I really don't trust Amazon having a monopoly on any market especially one I care about as much as books. While they still have competition, things seem to be going in their favor. Even more so after the justice department handed them control over the market again when they complained about Apple. Amazon is taking the Walmart strategy: push your competitors out with unsustainable pricing and then take over the market and charge whatever you want when they're all gone.
>and charge whatever you want when they're all gone.
Where does Walmart do this? I've never been to a Walmart where pricing was out of line. Moreover, predatory pricing is litigious at best and illegal at worst.
A good example of this behavior recently has been Walmarts big push on groceries. I saw it first hand when they did it in a small community I lived in. I also worked at Walmart as one of my first jobs so I had an inside look at things including their anti-union programs and pricing strategies.
Google "Walmart predatory pricing", it's a well-documented issue.
I suspect that it is "predatory" if it puts you out of business. It becomes illegal if you can convince a legislature to intervene (witness what happened in France, to Amazon[1]). Consumers don't tend to complain about lower prices.
I really like Brackets. And it's got some great plugins already. I've set mine up with a visual git sidebar, markdown preview, themes and a mini-map like Sublime Text has.
That's not funny or educational or even interesting. It looks like jealousy or unfounded hate. I can't really think of anything 37signals has done to warrant this. They make good products and treat both their employees and customers well. Am I missing something?
Yes. If you went to high school, you may recall a certain type of person: They'd pick someone else, anyone else, and make fun of them for no reason other than to elevate themselves as an arbiter of taste.
"Ewww, reg is wearing a bow tie. What a fashion disaster!"
I used Basecamp a few years back. It was neither horrible nor great in my opinion.
But, I don't think the software needs to be bad or they need to mistreat people to be parodied. If you can capture an element of something, then exaggerate it into absurdity. it's parody.
Also not so sure about attributing jealousy or hate as the motive here. I mean, it could be, but I just don't know what's on the author's mind (except that he/she clearly believes some things about the company to be absurd).
But, it does strike me that the only things worth parodying, for the most part, are those that either succeed or that fail in some very public or fantastic way.
Really? I haven't used Basecamp in years (I work alone most of the time) but last time I did it seemed well thought out and stable.
I have read "Getting Real" and have seen a number of their articles they've posted on customer service and taking care of their employees over the years. What have your experiences been?
Isn't it? You don't seem to previde any specifics.
Plus, whether it's your experience or not is irrelevant. The general consensus is that they do both. You won't find many people in the industry believing otherwise, not many unsatisfied customers in their forums.
>Your claim is just as baseless as the one you are responding to, which was pointing out how baseless the original claim "they make good software" was.
Judging from the fact that their service has good reviews in major media and millions of users, it doesn't sound anywhere near as baseless.
>They heavily censor their forums.
Any examples? Surely those mythical people know how to save a screenshot, right?
>Judging from the fact that their service has good reviews in major media and millions of users
They have no reviews in major media. They have both good and bad reviews in minor media. The "millions of users" claim is not supported at all.
>Any examples? Surely those mythical people know how to save a screenshot, right?
Yes, I happen to collect screenshots of things that are well known every time anyone talks to me about anything just in case some random redditard wants proof that the sky is blue.
>They have no reviews in major media. They have both good and bad reviews in minor media.
Well, I don't think PC Magazine, for one, is a "minor media" in the IT industry. Or that being called "best" in your category is a "bad review".
>The "millions of users" claim is not supported at all.
Supported by whom? You mean you don't believe the user numbers they give? Being able to support a 10+ year old company, with 40+ employess, expensive Chicago offices etc, I'd say the "millions of users" claim is just about right. Heck, just a product of Basecamp, Ruby of Rails has had millions of users. Oh, and this Jeff Bezos guy investing in them? I think he knows one thing or two, too.
>random redditard
OK, this is HN. You can now go back into the woodwork.
I believe that was his/her point. I'm clearly not the first person to have noticed that your contributions are few and far between, with much garbage taking up that in between. Your posts would be welcomed on reddit, here they serve only to drag HN down.
Excuse me, I maintained a serious responce in this thread, against some immature kid defending a "satire" submission that wouldn't even have made even reddit. And which, besides dragging 37 Signals in the mud, with FUD and unsubstanciated claims, he also wents on to call people names.
You somehow think this is acceptable, but find my contributions "garbage"? Last time I checked, my "garbage" contribution was the top thread in this post, whereas the "satire" shouldn't even be posted in the first place.
>That's not funny or educational or even interesting.
Two of those are subjective and I'll ignore. But it is educational, it links to alternatives to 37 signals products.
>I can't really think of anything 37signals has done to warrant this
The company and its reputation was built on aggressively bad-mouthing and trash-talking anyone and everyone they could. Remember when rails started out? Anyone who dared to like something other than their framework was an idiot (at best).
> The company and its reputation was built on aggressively bad-mouthing and trash-talking anyone and everyone they could.
Interesting, this Wired article[0] seems to back up this perception. In this light the 67signals page may be somewhat insightful by parodying the opinionated-jerk rockstar programmer caricature, if a little too mean-spirited and lacking in wit.
