Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 333 posts

Re: Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

#311

Post by thaumasiotes »

lhorie wrote: post #245
freehunter wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could name a hundred niche sellers too, but the allure of Walmart and Amazon is that they sell basically everything. I can buy a Macbook and Gatorade plus some brand name AA batteries for my RC car that I bought all in the same shopping trip. IKEA has good products but they don't come close to general merchandise stores like Amazon or Walmart.

What about Costco?

Costco is the opposite of Walmart; they're more like Trader Joe's. They sell hardly anything. The idea of Costco is "if you find it here, it's a decent product", not "if you want it, you can find it here".

Re: Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

#312

Post by thaumasiotes »

arkades wrote: post #294
paxys wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because no multi-million dollar business has ever made a bad decision..

Of course they have. And when they have, it's almost always because of more nuanced reasons than off-the-cuff random internet posters are privy to.

I've seen several people make pretty glaring mistakes based on their nuanced understanding of the details of some situation, when an idiot off the street who knew only the basic, surface-level facts would have gotten things completely correct.

Re: Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

#313

Post by thaumasiotes »

speedgoose wrote: post #137
TallGuyShort wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forbes ranks it as the #26 most valuable brand in the world: https://www.forbes.com/powerful-brands/list/ . Just because it's an almost entirely American brand doesn't change anything GP said.

The brand is absent from most countries.

> The brand is absent from most countries.

Who cares? Countries are not all equal. This is one of those "Either the sun will come up in the morning, or it won't. Two choices; fifty-fifty" arguments.

Re: Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

#314

Post by fomine3 »

bitexploder wrote: post #212
jm4 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The marketplace is the reason I don’t use Walmart. The marketplace and commingled stock is Amazon’s biggest problem and Walmart appears to be playing catch-up rather than forging their own path. We don’t need another Amazon. I’ve been using Target, eBay, Best Buy and random sites lately. The Target experience is great even if they don’t have the same selection Amazon does.

Yeah, I have noticed that as well. Newegg is another one that went down the "Market place" approach and is why I didn't list them. I just use Micro center now. A little bit less selection, but not much and they will order almost anything for you and get it quickly.

marketplace is fine unless they start fulfillment service, isn't it? Just only buy from the shop, not from thirdparty shop.

Re: Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

#315

Post by siwatanejo »

smabie wrote: post #304
siwatanejo wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you say you cannot implement monads and functors in F#? sorry but this is bullshit

F# doesn't support higher-kinded types.

That doesn't make functors and monads impossible to implement.

Re: Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

#316

Post by smabie »

siwatanejo wrote: post #315
smabie wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

F# doesn't support higher-kinded types.

That doesn't make functors and monads impossible to implement.

Of course not, but it means that there is no type that abstracts upon all of them. For example, in Haskell, you can >>= and >> just about everything and it'll work. In OCaml (and I assume F#), you have to import the right kind of >>= and >>. This is quite burdensome and creates a lot of repetitive and nasty code. The lack of polymorphism in ML languages is such a bummer.

Re: Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

#317

Post by HappyDoge »

smabie wrote: post #293
HappyDoge wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only to an untrained eye. F# is a firmly rooted in ML language family history, only making concessions where necessary due to the fact it's running on the CLR. Scala is a random walk of language design space, with different ideas either working or ending up complete trainwrecks, and the fact it's missing this clean ML core makes it a painful language to pick up coming in from F# (or in fact most other statically type…

I mean, considering that Scala has a much more powerful type system than F# and you can actually implement FP concepts like monads, functors, etc makes it arguably more FP than F#. While I haven't used F# much, as a professional OCaml and Scala dev, Scala is hands down the more powerful language. OCaml isn't bad, but it leaves a lot to be desired. A little offtopic, but if OCaml got rid of its module system, added ty…

Sure, Scala has fancier stuff on the high end of things, but it doesn't nail the basics the way F# does. I don't feel like sacrificing day-to-day productivity so I can skip duplicating some code with recursion schemes.

Your dream language sounds a lot more like F# than Scala tbh.

F# doesn't have (easy to use) type classes or higher kinded types, but has simplified modules and full access to .NET object system for all your polymorphism needs, and a much more seamless interop with the platform it's running on as there's significantly less "magic" happening in the compiler compared to Scala.

Re: Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

#318

Post by HappyDoge »

smabie wrote: post #316
siwatanejo wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't make functors and monads impossible to implement.

Of course not, but it means that there is no type that abstracts upon all of them. For example, in Haskell, you can >>= and >> just about everything and it'll work. In OCaml (and I assume F#), you have to import the right kind of >>= and >>. This is quite burdensome and creates a lot of repetitive and nasty code. The lack of polymorphism in ML languages is such a bummer.

Ostensibly yes, but F# has limited and clunky compile time ad-hoc polymorphism mechanism that can be used to implement "type classes" - which however can be abused to great effect if you really want generalised binds https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharpPlus.

Not to mention it has subtype polymorphism on par with what you get in C# that you can really get a lot of mileage from (and which gets too easily glossed over by some FP neophytes), AND an extensive reflection API to bridge the gap if you have nothing else to fall back to.

Re: Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

#319

Post by nojito »

JSavageOne wrote: post #240
david-cako wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but having a 3 letter domain name that sounds fast and a separate checkbook may have actually been important to growing their e-commerce business. The crazy discounts they offered when they first started and the purple boxes all had the effect of signaling to consumers (and investors) “we’re trying something new”, and now they rolled everything they learned (things lots of e-commerce sites are learning all at t…

I was referring more to the first sentence attributing the strength of walmart.com as the reasoning to shutting down jet.com. Walmart isn't shutting down jet.com because of "the continued strength of the Walmart brand", Walmart is shutting down jet.com because jet.com lost $2b last year and failed to gain the success they'd hoped for. The business failed.

>because jet.com lost $2b last year and failed to gain the success they'd hoped for. The business failed.

Walmart runs on Jet's backend now. FYI

Re: Walmart says it will discontinue Jet

#320

Post by josefresco »

johnvanommen wrote: post #283
cptskippy wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe premium is the wrong word. Levis and Huffy were never designer brands, they were the standard in quality. Like Tide Detergent, Heinz Ketchup or Coca Cola, they were brand to beat. The pattern seems to happen many brands over time that sell out or fail. You see it across markets with brands like Packard Bell, Kodak, Polaroid, Martha Stewart, Kate Spade, RCA, etc. 50 years ago if you had a Zenith or RCA TV it was…

True, but this isn't Wal Mart's fault, it's China's fault. For instance, half a dozen Japanese electronics manufacturers tried to sell televisions, a business that the Japanese have dominated for 40 years. Half of them threw in the towel. People buy on price; nobody was going to pay a 25% premium for a Pioneer or a JVC TV. At the same time, Chinese companies like TCL began gobbling market share. I'm typing this on a…

I had my projection TV fixed by a local repairman about 10 years ago. He told me the new Chinese TV's were not repairable as most don't have any parts, or mechanisms available to facilitate a repair.

A few years later we bought a "premium" LCD TV rated highly on Consumer Repots which broke less than 2 years later. We replaced with a cheapy, for 1/2 the price and it's already lasted longer. Even if it didn't (which was expected), I could buy 3x the cheap TVs for the same price.

Post reply on HN