Oh please . Can I sign up, get service, and not sign and agreement? NO. Now exactly would I know how good their customer service, the network, or coverage is without signing up with them?
You're right, there is absolutely no way to research this information.
While I'm no fan of the telcos and know that their math is skewed, it's not like you can't do a little googling before making a two-year commitment to something. Or ask some friends / coworkers; more than likely at least a couple of them are going to have verizon.
But, you see, Target markets to people who want value - reasonable cost and stylish. That's the message their ads put out, and you got it.
I'm not saying you are a sheep; just that effective marketing takes many forms and influences us in ways we may not even recognize.
Erm, except... I don't know that I've seen a target ad for their clothes. The only ones I can think of seeing were for electronics (I generally only watch TV for sports)
We go there for groceries because they're way cheaper than the grocery store, and I just wander through the men's section.
I don't think the clothes I buy at Target are worn by a "star"... but I could be wrong, mainly because I don't pay attention to such things. I buy clothes there because... I like the styles, and the prices are cheap. I discovered this simply by walking past them in the store.
Which brings us to your point. I don't think we're all sheep simply because a product we purchase employs a specific marketing tactic. It's sort of a "If a tree fell" scenario - how am I a sheep when I don't know that some cultural icon gets paid to wear / use something that I coincidentally also wear / use?
The thing is a great deal of people, consciously or not, do make purchases because someone they hold in high regard wears / uses something. Even when the only reason they are doing so is because they were paid to, or given the item for free. It makes zero sense to me, but I also don't read People Magazine:)
Exactly. I also don't see where this is new or innovative, except that it's (presumably) on a large scale.
When I ran a motorcycle shop, we did this all the time. You know the local customers who bring in other business, often times not even consciously... they do this because they have a "social influence". So... you give them cheaper prices. The business they bring in more than offsets that discount.
With amateur racing, it's called "sponsorship" even if you're not giving things to racers for free. Give a fast guy parts at dealer cost and a break on labor, and he tells other racers how great your are.
In the "big leagues", companies PAY people to use their products because, well, most people are sheep and buy stuff simply because some "star" wears / uses it.
I used to run a motorcycle performance shop. You do this all the time. I would often cut deals on accessories / parts to customers I knew would show them off to their friends, talk on the internet, etc, etc. Those people (hopefully) then buy from you at your regular prices.
When you do it for club racers, it's called "sponsorship"... but it's really the same thing. If you have a fast racer, you help him out based on his "influence" (wins races, is well liked, etc). Regardless if your assistance makes him go faster or not, the perception is: "Fast / winning guy goes to Shop X, I should also go to Shop X". They have influence over their "social network", which is other racers.
Seriously, I don't see how this is new or innovative.
BFH had been going downhill for some time due to rampant hacking that EA/DICE were doing nothing to stop. It had already lost a lot of players due to this, and about 3 weeks ago a new free aimbot hit the scene which increased the problem (unlike TF2, the game is fairly unfinished and there's no in-game tools for players or admins - vote kick, spectator mode, etc, so you're pretty much hosed).
In typical EA fashion... this move kinda makes sense. Rather than fix the problem, make people pay for things they need, and in addition to the game actually making money hopefully the script kiddies will stop playing.::shrug:: I was part of the closed beta and it really was a fun little game. Was totally hooked for a while. When the hacking epidemic started a few weeks ago... I gave up and moved on. You literally couldn't find a game without multiple cheaters in it.
You say you are a microbiologist... have you ever heard of flash-freezing to kill parasites? I'm a pilot... have you ever heard of air cargo?
If I had points, I'd mod you up.
The sushi in Denver, CO is going to be exactly the same as the sushi in San Francisco. Sushi grade fish is flash frozen and shipped... no matter where you're located. I hope our microbiologist does more research in his profession than in his personal life. He also doesn't seem to understand that the rice in sushi is mixed with vinegar to act as a natural anti-bacterial and preservative (the original reason sushi was created) even though he claims he knows it's as easy to make as a sandwich. (I make my own sushi, it is significantly more difficult than making a roast beef on wheat).
