store, pick up kids from school/daycare, etc, then make sure you have a plan for what happens when that car is out of commission. If you can't afford to have some savings in the event that your car is out of commission, then you can't afford to own the car.
I happen to not own a car. I'm lucky in that I live in a place that has decent public transit and cycling facilities, and there is also a lot of stuff (shopping etc) within walking distance from my house. Even so, there's a lot of people who can't fathom how I can not own a car. They've built their entire life around owning a car. Even though they live in the same neighbourhood, work in the same area, and make a similar income to me, they simply never even question if they could get by without a car. Many families couldn't get by without 2 cars. It's a huge expense, and most people just put out the money. They think there isn't an option.
When you have the money that Bill Gates has, there's very little that could happen that would cause you to lose that position. Sure you might drop from #1 to #20 on the scale of richest person in the world, but you'd still pretty much be on top. Unless the government enacts a law to take money that you earned over your lifetime retroactively, or there is massive worldwide inflation, there's very few things that could happen that could happen that you wouldn't maintain your position at the top. The government might be able to change tax rates such that getting to be a billionaire is difficult because you would be taxed to high, but once you have 80 billion dollars, they can't do much to take that money away from you. They can only take new money that you earn using that money.
I think the part about keeping passwords secret for the 6-12 year old range is really just to teach them good habits. The world isn't going to end if someone breaks into the site where they get their daily reading or math assignment. The teacher can probably just reset the account if something was messed up, and give them a new password. After that agent may become more of a problem, but by them it would probably be a good idea for the kids to have a device like an iPod touch where they can have a password manager. They could also use two factor authentication if the kids had a device, but I think that would be expecting s lot from some of these educational sites.
Interesting. Although I guess the question is, what is in the 2% of apps it doesn't run? From a quick search, it looks like there's 1.3 million apps. Which means that there's around 26000 apps that don't run. If they are all just fart apps, then that's fine. But if it includes popular games or programs that I want to use, then it's a big problem.
Also, how did anybody test that all those apps are even working. They would have to download each one individually and test them out. Even automating something like that would take a while. And how did they get access to all the apps if they had to pay form them. And how do you determine if an app "runs" do you launch it and check for crashes? Do you actually try out every feature of the app, play through the entire game?
Especially considering I haven't heard much criticism of the current generation of Windows Phones, except for that pertaining to lack of apps. The general consensus seem to be (as far as I've read) that Windows Phone is actually quite a good product. From the development standpoint, I've played around with it, and actually find it much easier to get started with than Android or iOS. The only reason I can figure that they aren't succeeding is because of the lack of apps, which leads to less users, which makes it less attractive to developers. It's a circular problem. Blackberry has other sorts of problems. Not only are there no users, but from what I've heard, developing apps on it isn't easy.
Google defines it as "a machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically, especially one programmable by a computer.". Those big welding robots in in factories hardly resemble any human or animal I'm aware of, but we call them robots. If you're really loose on the definition of "complex series of actions" then something as simple as a toaster or coffee maker with a computerized timer could be a robot.
In most cases where you could carry a phablet it wouldn't be much of an inconvenience to carry a 7 inch tablet and a small phone. Certainly it would be less cumbersome than carrying a 6 inch phone everywhere you wanted to have your phone with you. When the options are either carry a 6 inch phone everywhere, or carry a 4 inch phone (or even smaller) everywhere and sometimes bring along my 7 inch tablet when I have the room, I'll choose to have 2 devices. At least then you have the option to not carry around a giant device and still be somewhat connected. With only a phablet, your options are carry around a 6 inch+ device or don't have a phone at all. There's plenty of places I go that I really don't want to take a phablet with me, but where having a phone would be really useful. Like going to the ski hill or on a bike ride.
If you ignore the part about coming back, then I could see there being a Mars landing in the next 25 years. But I'm with you on the 50 year outlook. There's very little we could gain by sending people there that we couldn't accomplish by sending robots. And as the years pass, and robots gets more and more capable, that will only become more true. People forget (or don't know) how far away Mars is. The minimum time required for a round trip to Mars is around 21 months. Also, they estimate you would need 3 million pounds of supplies to get to Mars. Just lifting that into space would take 60 shuttle launches.