I like the design language Microsoft came up with for Windows Phone. So I bought a Nokia Lumia phone. I quickly regretted it. This was before Windows Phone 8 was released but we were promised "many of the features" with Windows Phone 7.8. I waited, and waited, and waited. Eventually I was told that they had changed their minds and Windows Phone 7.8 wouldn't even be coming to my particular phone.
Windows Phone 7 is missing a lot of very basic features. It's time consuming and frustrating using it even for the most basic tasks. The web browser is terrible. It lacks most popular 3rd-party services and apps. And the camera seems to be programmed to take out-of-focus photos.
I will never buy another Nokia phone, or Windows Phone, again. They had their chance.
As a designer living and working in Atlanta I often forget how much engineering talent we have locally. I've been to the Georgia Tech campus for a few events and was impressed with many of the students (and former students) I've met. I look forward to seeing my city develop its own technology culture and companies. Maybe someday I'll find the right people here and help make something myself. For now, it's all client work.
yeah man -- there is a surprising amount going on here. i think a decent amount of atl folks are probably here on hn as well. get in touch if you ever wanna talk.
Modern goes out of date. You don't call things modern, other people call your things modern.
'Module' is more likely. As in 'app' for 'application'. A 'module' implies something that works with other things so a 'calendar module' could work with a 'contacts module' in a 'modular way'. Apps just do their own thing and are standalone, modules integrate into a whole.
Anyway, this is a speculative story about nothing more than a filing for a name. They should put filings in there for things like 'rocket ship' just to get bloggers talking even more speculative nonsense.
That's not a problem for Microsoft branding. That has a typical shelf life of three to five years.
Also, I think their goal should be to navigate it back to 'Windows' as soon as possible. It's a bit like "the new Coke". Do you think Coca Cola intended that phrase to last forever? (Sorry, couldn't think of another example. Please don't follow up with remarks on how the new coke ended)
I thought so too, and was a bit put off because it sounds like a word a teen in the 60's would use.
But it could also be short for "modifications", as in "XBox mods". (Ostensibly to appeal to tinkerers?)
The best part of a name is, you don't have to explain it -- let people derive whatever meanings they want. You'll often be surprised (and not always pleasantly!) at the unexpected connotations people derive from a name.
I doubt somebody that gets upset about a small company protecting their idea with a patent (that he hasn't even seen) would actually buy software from them anyway.
His example ("prior art") wasn't remotely relevant.
So many upset about something you have no information on. But go ahead, grab your pitchforks and go hurt another small developer.
I'm confused, are you implying it's not okay for these criminals to be brought to justice, in accordance with various international laws, when their parent state acts belligerent and refuses to cooperate? These people hurt others for a living. They deserve punishment.
So does the Pentagon but you never see them punished for blowing up a wedding. US does not act within international law if they did CIS/Russia wouldn't be complaining about these kidnappings
The nuclear apologists are out in full force today.
I love how you guys, mostly computer programmers, are so much more informed than experts in nearly every other field of science existing. It must be amazing to be that smart.
Useful information that could have been included: Actual radiation measurements, with units. Specific location of the ship over the timeline. What radiation the Navy and the ship in question knew about, and when (news reports indicate the USS Reagan nearby knew very early on when radiation exceeded background radiation since as a nuclear vessel it had good radiation sensors). And, since some of the claimants are claiming thyroid problems, whether the navy issued iodine tablets to sailors in the area, since that's a well known and practically risk-free preventative measure against radioactive iodine uptake. Hell, the standard navy rations probably have supplemental iodine. Table salt often does.
You might also be interested in researching how much radiation is released into the atmosphere from coal plants, and how many health problems are caused by all sorts of conventional energy sources, coal, burning fuel, pollution from batteries, etc.
Disclaimer: not to say that 60's-era nuclear reactor designs are good, even with more precautions being taken since Fukushima; they absolutely should be phased out in favor of new designs that provide passive safety (for several days without power).
I'm with you, then. You have to learn and understand these things yourself, not just listen to whatever other people say. But, when somebody criticizes you for thinking you know better than the experts, it's totally valid to point out that the experts say the same thing.
Even someone with an anti-nuclear stance should look at an article whose primary source is an attorney suing TEPCO and think "this is not adding anything valuable to the conversation."
The guide, as well as this stunt, is laughable. The comparisons aren't even close to being the same value. And I wonder if Apple could sue the FSF for outright lying: nothing about the Macbook Pro is planned obsolescence. You can use it until the parts wear out. For me, my HDD died and it had been about 7 years so I decided to buy a faster model instead of replacing the HDD but it worked the same up until the end.
I'm sure they could at the very least attempt litigation for outright lying. Maybe false advertising? -- I suppose not since the FSF isn't selling anything in the traditional sense of the word. In any case that would be a PR nightmare for Apple. Goliath picking on David. If the lawsuit didn't financially destroy the FSF, and I doubt it would as many would step up to help fund it, it could possibly mean a ton of free PR/awareness/advertising/whatever for the FSF. I think a lawsuit is lose/lose for Apple here, considering this "stunt" was ineffective at best.