Unless you're chain smoking 3 packs a day in a small, closed room while exhaling directly into the thing... not happening.
I smoked for 20 years, and owned who knows how many computers during that time... none of them have ever resembled what you describe.
I now live in a high desert climate and we own two dogs. That requires regular, thorough cleaning or the things will overheat. It also can really reduce the life of the fans. (Same goes for my stereo receiver, and a couple other consumer boxes)
And as I also posted in another thread, I used to run a motorcycle shop. You should see what those PCs go through, especially the one used to run the dynamometer.
So... unless you want to exclude the 10 million other environments that can have a detrimental effect on the PC, you're simply picking one because the cause has become socially unacceptable by a large group of people.
You might actually have a point... if they also voided warranties for people who owned pets.
Or lived in dusty climates. Or where computers were used in places like... motorcycle shops. Or, any of the myriad of conditions that would have the exact same effect on the computer.
See, this is yet another example of where the logic of singling out one stupid little thing while ignoring 10 million others somehow makes sense.
I own dogs and live in a high desert climate... it requires regular cleaning of the PCs with an air compressor. The fans suck in dog hair like you wouldn't believe, and there's *always* dust here in the summer no matter what you do. I can gauge the "cleaning cycle" by how much the variable speed fans are running in the box (which right now is at "You should really clean me" by the amount of noise coming from the machine)
I also used to run a motorcycle shop. You should see what those PCs look like after a while, especially the one that's used to run the dynamometer. (Badly running vehicles spit out a lot of soot, not to mention all the other residues from various vapors from cleaning chemicals)
So... exclude everything else that could possibly harm the PC, and you have a point. Otherwise, you're picking one little thing out of many simply because the cause has become a socially unacceptable behaviour.
Lets try this again and see if you can pick apart something else and ignore the actual content of the message:
Amazon's prices are often less, regardless of whether you're "paying" for shipping as a separate charge, or whether it has been built into the price of the item then offered as "free" shipping. Even if the total cost of the order is the same as a local vendor, as the article states, you then save because you are not paying sales tax.
Even when paying an additional $80/year for "free" 2nd day shipping, we save money. This is of course because it's a calculated program based on what it costs them to ship, in addition to being a subsidized program and some people are not getting their money's worth. But since we do a significant amount of shopping on Amazon, it does work for us.
So, in summary (same as the original message): We save money year after year. In part because we're not paying 8% sales tax, and also because even when you figure in shipping charges, built in or not, the items are cheaper than if purchased locally with sales tax.
You mean the free shipping that most of their items include if they're over $25?
I've been buying from Amazon for years. We even pay the $80/yr for free 2 day shipping. We come out WAY ahead.
Or course, even if we were paying the 8% sales tax, we'd prob still be ahead. Finding anything in our area from a brick and mortar for less than MSRP is a rarity. Hell, for motorcycle and car parts I order from CA, pay the shipping, and STILL save money.
I'm going to guess your "oven part" was sold by a 3rd party vendor through Amazon, not Amazon itself. Or, since it was under $25, it didn't qualify for free shipping.
If you look at things that most people actually buy (consumer goods), and things that are sold by Amazon themselves, you'll find pretty much exactly what the article states.
In fact, most consumer goods on Amazon over $25 ship for free "Super Saver Shipping". So, even if the item is exactly the same price as a local vendor (which is usually not the case - usually it's lower), you're saving 5% - 10% because you're not paying the local sales tax.
Sales tax is over 8% here. We pay the $80/year to Amazon for the free 2-day shipping. We still come out WAY ahead over the course of a year.
It's like buying a new car with higher fuel economy (only) to save money on gas.
Keeping the old, presumably paid for vehicle is cheaper (unless you drive 100k miles a year and own a Range Rover, I suppose).
(Yeah yeah... I know, car analogy. But I was trying to explain this math to someone the other day who was going to buy a new car that gets 30mpg while theirs gets 22mpg, is paid off, and in fine condition).