Yeah, sometimes you get lucky and you happen to get a phone which is supported by Cyanogenmod and other non-Google Android distributions. Whether or not the device will be supported by the hacker community is largely up to chance. Mostly it's a combination of the popularity of the phone, as well as whether or not they can find drivers that support the hardware for the newer version of the OS. With the closed source nature of the handsets themselves there's very little the hacker community can do to get a newer version of Android working on a phone that simply doesn't have drivers available.
But you can buy a Nexus 7 tablet ($229) and a $100 phone for less than the price of many smart phones or phablets. You don't really have to spend double. The phone will work completely fine for phone tasks like talking on the phone and sending text messages. The tablet will work better than most smartphones and phablets for actual computing stuff. You can even opt to just bring a phone if you don't think you'll need to do any computing where you're going. A $100 phone can even do some computing tasks like look up a map if you find yourself in a pinch.
The is my biggest problem with the phone market. Especially in regards to Android. The time for supported updates is just such a short time. The phone I currently have is running Android 2.3 because there was never an update past that point. Android 4 was released 6 months after my phone was released, and it never saw a software update to version 4. It's another one of the reasons I won't spend $600 on a phone. There is no guarantee that says I will ever get software updates. Basically the choice are go with Apple and pay a whole lot of money to be reasonable assured updates will be available but be stuck without an option for an SD card, and be out a lot of money if there's some hardware failure after 2 years. Or buy a $200 Android phone every 2 years, spend way less money overall, and not having to worry about some hardware malfunction costing me so much money to replace the entire phone.
Exactly. There is very little reason for most people to go out and spend $700 on a phone. Yet we just saw it happen. 10 million people went out and bought a $700 phone in one day. People really perplex me sometimes. I'm starting to shop for my next phone, as my payoff period is coming up on my current phone, and the ones I'm looking at are all $200 or less. It doesn't really seem like you get anything much from the $700 phone as compared to the $200 phone.
The specs that matter to me are things like battery life, external storage (Micro SD Card) support and durability. These are things that many manufacturers seem to not be focusing on. They'd rather shave another 0.2 mm off the phone just so they could say it's thinner than last year, as opposed to leaving those 0.2mm on an maybe have better battery life, or be able to make the thing waterproof or add functions that really matter to me. I know battery life has gotten a lot better, but the way I see it, we could have a phone that lasted through 3 or 4 days of actual use if they just would have stopped trying to make it thinner once they hit the 1cm mark. And I will never buy a phone that doesn't support SD cards. (or whatever the popular form of removable media is in the future).
This is another thing that bothers me. If we can see stars as far away as the universe is old, then we (or the matter we are composed of) must be moving away from them at very close to the speed of light, since we were once very close to them. I've heard explanations that we are not really moving as fast, or faster than the speed of light but that it's space that is expanding?
What is the difference between space expanding such that the distance between them increases by 14 billion light years in 14 billion years and 2 objects actually moving apart at the speed of light. The definition of speed is (x1 - x0)/(delta t). If the two objects are now 14 billion light years apart, and we it took 14 billion years for them to get that way, then they must be travelling at the speed of light.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic, but I really don't like how they do this extrapolation stuff. Like the universe is currently expanding, and based on the current rate of expansion (or the rate of change of that expansion) we assume it has always been expanding and that 14 billion years ago everything was crammed into something the size of a golf ball. I'm not anti-science, but that seems to be making a pretty big leap.
Anytime the "official" store had better prices than some retailers would get as their cost price it would be (rightly or wrongly) seen as favoritism, and the other resellers would be livid. And it would happens. It happens all the time. Amazon and Best Buy get much better prices from the manufacturers and distributors compared to the small time shops because they sell so much volume. The little guys complain but nobody listens because they are so unimportant. But it would not be a good idea for the "official" store would not be able to undercut Best Buy or Amazon, because they have the clout to complain to the manufacturer and get a similar deal.
