Well, it doesn’t necessarily need to be bought, it just needs to not be part of alphabet anymore. I think the ideal outcome is actually that chrome become an independent non-profit that maintains an important piece of software using funding from a consortium of different sources that want it to continue to exist.
This kind of thing is actually very very common and far from a new concept.
Honestly, what’s super interesting to me is how clustered the US and Germany are. I’ve always noticed that Germans show up more often than other non-native-English speaking groups in English speaking online spaces, but to see them be nearly on par with the UK in clustering with the US is wild, especially because there is so little clustering between them and the UK.
See that’s the thing, you don’t need a touch screen for those things, or even a screen. Everyone has a phone for sat nav, (you shouldn’t be looking at your phone while driving but you also shouldn’t be looking at a screen on the console while driving). And for maintenance stuff a light up an LED is enough.
I think in general there’s just been a proliferation of unnecessary features and with it has gone the affordable new car.
I just don’t think his product will be competitive when the market moves up a whole price bracket, even if he thinks so.
People willing buy a 30,000$ new car are going to have more patience for poor quality than people who are willing to pay 40,000$. Like the market will shrink as some people are priced out, and those who remain will probably opt for something like an Ioniq-5, a Solterra, or a EX30 which are just nicer cars. Their main issues right now are a lack of availability, but that’s less of an issue as the market shrinks.
It often feels like the software is an afterthought and not given the time and resources it needs to work properly. Like, they slap the screen in to seem tech forward or to stream line dash design, and then dump the problems this creates on to software devs.
Yah, but musk has been doing some serious brand damage lately, so can they really keep selling on that?
A touch screen is more expensive than an injection molded plastic knob, even if the actual interfacing of the controls is easier.
I take the point that it’s simpler to integrate with how many buttons, dials and controls newer cars have, but I think the proliferation of those bits is part of the same issue. A lot of stuff is being added not because people find use in these things but because companies feel they need to add them to appear like they’re tech forward.
the problem is that they’re also one of the more expensive options. And they have a pretty bad reputation for quality now. So a 7,500 price increase is probably going to push people to look for higher quality at the 40 thousand price range, or for one of the cheaper options in the 30 thousand range. Assuming they don’t just go for a Prius instead.
The touch pad control shit just sends me “yah, let’s get rid of these cheap, easily manufactured and implemented dials and knobs that can be easily operated without looking and replace them with an expensive touch screen that you need to look away from the road to use, that’s truly the way of the future; Unnecessarily expensive, more difficult to use, and reliant on software that will probably get bricked in 3 years when the executives lay off the team maintaining it so they can give them selves a pay raise.”
passing the market share of windows
…well windows 7 at least.
because they weren’t throwing money at it until it was fun. They were throwing money at it trying to make a new “brand” and live service money printer.
you know what’s funny to me, that when large organizations manipulate the apparent consensus on Reddit about a topic, that’s “clever marketing” and “innovative campaign techniques”.
When a bunch of random people collectively organize to do it suddenly it’s a “dangerous”
public companies do not necessarily have a Fiduciary duty to the shareholders, let alone one to increase value. Any that they did have (based on the laws and how they are incorporated in a given jurisdiction) would also be applicable to a private company. Private companies also have shareholders, the shares are just not traded publicly.
You’re probably thinking of the theory of “Shareholder Primacy” but that is a theory not a legal reality, although some insist it is based on a questionable interpretation of the precedent set by dodge vs ford motor company.
Public companies can be run in what ever way the board/shareholders see fit.
Plenty of privately owned companies do the same things so I don’t think it can be chalked up to an issue with publicly traded companies.
Because then tech would have to admit they’re moving in to a period of stability rather than a period of constant growth.
The big companies and start ups need to prove they’ve still got “revolutionary” potential otherwise the stock values start to drop. And lower stock values means less bonuses for leadership.
See, in a lot of games generas I could look past performance issues, but with city builders? Yah, nah, good performance is kind of core. It’s basically impossible to make cities of much more than 40,000 unless you have a monstrosity of a CPU, and even then your game will be chugging. Scale of city is fundamentally limited by the performance, you can just make a larger, more interesting city in cities skylines at the moment. There are some interesting game play changes from from the first, but not interesting enough to make up for the limitations to scale.
Victoria 3 also has some big performance issues. Like paradox games have always been known to slow down in the late game, but you basically can’t get through the end game in Victoria 3 unless you’re willing to run the game in the background. Again, this is even on good, modern, mid range CPUs.
I love the flying car example because it reveals a huge issue with the whole “tech will get better” idea. People are still trying to make flying cars happen but it’s running in to the same fundamental issues; large things that are mechanically complex, energy intensive, and moving at high speeds in a crowded urban environments are just too expensive and dangerous.
There is no way around the physical realities, no clever trick or efficiency that will push it over some threshold of practicality.
How much will it affect ranking in the search algorithm? When will they announce the asking price? What about legitimate sites that cannot pony up that inevitable price?
Call me conspiratorial but this seems like a way to further subjugate civil society to cooperate society. . “Oh well, they couldn’t make a profit to pay for the blue check, so they’re not legitimate”
I mean there are huge issues with tech, but like, they’re in no way limited to kids… nor does it seem to affect them particularly strongly.
In other words, of the self selecting group excited enough about the technology to try one of these, 46% wouldn’t buy another. I can’t help but wonder when these companies will realize that there is no market for clippy 2.0.