"Other people enjoy the social aspect of gambling such as in blackjack where the players aren't competing against each other. Or in craps, where the players are all competing against... the shooter... or the house.. unless they roll a 7 and it's the third tuesday of the month...."
Exactly. Last night was spent with my wife and a friend up at Blackhawk (Casinos outside Denver in the mountains).
I ended up $175 down for the night playing craps (8pm until about 2am...::shrug:: It was fun, and the drinks are free at the tables.
So... I spent $175 for about 5+ hours of entertainment. Last time I looked, good seats and parking at a 3 hour long NFL game would cost me more than that, and the beer is $7.
Some nights... I actually MAKE money. Of course... I never bet on that;)
It seems stupid to charge for customizations that give no tactical advantage. However, and maybe they thought of this, what if they charged for certificates or licences to use vehicles? In other Battlefield games I have never been one for flying around, but some people loved it... if you charge just to have access to an entirely different dimension to the game, it would keep people from just paying for the best characters, while still generating some money for the company
So, technically, there's a single "pay" item that sort of gives you an advantage; the XP booster. When you level up, you get a point to spend on "abilities" which will let you deal out more damage. But... it's all relative. You are generally playing against people who are near your level.
The whole concept of free games with micro-payments is an oversees concept that EA is trying out to see how it flies here in the US. I actually really enjoy the game, and could see spending $5 or $10 to customize my character(s). In general, these types of games don't charge for weapons, etc, but we'll see given that it's EA.
Another idea: Charge for new maps.
This wouldn't surprise me at all, since it's a fairly proven concept with xBox live, etc.
I moved 1800 miles across the country two years ago. I knew exactly 1 person here excluding my wife and the guys at my job.
http://www.meetup.com/ has been really awesome. I found local rock climbing, snowboarding, and off-road riding groups on there, met some really great people, and never lack for something to do should I want to leave the house.
Even if your cup of tea doesn't involve physical activity, there's bound to be a group on there for something you're interested in.
Nothing... except "decent" hardware to vista is "Blazingly fast" hardware to XP.
My reason for not upgrading to Vista: Why would I? It offers exactly zero features that I need over XP, and runs slower on the same hardware.
I don't hear too many people these days who actually use Vista grumbling about it any more than the average XP (or any other MS product) user, so I'm assuming it's reached the usual level of "doesn't suck that much" people expect from MS.
Historically though, I've found that if you simply follow the "upgrade to every other" method with MS, you're ok. 95 -> 98SE -> XP was a good path, which means I might look at Windows 7 when it comes out.
Also, fewer UI mods being available means, on average, a worse experience for players.
In your opinion. Theirs appears to differ.
I guarantee you they know that some UI mods will be lost (along with some players) any time they change the API usage requirements/rules. They probably employ an analytics guy whose entire job is to predict the numbers on that:)
If there wasn't a compelling reason for them to cause that, they wouldn't do it. They are not in business to reduce their subscription base.
That same numbers guy may have figured out that the game experience for the majority of their players would be better with fewer UI mods. Who knows.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh please . Can I sign up, get service, and not sign and agreement? NO. Now exactly would I know how good their customer service, the network, or coverage is without signing up with them?
You're right, there is absolutely no way to research this information.
While I'm no fan of the telcos and know that their math is skewed, it's not like you can't do a little googling before making a two-year commitment to something. Or ask some friends / coworkers; more than likely at least a couple of them are going to have verizon.
http://www.w3.org/2003/10/27-rogan.html
No need for scouring, Tim Berners-Lee already did it.
So why do you no longer run the shop? Sounds like you liked it quite a bit.
I missed the day in business 101 where they tell you never to go into business with friends. After 6 years it was ... time to go back to being a geek.
I don't regret it though, it was a great learning experience both in business and personal relations.
As for the double post ... it made sense to add the content to that conversation as it was relevant.