Exactly. I will not buy a device that doesn't have cheap, easily available removable memory. I've always been that way. I bought a Minidisc player when MP3 players were starting to get popular because Minidiscs were $5, while 128 MB cards which held about the same amount of music were around $200. Sony really could have maintained the market on portable music for at least 5 more years if they didn't put so much DRM on their Minidisc players. They could have made them as easy to use any other MP3 player, and they would have outsold everyone because you could bring so much music with you. They would have eventually lost out as flash drives got cheaper and larger, but for the initial period when MP3 players first came out, there's no reason why anybody should have been buying them at all.
For $8 a month they offer a pretty good selection. I remember when blockbuster was still around, and they were charging almost as much for a single rental. Renting a single movie on iTunes will set you back around $5. Premiums channels like HBO cost $15+ a month, and you have to already have a cable subscription. Sure Netflix may not have everything, but they have a pretty good selection given the price they are asking. I definitely get my $8 worth every month. I guess it would be nice if their selection were better, or if they had an option for $25 for every movie and every TV show in existence, but that option doesn't exist anywhere. If Netflix isn't good, who offers a better deal?
Really this is the answer. To use Netflix, you need to pay for an account. And it has TV shows and movies. It's not like Youtube where somebody links you it and you just go watch a short clip and go back to your browsing. Things like Netflix don't need to run in a web browser at all. They just need to make full applications (or plugins in the case of XBMC and others) for all the platforms worth supporting.
I think the problem with Apple going to lossless, is that people would soon get really irritated with the very small amount of space that Apple gives you with the base model of their devices. From some basic searching it seems that FLAC is somewhere around 700 kbps. It could be less or more depending on the file, because it's lossless and will take as many bits as it needs, but I think that's a pretty good estimate. The last 16 GB iPod I bought came with 12 GB usable out of the box. That means you could probably fit about 40 albums (at about an hour and album) on an iPod assuming you used it only for music. You'd have no space for apps/games, or photos, or videos. 40 albums is quite a bit to be carrying around in your pocket, but when other devices allow you to carry around hundreds of albums, your 16 GB iPod is going to seem pretty weak.
This is the big question. What does the dealership do other than sell cars for Tesla? Dealerships make a lot of their money doing regular maintenance and warranty repairs on cars. With an electric car, there is a lot less maintenance to be done. And they are much more reliable. They have an 8 year, unlimited mile warranty. No other IC engine car can offer that, because they simple aren't as reliable, and by their nature, never can be. Most of the problems with Teslas have been software bugs. Once they get all that figured out, there's very little that can go wrong. And fixing software bugs can most likely be done by the end user at home, just like they do with their computers, phones, TVs, and game consoles.
The manufacturer likely could sell for less but in many cases they don't want to get on the bad side of Amazon or Best Buy or whoever else is selling so many of their products. Most manufacturers know very little about good marketing and how to ship a product to the end customer. They simple aren't set up for such tasks. Amazon and others actually provide a very good service to many manufacturers. All the manufacturer has to do is send truckloads of their products to Amazon's warehouse. And Amazon will send money to the manufacturer. Amazon will handle all the complicated stuff like running website, sending out emails to let people know about the products, advertising on websites so people know about the products, search engine optimization to ensure people find the product they are looking for, taking payment from the customer, shipping the product out to the customer. Very few businesses could offer the level of service that Amazon and other online retailers do if they were tasked with it themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
Better than the MySQL alternative where unused table space can't be reclaimed at all. The only solution is to use the inno_db_file_per_table feature, which puts every table in it's own table space. When you want reclaim the space, you basically have to rewrite the entire table, indexes and all, which, like PostgreSQL will lock up the table until it is finished. It really should be possible to clean up unused space without locking the table. I'm pretty sure that SQL Server has been able to do it for since at least SQL Server 2000.
This might be the reason it never took off the fist time around, 15 years ago, and why it's still failing to take off. For VR to work, you have to design the game specifically to work with the VR hardware. But the VR hardware has always been so expensive that only a few people are willing to buy it, and therefore there is not incentive to spend the time developing for it. And since there's no development going on, there's very little reason for people to spend so much money on it. Big circular problem that's hard to fix. Really they only way I can see this coming to an end is for the hardware to get really cheap ($200), and then have some huge powerhouse behind it who can push it and get great games on the shelves at release time.
