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

Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 397 posts

Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”

#21

Post by nneonneo »

abakker wrote: post #15

I thought the idea was that these would allow more insulation in the doors than glass, and that the energy use from the screen was less than the energy saved from cooling losses (but what is the payback from the manufacturing, shipping, install, recycling, repair etc?). I'm skeptical, but it is conceivably possible that it works out if the screens are very efficient, using off the shelf parts. Maybe.

Large panels like this emit heat. Any wins from better insulation are going to be offset by needing to keep the panel’s heat well away from the refrigerated contents.

Triple-paned glass insulates pretty well and for a fraction of the cost…

Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”

#23

Post by foxpurple »

abakker wrote: post #15

I thought the idea was that these would allow more insulation in the doors than glass, and that the energy use from the screen was less than the energy saved from cooling losses (but what is the payback from the manufacturing, shipping, install, recycling, repair etc?). I'm skeptical, but it is conceivably possible that it works out if the screens are very efficient, using off the shelf parts. Maybe.

If they cared about energy they could double glaze the glass

Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”

#24

Post by foxpurple »

orbital-decay wrote: post #14
armchairhacker wrote: post #11

Seriously though, how does someone even come up with something this dumb? How does one go about thinking of and actually implementing this? How did the development process go through without someone interjecting "why the fuck are we spending $1000s on 6ft LEDs when we can just use glass?"

Perhaps it's for quickly updating the price tags for items inside refrigerators? E-Ink tags are ubiquitous but often handle low temperatures poorly.

A simple green and black lcd is fine for prices.

Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”

#25

Post by foxpurple »

pedrogpimenta wrote: post #20
armchairhacker wrote: post #11

Seriously though, how does someone even come up with something this dumb? How does one go about thinking of and actually implementing this? How did the development process go through without someone interjecting "why the fuck are we spending $1000s on 6ft LEDs when we can just use glass?"

Ads.

You can also see cameras and IR blasters on the top of each door for facial tracking.

Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”

#26

Post by foxfired »

I do not blame cooler screen for selling this technology to anyone. But I want everyone to consider how much it takes to bring about a technology like this to a grocery store.

If this is any of the big chain groceries, the manager doesn't even have the authority to put a sticker on the glass door. This was vetted by hundreds of people and none of them thought... glass?

Business class tickets were purchased, hotels were booked, months of back and forth, daily meetings. Hundreds of thousands were spent on pilot programs like this one. Still no one thought... glass?

In my opinion, it's a silly idea. But I applaud the person who had this silly idea, built a company around it, got deals with screens, door, glass, and cameras manufacturing companies, and then convinced a grocery chain to buy this for their store.

I would really, really love to have been in that sales pitch meeting.

Edit: What bothers me the most about this, is that it will actually work. Any surface where eyes may fall on, will be replaced with an ad.

Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”

#27

Post by pydry »

armchairhacker wrote: post #11

Seriously though, how does someone even come up with something this dumb? How does one go about thinking of and actually implementing this? How did the development process go through without someone interjecting "why the fuck are we spending $1000s on 6ft LEDs when we can just use glass?"

I would imagine this is the kind of thing you'd commission if your job title was, say, chief innovation officer at a soft drinks company.

What else would you do?

Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”

#28

Post by canadianfella »

armchairhacker wrote: post #11

Seriously though, how does someone even come up with something this dumb? How does one go about thinking of and actually implementing this? How did the development process go through without someone interjecting "why the fuck are we spending $1000s on 6ft LEDs when we can just use glass?"

LEDs?

Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”

#29

Post by LeftHandPath »

yumraj wrote: post #17
armchairhacker wrote: post #11

Seriously though, how does someone even come up with something this dumb? How does one go about thinking of and actually implementing this? How did the development process go through without someone interjecting "why the fuck are we spending $1000s on 6ft LEDs when we can just use glass?"

Some bean counter came up with the idea that they have a captive audience which they can force to watch ads. I think this is one of the stupidest things I’ve seen. But to be honest, I won’t be surprised if this actually increases revenue since people are going to buy what they buy and it’s not like they will go to another store due to this.

I think I would go to another store due to this. I think that non-HN type people like my dad or my mom would probably go to another store due to this.

Not being able to see what's behind the glass makes it take longer to shop. People abandon webpages that don't load quickly enough - why wouldn't they abandon stores where you have to open each door on an aisle of refrigerators just to see what's available?

Post reply on HN