But, you see, Target markets to people who want value - reasonable cost and stylish. That's the message their ads put out, and you got it.
I'm not saying you are a sheep; just that effective marketing takes many forms and influences us in ways we may not even recognize.
Erm, except ... I don't know that I've seen a target ad for their clothes. The only ones I can think of seeing were for electronics (I generally only watch TV for sports)
We go there for groceries because they're way cheaper than the grocery store, and I just wander through the men's section.
I don't think the clothes I buy at Target are worn by a "star" ... but I could be wrong, mainly because I don't pay attention to such things. I buy clothes there because ... I like the styles, and the prices are cheap. I discovered this simply by walking past them in the store.
Which brings us to your point. I don't think we're all sheep simply because a product we purchase employs a specific marketing tactic. It's sort of a "If a tree fell" scenario - how am I a sheep when I don't know that some cultural icon gets paid to wear / use something that I coincidentally also wear / use?
The thing is a great deal of people, consciously or not, do make purchases because someone they hold in high regard wears / uses something. Even when the only reason they are doing so is because they were paid to, or given the item for free. It makes zero sense to me, but I also don't read People Magazine :)
Exactly. I also don't see where this is new or innovative, except that it's (presumably) on a large scale.
When I ran a motorcycle shop, we did this all the time. You know the local customers who bring in other business, often times not even consciously ... they do this because they have a "social influence". So ... you give them cheaper prices. The business they bring in more than offsets that discount.
With amateur racing, it's called "sponsorship" even if you're not giving things to racers for free. Give a fast guy parts at dealer cost and a break on labor, and he tells other racers how great your are.
In the "big leagues", companies PAY people to use their products because, well, most people are sheep and buy stuff simply because some "star" wears / uses it.
Nothing new to see here, move along.
I used to run a motorcycle performance shop. You do this all the time. I would often cut deals on accessories / parts to customers I knew would show them off to their friends, talk on the internet, etc, etc. Those people (hopefully) then buy from you at your regular prices.
When you do it for club racers, it's called "sponsorship" ... but it's really the same thing. If you have a fast racer, you help him out based on his "influence" (wins races, is well liked, etc). Regardless if your assistance makes him go faster or not, the perception is: "Fast / winning guy goes to Shop X, I should also go to Shop X". They have influence over their "social network", which is other racers.
Seriously, I don't see how this is new or innovative.
Why is the fact that their redacting technique is as useful and effective as their screening techniques surprising to anyone?
TSA, bringing you the best in security theatre since 2001!
BFH had been going downhill for some time due to rampant hacking that EA/DICE were doing nothing to stop. It had already lost a lot of players due to this, and about 3 weeks ago a new free aimbot hit the scene which increased the problem (unlike TF2, the game is fairly unfinished and there's no in-game tools for players or admins - vote kick, spectator mode, etc, so you're pretty much hosed).
In typical EA fashion ... this move kinda makes sense. Rather than fix the problem, make people pay for things they need, and in addition to the game actually making money hopefully the script kiddies will stop playing. ::shrug:: I was part of the closed beta and it really was a fun little game. Was totally hooked for a while. When the hacking epidemic started a few weeks ago... I gave up and moved on. You literally couldn't find a game without multiple cheaters in it.
You say you are a microbiologist... have you ever heard of flash-freezing to kill parasites? I'm a pilot... have you ever heard of air cargo?
If I had points, I'd mod you up.
The sushi in Denver, CO is going to be exactly the same as the sushi in San Francisco. Sushi grade fish is flash frozen and shipped ... no matter where you're located. I hope our microbiologist does more research in his profession than in his personal life. He also doesn't seem to understand that the rice in sushi is mixed with vinegar to act as a natural anti-bacterial and preservative (the original reason sushi was created) even though he claims he knows it's as easy to make as a sandwich. (I make my own sushi, it is significantly more difficult than making a roast beef on wheat).
Sorry, but as you say, bullshit.
Unless you're chain smoking 3 packs a day in a small, closed room while exhaling directly into the thing ... not happening.