$10 million doesn't get you very far anymore. My city has spent over $10 million trying to construct a pedestrian bridge. The initial estimate was over 6.5 million. For a bridge. That people walk on. I think it allows for bikes too. Crazy. And it still hasn't been completed. Who knows how much it will cost by the end of it.
The downside of not being able to issue loans like this is that either people will have to go without the loan and without the car, or they will find somebody who is going to loan them the money illegally. Having a loan where the car disables itself if the payment is late is probably a lot less dangerous than having people get loans from illegal sources.
Also, if you depend on a car for your day to day life (get to work, get to store, pick up kids from school/daycare, etc, then make sure you have a plan for what happens when that car is out of commission. If you can't afford to have some savings in the event that your car is out of commission, then you can't afford to own the car.
I happen to not own a car. I'm lucky in that I live in a place that has decent public transit and cycling facilities, and there is also a lot of stuff (shopping etc) within walking distance from my house. Even so, there's a lot of people who can't fathom how I can not own a car. They've built their entire life around owning a car. Even though they live in the same neighbourhood, work in the same area, and make a similar income to me, they simply never even question if they could get by without a car. Many families couldn't get by without 2 cars. It's a huge expense, and most people just put out the money. They think there isn't an option.
When you have the money that Bill Gates has, there's very little that could happen that would cause you to lose that position. Sure you might drop from #1 to #20 on the scale of richest person in the world, but you'd still pretty much be on top. Unless the government enacts a law to take money that you earned over your lifetime retroactively, or there is massive worldwide inflation, there's very few things that could happen that could happen that you wouldn't maintain your position at the top. The government might be able to change tax rates such that getting to be a billionaire is difficult because you would be taxed to high, but once you have 80 billion dollars, they can't do much to take that money away from you. They can only take new money that you earn using that money.
I think the part about keeping passwords secret for the 6-12 year old range is really just to teach them good habits. The world isn't going to end if someone breaks into the site where they get their daily reading or math assignment. The teacher can probably just reset the account if something was messed up, and give them a new password. After that agent may become more of a problem, but by them it would probably be a good idea for the kids to have a device like an iPod touch where they can have a password manager. They could also use two factor authentication if the kids had a device, but I think that would be expecting s lot from some of these educational sites.
Interesting. Although I guess the question is, what is in the 2% of apps it doesn't run? From a quick search, it looks like there's 1.3 million apps. Which means that there's around 26000 apps that don't run. If they are all just fart apps, then that's fine. But if it includes popular games or programs that I want to use, then it's a big problem.
Also, how did anybody test that all those apps are even working. They would have to download each one individually and test them out. Even automating something like that would take a while. And how did they get access to all the apps if they had to pay form them. And how do you determine if an app "runs" do you launch it and check for crashes? Do you actually try out every feature of the app, play through the entire game?
Especially considering I haven't heard much criticism of the current generation of Windows Phones, except for that pertaining to lack of apps. The general consensus seem to be (as far as I've read) that Windows Phone is actually quite a good product. From the development standpoint, I've played around with it, and actually find it much easier to get started with than Android or iOS. The only reason I can figure that they aren't succeeding is because of the lack of apps, which leads to less users, which makes it less attractive to developers. It's a circular problem. Blackberry has other sorts of problems. Not only are there no users, but from what I've heard, developing apps on it isn't easy.
Google defines it as "a machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically, especially one programmable by a computer.". Those big welding robots in in factories hardly resemble any human or animal I'm aware of, but we call them robots. If you're really loose on the definition of "complex series of actions" then something as simple as a toaster or coffee maker with a computerized timer could be a robot.
