421–430 of 555 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You put the /s, but I don't think this comment is inaccurate in any way. Some people really have enthusiasm for nothing but making money. No hobbies, no interests, no friends, no other goals.
> Some people really have enthusiasm for nothing but making money. As long as those people have morals, what’s wrong with that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Software as a service is a continuous operation. I would pay to get software not as a service. Fuck your updates, I don't want bloody updates that end up breaking my stuff and wasting my time. Give me one version, no updates and no support, and I will give you top dollars. If I want an update I'll come back to repeat the process again, giving you top dollars again, several years down the road. Are big purchases ever…
I guess I sort of grew up in the SaaS era - to this day it blows my mind that one of the most perfect pieces of software I have ever enjoyed - N64's Goldeneye - was created by ~10 devs, who had one single release. I often fantasize about joining team like that while daydreaming in the poker-card scrum sessions at the agile sweatshop I currently take my paycheck from :/
Wait till you hear how many people it took to build Roaler Coaster Tycoon .... in assembly. Spoiler alert: 1; one; uno.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These complaints remind me of complaints I've heard about "day one" DLC (DownLoadable Content) in video games. For those unfamiliar, it's content which is available in the game upon its release but you have to pay extra for it. Sometimes, players are given the option to buy the Ultra Digital Deluxe Collector's Edition which comes with the DLC and "exclusive" shit (and also costs extra). If it's not rent seeking, it's…
Isn't this all the same thing as what airlines did after 9/11? You pay the fare and get a seat. Want it to not be a middle seat? That's $50. Want to carry on a bag? That's $50. Want to check a bag? That's $50. Want to check out the lounge before you depart? That's $50. Want some WiFi? That's $50. Want a snack? That's $50. Now your flight is $200 more than the quoted fare. (OK OK you can probably get WiFi and a snack…
“Complains about air pollution, but still breathes the air”, amirite? Or perhaps there’s another explanation for the dynamic. Because I can tell you that my game-buying habits have changed as a result of your parallel example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's absolutely false. You are painting the picture as if the car maker will sell you a high performance model (with all the necessary parts for performance) at a lower cost. No they will sell you that model with all their profit margin and then charge you extra monthly for the performance.
this is untrue in a competitive market
The whole idea will be perceived for the pettiness and ripoff it is. Especially when no one will even know you pay the extra a month so there is zero status symbol with this.
No way this is around in a few years. They will lose more sales than they will ever make up with the monthly fee.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They already posses the capability to perform to the implied specifications with or without that $60/mo.
I understand the technical part: they are unlocking the extra power electronically. What I don't understand is what is different between the headline saying that you can pay $60 for your car to go faster (true) and parent poster saying "pay an extra $60 monthly your already-expensive vehicle will not give the full outstanding performance that your particular hardware was engineered to do"? Those two statements seem t…
Paying doesn't make the machine perform better than it already could; Not paying makes the on-board software limit the machine to perform worse than what it's actually capable of.
The best EV is an electric bus with trolley lines or a tram. I hate that I have to own a monstrous depreciating asset to have reliable transportation. If you think people are buying this to drive on a track you are naive. They are paying $60/month to make their already unsafe overweight vehicle even more unsafe. I hope they go bankrupt.
Maybe for you. I have no interest in paying for this subscription, but a trolley or tram or train would not solve my problem without an absolutely mind-boggling amount of infrastructure investment, and there are so many things I would rather pay for. I've never enjoyed public transit, here or in Europe. It's a pain in the ass to some degree, no matter how good it is. An individual car is the epitome of freedom, so yo…
You mean like roads?
I want to see this legislated out of existence. To be clear, because every time this comes up some dickfucks come in here and start making excuses about how it's better to rent in some cases and that this is just amortizing the whole payment, and there are some people who want this: No. This is a fucking terrible deal even just using mercedes numbers. It takes a whopping 30 months (2.5 years) for the monthly payment…
Thank you for being a voice of righteousness in a sea of simps. It’s hard to tell on this site, are people really this devoted to corps or are they shills? Even with what you said there are still so many people defending this behavior. The world is full of weak and/or deceitful people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you considered that most people can't afford to upgrade to first class? The choice is either deal with the shit seat or not go on vacation.
Of course. It being cheaper is why people like it. Same reason that games are free and offer DLC, or Mercedes offers a car that could go faster if you have extra money laying around this month. I hate the nickel and diming but it does make things more accessible in general.
I want to see this legislated out of existence. To be clear, because every time this comes up some dickfucks come in here and start making excuses about how it's better to rent in some cases and that this is just amortizing the whole payment, and there are some people who want this: No. This is a fucking terrible deal even just using mercedes numbers. It takes a whopping 30 months (2.5 years) for the monthly payment…
> RENT FUCKING SEEKING. That's not rent seeking. Rent seeking is when an entity has control of something that can't be traded in a liquid/efficient way (this part is important!) and tries to leverage this uncompetetive situation into revenue that isn't subject to market forces. Cars are pretty liquid. Subscription products are very liquid. If people don't want this they won't buy it. If they don't want cars with this…
I want to see this legislated out of existence. To be clear, because every time this comes up some dickfucks come in here and start making excuses about how it's better to rent in some cases and that this is just amortizing the whole payment, and there are some people who want this: No. This is a fucking terrible deal even just using mercedes numbers. It takes a whopping 30 months (2.5 years) for the monthly payment…
Thank you for being a voice of righteousness in a sea of simps. It’s hard to tell on this site, are people really this devoted to corps or are they shills? Even with what you said there are still so many people defending this behavior. The world is full of weak and/or deceitful people.