I smoked for 20 years, and owned who knows how many computers during that time ... none of them have ever resembled what you describe.
I now live in a high desert climate and we own two dogs. That requires regular, thorough cleaning or the things will overheat. It also can really reduce the life of the fans. (Same goes for my stereo receiver, and a couple other consumer boxes)
And as I also posted in another thread, I used to run a motorcycle shop. You should see what those PCs go through, especially the one used to run the dynamometer.
So ... unless you want to exclude the 10 million other environments that can have a detrimental effect on the PC, you're simply picking one because the cause has become socially unacceptable by a large group of people.
You might actually have a point ... if they also voided warranties for people who owned pets.
Or lived in dusty climates. Or where computers were used in places like ... motorcycle shops. Or, any of the myriad of conditions that would have the exact same effect on the computer.
See, this is yet another example of where the logic of singling out one stupid little thing while ignoring 10 million others somehow makes sense.
I own dogs and live in a high desert climate ... it requires regular cleaning of the PCs with an air compressor. The fans suck in dog hair like you wouldn't believe, and there's *always* dust here in the summer no matter what you do. I can gauge the "cleaning cycle" by how much the variable speed fans are running in the box (which right now is at "You should really clean me" by the amount of noise coming from the machine)
I also used to run a motorcycle shop. You should see what those PCs look like after a while, especially the one that's used to run the dynamometer. (Badly running vehicles spit out a lot of soot, not to mention all the other residues from various vapors from cleaning chemicals)
So ... exclude everything else that could possibly harm the PC, and you have a point. Otherwise, you're picking one little thing out of many simply because the cause has become a socially unacceptable behaviour.
Not to be picky, by Obesity is now the #1 leading cause of death (health problems related to) in the US.
And 3/4 of the country is now Obese.
So ... as long as you're skinny and smoke, chances are the fat ones are going to die first.
Duh.
Lets try this again and see if you can pick apart something else and ignore the actual content of the message:
Amazon's prices are often less, regardless of whether you're "paying" for shipping as a separate charge, or whether it has been built into the price of the item then offered as "free" shipping. Even if the total cost of the order is the same as a local vendor, as the article states, you then save because you are not paying sales tax.
Even when paying an additional $80/year for "free" 2nd day shipping, we save money. This is of course because it's a calculated program based on what it costs them to ship, in addition to being a subsidized program and some people are not getting their money's worth. But since we do a significant amount of shopping on Amazon, it does work for us.
So, in summary (same as the original message): We save money year after year. In part because we're not paying 8% sales tax, and also because even when you figure in shipping charges, built in or not, the items are cheaper than if purchased locally with sales tax.
You mean the free shipping that most of their items include if they're over $25?
I've been buying from Amazon for years. We even pay the $80/yr for free 2 day shipping. We come out WAY ahead.
Or course, even if we were paying the 8% sales tax, we'd prob still be ahead. Finding anything in our area from a brick and mortar for less than MSRP is a rarity. Hell, for motorcycle and car parts I order from CA, pay the shipping, and STILL save money.
I'm going to guess your "oven part" was sold by a 3rd party vendor through Amazon, not Amazon itself. Or, since it was under $25, it didn't qualify for free shipping.
If you look at things that most people actually buy (consumer goods), and things that are sold by Amazon themselves, you'll find pretty much exactly what the article states.
In fact, most consumer goods on Amazon over $25 ship for free "Super Saver Shipping". So, even if the item is exactly the same price as a local vendor (which is usually not the case - usually it's lower), you're saving 5% - 10% because you're not paying the local sales tax.
Sales tax is over 8% here. We pay the $80/year to Amazon for the free 2-day shipping. We still come out WAY ahead over the course of a year.
I was thinking the same thing.
It's like buying a new car with higher fuel economy (only) to save money on gas.
Keeping the old, presumably paid for vehicle is cheaper (unless you drive 100k miles a year and own a Range Rover, I suppose).