In most cases where you could carry a phablet it wouldn't be much of an inconvenience to carry a 7 inch tablet and a small phone. Certainly it would be less cumbersome than carrying a 6 inch phone everywhere you wanted to have your phone with you. When the options are either carry a 6 inch phone everywhere, or carry a 4 inch phone (or even smaller) everywhere and sometimes bring along my 7 inch tablet when I have the room, I'll choose to have 2 devices. At least then you have the option to not carry around a giant device and still be somewhat connected. With only a phablet, your options are carry around a 6 inch+ device or don't have a phone at all. There's plenty of places I go that I really don't want to take a phablet with me, but where having a phone would be really useful. Like going to the ski hill or on a bike ride.
If you ignore the part about coming back, then I could see there being a Mars landing in the next 25 years. But I'm with you on the 50 year outlook. There's very little we could gain by sending people there that we couldn't accomplish by sending robots. And as the years pass, and robots gets more and more capable, that will only become more true. People forget (or don't know) how far away Mars is. The minimum time required for a round trip to Mars is around 21 months. Also, they estimate you would need 3 million pounds of supplies to get to Mars. Just lifting that into space would take 60 shuttle launches.
Yeah, sometimes you get lucky and you happen to get a phone which is supported by Cyanogenmod and other non-Google Android distributions. Whether or not the device will be supported by the hacker community is largely up to chance. Mostly it's a combination of the popularity of the phone, as well as whether or not they can find drivers that support the hardware for the newer version of the OS. With the closed source nature of the handsets themselves there's very little the hacker community can do to get a newer version of Android working on a phone that simply doesn't have drivers available.
But you can buy a Nexus 7 tablet ($229) and a $100 phone for less than the price of many smart phones or phablets. You don't really have to spend double. The phone will work completely fine for phone tasks like talking on the phone and sending text messages. The tablet will work better than most smartphones and phablets for actual computing stuff. You can even opt to just bring a phone if you don't think you'll need to do any computing where you're going. A $100 phone can even do some computing tasks like look up a map if you find yourself in a pinch.
The is my biggest problem with the phone market. Especially in regards to Android. The time for supported updates is just such a short time. The phone I currently have is running Android 2.3 because there was never an update past that point. Android 4 was released 6 months after my phone was released, and it never saw a software update to version 4. It's another one of the reasons I won't spend $600 on a phone. There is no guarantee that says I will ever get software updates. Basically the choice are go with Apple and pay a whole lot of money to be reasonable assured updates will be available but be stuck without an option for an SD card, and be out a lot of money if there's some hardware failure after 2 years. Or buy a $200 Android phone every 2 years, spend way less money overall, and not having to worry about some hardware malfunction costing me so much money to replace the entire phone.
Exactly. There is very little reason for most people to go out and spend $700 on a phone. Yet we just saw it happen. 10 million people went out and bought a $700 phone in one day. People really perplex me sometimes. I'm starting to shop for my next phone, as my payoff period is coming up on my current phone, and the ones I'm looking at are all $200 or less. It doesn't really seem like you get anything much from the $700 phone as compared to the $200 phone.
The specs that matter to me are things like battery life, external storage (Micro SD Card) support and durability. These are things that many manufacturers seem to not be focusing on. They'd rather shave another 0.2 mm off the phone just so they could say it's thinner than last year, as opposed to leaving those 0.2mm on an maybe have better battery life, or be able to make the thing waterproof or add functions that really matter to me. I know battery life has gotten a lot better, but the way I see it, we could have a phone that lasted through 3 or 4 days of actual use if they just would have stopped trying to make it thinner once they hit the 1cm mark. And I will never buy a phone that doesn't support SD cards. (or whatever the popular form of removable media is in the future).
This is another thing that bothers me. If we can see stars as far away as the universe is old, then we (or the matter we are composed of) must be moving away from them at very close to the speed of light, since we were once very close to them. I've heard explanations that we are not really moving as fast, or faster than the speed of light but that it's space that is expanding?
What is the difference between space expanding such that the distance between them increases by 14 billion light years in 14 billion years and 2 objects actually moving apart at the speed of light. The definition of speed is (x1 - x0)/(delta t). If the two objects are now 14 billion light years apart, and we it took 14 billion years for them to get that way, then they must be travelling at the speed of light.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic, but I really don't like how they do this extrapolation stuff. Like the universe is currently expanding, and based on the current rate of expansion (or the rate of change of that expansion) we assume it has always been expanding and that 14 billion years ago everything was crammed into something the size of a golf ball. I'm not anti-science, but that seems to be making a pretty big leap.
