111–120 of 171 posts
Can someone explain why this is so much noteworthy? All I see is random messages pasted onto random backgrounds. I am not from sales or marketing though.
My first freshman physics class consisted of random symbols scribbled onto a random blackboard. I was not from a physics background though. The learning new stuff you're not familiar with is why it's noteworthy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
err... are you implying that there are no alternatives in the market to 3D TVs and bent TVs? As far as I know 3D TVs have basically gone out of market[1] because no one bought them. It is actually the exact opposite of what you suggested - they could not start a trend, even thought they tried to force it on people, because there was no demand for it. [1]- https://www.cnet.com/news/shambling-corpse-of-3d-tv-finally-..…
For about 5 years, any tv you found in an electronic store was 3D, and I have yet to find a single person who claims to like them. Today, every tv is a Smart TV, and yet again, I haven’t found anyone who thought they weren’t awful In cars theres the same issue with GPS systems: even luxury cars have awful interfaces. Presumably tesla’s is decent (never tried), but otherwise the only interface I’ve encountered yet tha…
If 3D TVs were able to garner any premium over regular TVs, the electronics companies would have continued selling them. It was, and probably still is, a net loss.
Smart TVs are a convenience that is actually in demand, mostly because it does not add a markup to price - why buy a non smart TV when you can buy a smart one at the same price.
The majority of iPhone users probably use bluetooth headphones.
Phablets are so much in demand, that apple had practically no choice but to build one.
Heavy js and web is a completely different story because you aren't the customer for website with heavy js, and the advertisers, who are the customers of these websites, have a great demand for more javascript.
AAA titles are dominating the market. Indie sales are a minuscule fraction of the game industry market. Why? because there is insane demand for AAA titles, and for that matter for massive multiplayer games - LoL, Fortnite, PUBG etc...
Just because you don't like it, or for that matter the entire of HN don't like it, doesn't mean there is no demand for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I keep hearing this "capex vs. opex" argument from time to time; are there tax benefits to this, or something else that justifies putting the same costs under different label?
Yes. Cash at hand is very valuable. It cushions you against certain types of business risk and also gives you the ability to pounce on opportunities that may come up (e.g. acquiring another company). In some companies there are also budgetary reasons. For example, a department may blow their capex budget on something early in the year. If you have a payment model that supports regular payments, the customer can still…
As it happens, I would have been fine just dropping the cash. No major emergencies occurred. But I didn't know that at the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I genuinely love my Smart TV. Its nice having the TV know about every input option, and not having to fool around d with multiple remotes.
The actual feature (having netflix, amazon, hulu, etc natively available) is fine; the problem is that its slow, unreliable, prints useless errors, and no matter how much you spend, the interface is always a janky horrible experience. There are also other nuisances like forcing the framerate up to 60fps by frame interprolation, causing everything in 24fps (most content) to look awful, and in certain implementations,…
THat's just a shitty TV. My now almost 5 year old Smart TV handles 24hz just fine... the panel is actually running at 120 so 24 is an even multiple.
Personally, I really like my smart TV and use many apps for stream non-mainstream sports, and the like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The actual feature (having netflix, amazon, hulu, etc natively available) is fine; the problem is that its slow, unreliable, prints useless errors, and no matter how much you spend, the interface is always a janky horrible experience. There are also other nuisances like forcing the framerate up to 60fps by frame interprolation, causing everything in 24fps (most content) to look awful, and in certain implementations,…
> There are also other nuisances like forcing the framerate up to 60fps by frame interprolation, causing everything in 24fps (most content) to look awful, and in certain implementations, jitter. THat's just a shitty TV. My now almost 5 year old Smart TV handles 24hz just fine... the panel is actually running at 120 so 24 is an even multiple. Personally, I really like my smart TV and use many apps for stream non-mains…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For about 5 years, any tv you found in an electronic store was 3D, and I have yet to find a single person who claims to like them. Today, every tv is a Smart TV, and yet again, I haven’t found anyone who thought they weren’t awful In cars theres the same issue with GPS systems: even luxury cars have awful interfaces. Presumably tesla’s is decent (never tried), but otherwise the only interface I’ve encountered yet tha…
If I recall correctly 3D TVs has always had minuscule sales volume compared to regular TVs. Even in it's "height" there were far more regular TVs sold then 3D ones. If 3D TVs were able to garner any premium over regular TVs, the electronics companies would have continued selling them. It was, and probably still is, a net loss. Smart TVs are a convenience that is actually in demand, mostly because it does not add a ma…
Sure; the issue is that due to supplier convergence, the only option in a modern tv. If they weren’t so obviously harmful to sales, we’d still have them around, because it’d be impossible to differentiate between negative vs positive impact, simply because nothing else was available to even buy (in that trust/price/quality/brand range)
>The majority of iPhone users probably use bluetooth headphones.
Before or after it was their only choice? Like cars, the presence or lack of an aux port is irrelevant compared to the rest of the purchase. It doesn’t imply one way or the other whether anyone actually prefers it, when the change is bundled with so much more.
>AAA titles are dominating the market
AAA titles are always dominating the market. My point is that there is no way to differentiate between a AAA game being successful because of, despite or irresThe majority of iPhone users probably use bluetooth headphones.pective of its graphical complexity, because consumers simply cannot buy a AAA title that did not spend half its budget on 3D graphics.
This is only changing because a few indie games/smaller titles have seen extreme success despite “weak” graphics (minecraft, fortnite, LoL). Even kickstarter games appealing to older genres (eg The recent CRPGs trend) probably put an outsized emphasis on graphics, despite targetting players of 90s work.
My opinion is that games can get very far with very limited graphics, but looking at the general market its impossible to actually make the case because there’s very few examples where its even been tried. The best you can really do is turn to modern indie, or point out that some older games are still heavily played (WoW, starcraft, quake, etc)
If the whole market suddenly shifts in a particular direction, there’s no chance for competition to rule out an idea as being a bad one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure they do. 3D TVs and bent TVs are two glaring examples of something people never wanted. The only way companies could uphold that view was by ensuring that no manufacturer had sensible alternatives - effectively forcing people that wanted a TV to buy it. And then pretending that the sales were proof that people wanted it. It is the exact same with the majority of subscription services. For a company I get that it…
>I walk twice around the earth before even considering a subscription service. I can't imagine going back not having music subscription service. I don't have to make a decision which album to buy anymore and I don't have to worry about my kids pirating music.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure they do. 3D TVs and bent TVs are two glaring examples of something people never wanted. The only way companies could uphold that view was by ensuring that no manufacturer had sensible alternatives - effectively forcing people that wanted a TV to buy it. And then pretending that the sales were proof that people wanted it. It is the exact same with the majority of subscription services. For a company I get that it…
>I walk twice around the earth before even considering a subscription service. I can't imagine going back not having music subscription service. I don't have to make a decision which album to buy anymore and I don't have to worry about my kids pirating music.
The problem is when something really has no reason to not be a one time purchase, like companies on instagram charging me $15 a month to send me three new pairs of socks twice a quarter, or maybe they mail me a wooden box once a month with some woodsy smelling beard oil, a leather flask, and a small axe.
Software is moving this way too; but I'm still in the camp that would shell out $25 for a program as is that would still work on my machine decades later even if the company folds or puts out another version, than pay $2 a month for something that might not work at all or fundamentally change its functionality in a year.