(Yeah yeah ... I know, car analogy. But I was trying to explain this math to someone the other day who was going to buy a new car that gets 30mpg while theirs gets 22mpg, is paid off, and in fine condition).
"Other people enjoy the social aspect of gambling such as in blackjack where the players aren't competing against each other. Or in craps, where the players are all competing against... the shooter... or the house.. unless they roll a 7 and it's the third tuesday of the month...."
Exactly. Last night was spent with my wife and a friend up at Blackhawk (Casinos outside Denver in the mountains).
I ended up $175 down for the night playing craps (8pm until about 2am ... ::shrug:: It was fun, and the drinks are free at the tables.
So ... I spent $175 for about 5+ hours of entertainment. Last time I looked, good seats and parking at a 3 hour long NFL game would cost me more than that, and the beer is $7.
Some nights ... I actually MAKE money. Of course ... I never bet on that ;)
Does the game have vehicle support?
Tanks, jeeps, and planes.
It seems stupid to charge for customizations that give no tactical advantage. However, and maybe they thought of this, what if they charged for certificates or licences to use vehicles? In other Battlefield games I have never been one for flying around, but some people loved it... if you charge just to have access to an entirely different dimension to the game, it would keep people from just paying for the best characters, while still generating some money for the company
So, technically, there's a single "pay" item that sort of gives you an advantage; the XP booster. When you level up, you get a point to spend on "abilities" which will let you deal out more damage. But ... it's all relative. You are generally playing against people who are near your level.
The whole concept of free games with micro-payments is an oversees concept that EA is trying out to see how it flies here in the US. I actually really enjoy the game, and could see spending $5 or $10 to customize my character(s). In general, these types of games don't charge for weapons, etc, but we'll see given that it's EA.
Another idea: Charge for new maps.
This wouldn't surprise me at all, since it's a fairly proven concept with xBox live, etc.
Same here (I posted the same, just happened to see your post).
Moved to a new area where I didn't know anyone, found meetup.com. I've met some great people and had some great times.
- Roach
Seriously.
I moved 1800 miles across the country two years ago. I knew exactly 1 person here excluding my wife and the guys at my job.
http://www.meetup.com/ has been really awesome. I found local rock climbing, snowboarding, and off-road riding groups on there, met some really great people, and never lack for something to do should I want to leave the house.
Even if your cup of tea doesn't involve physical activity, there's bound to be a group on there for something you're interested in.
- Roach
Um ... huh?
It returns a (void) pointer to the same memory address as the destination you passed in. It's really not all that useful and you can just ignore it.
memcpy() doesn't care what the memory contains or what it represents. It simply copies n bytes from one place to another.
If you don't know what your data is, or how long the memory segment you malloc'd is ... um, you've got other problems.
Nothing ... except "decent" hardware to vista is "Blazingly fast" hardware to XP.
My reason for not upgrading to Vista: Why would I? It offers exactly zero features that I need over XP, and runs slower on the same hardware.
I don't hear too many people these days who actually use Vista grumbling about it any more than the average XP (or any other MS product) user, so I'm assuming it's reached the usual level of "doesn't suck that much" people expect from MS.
Historically though, I've found that if you simply follow the "upgrade to every other" method with MS, you're ok. 95 -> 98SE -> XP was a good path, which means I might look at Windows 7 when it comes out.
And when Blizzard gets declared an illegal MMORPG monopoly, maybe they will too.
Did I mention ... Apples, meet oranges?
- Roach
Also, fewer UI mods being available means, on average, a worse experience for players.
In your opinion. Theirs appears to differ.
I guarantee you they know that some UI mods will be lost (along with some players) any time they change the API usage requirements/rules. They probably employ an analytics guy whose entire job is to predict the numbers on that :)
If there wasn't a compelling reason for them to cause that, they wouldn't do it. They are not in business to reduce their subscription base.
That same numbers guy may have figured out that the game experience for the majority of their players would be better with fewer UI mods. Who knows.
- Roach