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

98% isn't much

whynothugo.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 367 posts

Re: 98% isn't much

#141

Post by MichaelZuo »

itake wrote: post #50
wccrawford wrote: post #25

Alternatively, 98% is plenty . If your business plan requires you to capitalize on more than 98% of the market, it's already a failure. It'll never happen. As always, it's an "it depends" situation. If your userbase is largely luddites, then maybe you need to support 10+ year old browsers that can't be updated. Otherwise, you can probably just worry about people who are using computers new enough to actually update t…

Unfortunately some business are critical where is not an option or very expensive for someone to not use it. For example, Uber, a Visa immigration website, low cost air carrier booking site, etc.

Generally most people would consider a viable option to exist even if it’s multiple times the cost…

As long as it’s credibly offered without too many caveats.

Re: 98% isn't much

#142

Post by groundzeros2015 »

xdertz wrote: post #78
Panzerschrek wrote: post #62

There are cases when providing service for remaining 2% isn't profitable. It's better just say "sorry". I used to work in company where we have spent a lot of time making custom fixes for our software in order to work-around wired hardware/software bugs on machines of individual customers. Yes, we provided service for remaining 2% or so, but in cost of slowing-down overall product development and not making our produ…

So how about also getting rid of all regulations for wheelchair friendly infrastructure while we are at it? Way too expensive and it is even less than 2% of the population that requires it.

Great idea. We should reevaluate how effective these policies are. The ADA favored visible signs of disability accommodation for political reasons rather than the most essential services. Many historical sites are not available to the public due to this regulation.

Re: 98% isn't much

#143

Post by jawilson2 »

zero-sharp wrote: post #39
wccrawford wrote: post #25

Alternatively, 98% is plenty . If your business plan requires you to capitalize on more than 98% of the market, it's already a failure. It'll never happen. As always, it's an "it depends" situation. If your userbase is largely luddites, then maybe you need to support 10+ year old browsers that can't be updated. Otherwise, you can probably just worry about people who are using computers new enough to actually update t…

I like how you equate 10 year old browser users with luddites?

Ha, I had the same thought, if you actually know the history of Luddites vs the more colloquial usage of "someone who hates all technology."

Re: 98% isn't much

#144

Post by zarzavat »

londons_explore wrote: post #72
bradleybuda wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s very difficult for the average person to use a ten year old browser; in fact I’d offer that the only way to use a ten year old browser is to be an expert and do so intentionally.

There are plenty of people with old android phones with no free disk space using ancient browsers. There are plenty of people still using windows 10 with updates turned off or wedged for whatever reason. These people just use the sites that work. They aren't computer experts, and might not even realise why half the internet doesn't work - they just think that's the way things are.

It's fine to support such configurations by accident, but you shouldn't try to support them intentionally. You will end up dropping support eventually regardless but the skeletons will live on in your codebase as tech debt.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Re: 98% isn't much

#145

Post by tiborsaas »

It's almost as if context matters for random numbers. A 98% success rate for a parachute is criminal, but if I could achieve 98% of my goals, I couldn't be happier.

Re: 98% isn't much

#146

Post by abofh »

account42 wrote: post #138
igsomething wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For public services you can tell people to use another device, or provide a way to schedule an appointment in-person that is accessible using old browsers.

You you can make a law that requires such businesses to use perfectly good technology standards that are widely supported instead of whatever EEE crap the latest Chrome comes with.

I remember years ago when websites would have buttons "best viewed in Internet explorer 4.0". We're past those days, but only because it's implied "use chrome, maybe webkit, we didn't test on Firefox"

Re: 98% isn't much

#147

Post by dd8601fn »

boelboel wrote: post #134
steego wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll go even further. Sometimes you want to give certain people an incentive to not be your customers because your company would be entirely better off if they were someone else’s customer.

This is why discounts are often a bad way to get customers, you don't want the customers who (only) go for discounts, they're often worse (and not just their sensitivity to prices).

A lesson taught to millions of businesses by GroupOn.

Re: 98% isn't much

#148

Post by robalni »

wccrawford wrote: post #25

Alternatively, 98% is plenty . If your business plan requires you to capitalize on more than 98% of the market, it's already a failure. It'll never happen. As always, it's an "it depends" situation. If your userbase is largely luddites, then maybe you need to support 10+ year old browsers that can't be updated. Otherwise, you can probably just worry about people who are using computers new enough to actually update t…

This is not just a question of browser age.

I use a browser that had its last release less than a year ago. It doesn't do CSS, it doesn't do javascript and I love it. I also love to be able to use the websites I need.

Re: 98% isn't much

#149

Post by BoxOfRain »

card_zero wrote: post #99
groundzeros2015 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the simple option is to cut lines serving small and rural communities We don’t see this in practice to though. Three examples: 1. In the airline industry big airlines don’t go everywhere for this reasons but small local airlines fill the gap due to market opportunity. 2. Changes in technology enable big companies to operate more efficiently. See starlink. 3. Big companies know that ubiquity is important for their b…

Meanwhile in Britain in the 1960s, this cost-cutting closure of local rail lines did happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_cuts ... at a time when the trains and rail infrastructure had been publicly owned for about 15 years already. It doesn't dispel the incentive.

I have never heard the name Beeching spoken with more venom than in Wales, I used to live in Mid Wales and now I live in Cardiff. If I wanted to visit where I used to live by train, I'd have to do a multi-hour detour of a sightseeing trip around the West Midlands, deep into England. The Beeching Axe literally cut Wales in half and the consequences are felt to this day, even though there wasn't much outright salting the Earth to make sure the terrible decision couldn't be reversed as there was in some cases, the Welsh government doesn't have the money to reinstate the Aberystwyth-Carmarthen line which would deal with a lot of these north-south issues.

Also it's not just Wales where Beeching carried out intense vandalism of public infrastructure, the South West was severely affected too. Basically anywhere that wasn't London-centric suffered, which is the British government to a T regardless of the party in power. The general assumption was that private cars would replace the local trains, which as someone who currently doesn't drive for medical reasons really makes my blood boil. While perhaps not in intent, in effect the Beeching Axe was a profound kick in the teeth for the disabled.

Re: 98% isn't much

#150

Post by steadystate_eng »

trjordan wrote: post #51

I was heading to dinner with a friend who worked in infra. Google maps said we could bike across town in 20 minutes. He suggested we leave 40 minutes ahead of time and grab a drink at the bar if we got there early. When I raised an eyebrow, he goes: "What, do you not live your life based on 99th percentiles?" I tend to think of work as upside-based on downside-based. Most feature work is upside. 10% lift on conversio…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN