I had to explain this to some slightly younger colleagues recently. It's hard to believe now, but in ye olde days hardware was not as cheap and abundant as it is now. So you invested heavily in your database servers and to justify the hardware and software cost, ran as many workloads as possible on it to spread the pain.
This is also the same incentives that resulted in many classic architectures from 80s and 90s relying heavily on stored procedures. It was the only place where certain data could be crunched in a performant way. Middleware servers lacked the CPU and memory to crunch large datasets, and the network was more of a performance bottleneck.
There was a brief period of time where you could buy your car like this. You'd purchase a rolling chassis from one manufacturer, and commission a coachbuilder to put a body on top. Many premium brands such as Bugatti, Rolls-Royce and Jaguar (Swallow) started in this fashion.
Today, outside of a few niche areas such as motorsport and commercial uses such as buses and coaches, nobody buys a vehicle this way. If you walked into your local Ford or Toyota and asked for a rolling chassis they would look at you as if you were insane, and rightly so. Integrating the development of the chassis and body into a single unit (both philosophically and literally [0]) has given us cars which are lighter, faster, more efficient, more featureful and safer by every measure.
We had our coachbuilding period in personal computing and it's all but over[1]. Nobody asks for the hardware and operating system to be sold separately for their washing machine, their TV, their microwave oven or Tesla EV. And yet for some reason some still cling to the idea that tablets and smartphones are personal computers rather than recognising them for the appliances they are.
As Steve Jobs allegedly said, design is not how something looks, design is how something works. How a feature works on a highly evolved device like an iPhone is a function of tightly coupled and carefully designed hardware and software.
Having this design process take place in different teams inside different companies, selling in different commercial models would not lead to a better outcome, it would be worse, much worse. The staggering commercial success of both iPhone and iPad is all the proof you need.
While I appreciate the aesthetics of this feature I actually fear it represents a loss of focus for Flighty. As a traveller, I don't need a global view of airport disruptions, I need relevant info for my flights.
Given the prominent TV Mode button in the interface, this update seems to be about competing with Flightradar24, who sell business subscriptions for airports and related sectors for information displays.
it sounds like the app already does what you need it to do. developers can spend a few hours on something other than #1 most pressing core feature every now and then.
I agree. The reason I love Flighty vs FlightAware or Flightradar24 is because the app is solely focused on my flights. The real-time tactical information about delays and inbound aircraft is so good that it is very heavily used by airline employees since even the airlines are not great about providing this data in a timely fashion to their front line employees.
The dashboard is really nice and if it remained free I could see integrating it into a display's playlist in my office but, I highly doubt this doesn't turn into a hefty subscription service.
Having the departure / arrival boards of the airports in the app in a easy to find and uniform way is a great feature and is exactly what I pay Flighty for. Having to find this information on airport websites is horrible and the alternative websites for that are usually filled with ads or behind a lock screen.
I'd say that's exactly the focus for Flighty to have that.
They can do both things at once. Airports desperately need to be displaying accurate information and stop letting gate agents make random calls based on their interpreting of company policy
> Airports desperately need to be displaying accurate information [..]
Airports and airlines may have information that they deliberately do not share with passengers.
For example: a large European airport that I once did some work for ran a trial in which they announced departure boarding gates significantly earlier. The effect was that passengers went to their gates earlier.
The side effect was that retail revenues in the terminal fell during the trial. Yes, this was a metric.
Guess what? They decided not to proceed with announcing departure gates earlier and went back to the previous system.
> one of the most important pieces of data for a flight, its duration
Flighty is all about getting you to the airport in time for your flight, so the most important pieces of information are things like departure times, connection times, delay information, terminal and boarding gate. These are prioritised in the interface.
The flight duration is set when you book the flight and it's not going to change, there is no reason to prioritise this.
> It also doesn’t surface boarding time
I think this would be useful but difficult data to get. Airlines sometimes will push boarding announcements to their own apps but I doubt they would agree to feed Flighty.
My guess is that's because boarding a plane is a little bit like being an extra for a film, it's a hurry up and wait situation. If they printed the exact time boarding starts and people showed up then (and later), no flight would ever board on time. Better for the airline to print an earlier time and have people wait longer, so they can board as quickly as possible. Every minute behind schedule costs the airline money.
AA displays the boarding time in the app instead of the departure time once the flight gets close enough (like same day)
>If they printed the exact time boarding starts and people showed up then (and later), no flight would ever board on time
I don't understand the logic. If everyone is there at the stated boarding time and the airline has correctly allocated enough time for boarding, aren't they winning?
200 people can't board at the same second. Reality is you want orderly boarding over the course of ~ 10-15mins depending on passenger makeup. Crew also need to account for passenger with additional needs, catering recharge, etc
Just don't try this on Ryan Air. A good friend got stuck at the airport on a Sunday night after being denied boarding because he waited out the standing line sitting on a bench right by the gate.
As soon as the last person standing walked through the checkpoint the gate crew closed the gate -- and completely ignored my friend when he showed up 10 seconds later.
How did his actual boarding time match up with the contractually agreed boarding close time?
Most budget airlines pull this crap but I've started pushing back especially when it's poor weather outside and they expect us to wait in the rain just to improve their metrics
They need some EU261 denied boarding threats/claims to sort them out
> Singapore has a regressive shock absorber model where something like half the country are immigrants that are ineligible for, say, public housing
Singapore has about 1.5 million foreign workers[0] of the population of 6.1 million or just under 25%. Of that 1.5 million, 75% are WP holders who pay no tax and have housing provided as a condition of their employment. Why would you expect social housing to be provided for them?
Only about 5-6% of the population are on EPs and SPs. They are definitely vulnerable during a downturn, but they are professionals and they know the rules coming in. At least while they're here they enjoy low tax rates and don't have to contribute to CPF. If they fell into the expat trap of living the high life and didn't save, that's on them.
I really wish people would not throw this word around so casually, it is disrespectful to the many millions of people over the course of human history (and today!) who were forced under threat of violence or death to labour without remuneration.
Of course Singapore's migrant worker system is open to criticism, but every single one of those workers can resign tomorrow and get a free plane ticket home, and the same applies to domestic helpers as well.
Migrant workers work in Singapore because it's their most rational economic choice. They pay no income tax, room and board is provided and the wages are sufficient to house, feed and educate their family back home, almost certainly to a better standard than would otherwise be possible had they remained in their home country.
tl;dr migrant workers have agency!
The comment about cars is unintentionally hilarious. “A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It's where the rich use public transportation.” and the public transportation in Singapore is very good indeed.
The argument against allowing migrant workers seems to boil down mostly to 'out of sight, out of mind'. Or in more sophisticated terms: The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics.
Interesting article, and thanks for the introduction to "philosophy bro".
I think the Copenhagen interpretation of Ethics is really a misnomer. In quantum physics, a particle can exist in a superposition of states until you observe it. The ethical equivalent would be "a problem can be viewed as moral or amoral until you observe it", which is not really what the author is explaining. Additionally, I think the problem the author describes mostly boils down to how one interprets the intention behind each example. For instance: paying a homeless person $20 a day (plus donations) can be viewed as charitable (a homeless person gets to earn money and be treated as a human being) or exploitative (you underpay a worker). Same with the price surging: you can view it as a incentive for drivers to compensate for demands or price gouging. I'm not saying either is right or wrong, but that these are the opposed views are coexisting in different people's head. For this, it would make more sense to call this scenario a "Reverse Copenhagen interpretation" where one observation lead to two coexisting interpretations.
There are different degrees and institutions of slavery, and Frederick Douglass, the abolitionist and former chattel slave himself, had this to say[1] about that sentiment:
> The abolitionist and former slave Frederick Douglass initially declared "now I am my own master", upon taking a paying job. However, later in life he concluded to the contrary, saying "experience demonstrates that there may be a slavery of wages only a little less galling and crushing in its effects than chattel slavery, and that this slavery of wages must go down with the other"
The non-resident population of Singapore (which is a reasonable proxy for migrant worker population) is at the highest it's ever been, as is the total population.[0][1]
I'm sure no ill intent on your part but referring to the Philippines as "The PI" (short for The Philippine Islands as it was known under US colonial administration) is roughly equivalent to calling Thailand "Siam" or Sri Lanka "Ceylon".
Since 1946 the country has simply been known as the Philippines, officially "the Republic of the Philippines" and the ISO 3166 code is PH.
This is also the same incentives that resulted in many classic architectures from 80s and 90s relying heavily on stored procedures. It was the only place where certain data could be crunched in a performant way. Middleware servers lacked the CPU and memory to crunch large datasets, and the network was more of a performance bottleneck.
reply