Anytime the "official" store had better prices than some retailers would get as their cost price it would be (rightly or wrongly) seen as favoritism, and the other resellers would be livid. And it would happens. It happens all the time. Amazon and Best Buy get much better prices from the manufacturers and distributors compared to the small time shops because they sell so much volume. The little guys complain but nobody listens because they are so unimportant. But it would not be a good idea for the "official" store would not be able to undercut Best Buy or Amazon, because they have the clout to complain to the manufacturer and get a similar deal.
Exactly. I will not buy a device that doesn't have cheap, easily available removable memory. I've always been that way. I bought a Minidisc player when MP3 players were starting to get popular because Minidiscs were $5, while 128 MB cards which held about the same amount of music were around $200. Sony really could have maintained the market on portable music for at least 5 more years if they didn't put so much DRM on their Minidisc players. They could have made them as easy to use any other MP3 player, and they would have outsold everyone because you could bring so much music with you. They would have eventually lost out as flash drives got cheaper and larger, but for the initial period when MP3 players first came out, there's no reason why anybody should have been buying them at all.
For $8 a month they offer a pretty good selection. I remember when blockbuster was still around, and they were charging almost as much for a single rental. Renting a single movie on iTunes will set you back around $5. Premiums channels like HBO cost $15+ a month, and you have to already have a cable subscription. Sure Netflix may not have everything, but they have a pretty good selection given the price they are asking. I definitely get my $8 worth every month. I guess it would be nice if their selection were better, or if they had an option for $25 for every movie and every TV show in existence, but that option doesn't exist anywhere. If Netflix isn't good, who offers a better deal?
Really this is the answer. To use Netflix, you need to pay for an account. And it has TV shows and movies. It's not like Youtube where somebody links you it and you just go watch a short clip and go back to your browsing. Things like Netflix don't need to run in a web browser at all. They just need to make full applications (or plugins in the case of XBMC and others) for all the platforms worth supporting.
I think the problem with Apple going to lossless, is that people would soon get really irritated with the very small amount of space that Apple gives you with the base model of their devices. From some basic searching it seems that FLAC is somewhere around 700 kbps. It could be less or more depending on the file, because it's lossless and will take as many bits as it needs, but I think that's a pretty good estimate. The last 16 GB iPod I bought came with 12 GB usable out of the box. That means you could probably fit about 40 albums (at about an hour and album) on an iPod assuming you used it only for music. You'd have no space for apps/games, or photos, or videos. 40 albums is quite a bit to be carrying around in your pocket, but when other devices allow you to carry around hundreds of albums, your 16 GB iPod is going to seem pretty weak.
This is the big question. What does the dealership do other than sell cars for Tesla? Dealerships make a lot of their money doing regular maintenance and warranty repairs on cars. With an electric car, there is a lot less maintenance to be done. And they are much more reliable. They have an 8 year, unlimited mile warranty. No other IC engine car can offer that, because they simple aren't as reliable, and by their nature, never can be. Most of the problems with Teslas have been software bugs. Once they get all that figured out, there's very little that can go wrong. And fixing software bugs can most likely be done by the end user at home, just like they do with their computers, phones, TVs, and game consoles.
The manufacturer likely could sell for less but in many cases they don't want to get on the bad side of Amazon or Best Buy or whoever else is selling so many of their products. Most manufacturers know very little about good marketing and how to ship a product to the end customer. They simple aren't set up for such tasks. Amazon and others actually provide a very good service to many manufacturers. All the manufacturer has to do is send truckloads of their products to Amazon's warehouse. And Amazon will send money to the manufacturer. Amazon will handle all the complicated stuff like running website, sending out emails to let people know about the products, advertising on websites so people know about the products, search engine optimization to ensure people find the product they are looking for, taking payment from the customer, shipping the product out to the customer. Very few businesses could offer the level of service that Amazon and other online retailers do if they were tasked with it themselves.