Does anyone track the apple criticism for the ipod, the iphone, the watch etc etc?
Apple takes some risks, not everyone is fan, it costs a lot, but they have the money to burn, I don't get why they aren't allowed to try this stuff out.
I'm a fan of two monitors, my main horizontal (though I got one with much more vertical resolution than most 4:3), and one in portrait somewhat to the side.
So many big wins. I can do a zoom screen share on my main window and have notes, private stuff on the side window, I can read documents that often are vertically formatted on the side window.
I do a fair bit of comparing type work where I need a reference index doc on the side, then I got through the individual docs for tieback on the main.
It's game changing to have multiple monitors and particularly have one portrait and one vertical.
My immediate thought was working on a flight. This guy is like he's got some big curved monitor on his flight. No he doesn't, he's hunched over a laptop screen.
If I could work on a flight on a big screen I'd be thrilled. I really don't like the ergonomics of hunching over a laptop screen.
Techcrunch concluded "The price reveal turned any ‘would buy’ in the room into a ‘definitely not’ without hesitation."
Anyways, bookmark the threads of folks calling an Apple product dead on arrival for a revisit in a few years.
The ipod, the iphone, the watch, the airpods... they've had a pretty good record and almost all these have had harsh criticism out the gate (while then going on to absolutely PRINT money for apple).
Apple is sitting on lots of cash and investment with operating cash flow of something like another $100B a year? Why aren't they allowed to take some risks on products like this. Facebook certainly has burnt billions in a similar space.
That said, I wouldn't jump to conclusions on how things like saturation or desaturation play into ratings, a lot of instagram filters for example have an a desaturation effect which makes me wonder if folks like that as a look. I don't personally.
Very well could be a bad model, but sometimes there are underlying factors that result in these bad models from the training set. And no, it's no ML 101 to randomize elements of your input in the training set, though if you want a broadly applicable model you'd look to have inputs that include a variety of hue and saturation (perhaps that's what you meant - I have seen folks though manually start doing things like randomize hue in the set, where the ratings were on the original image).
There are some studies I believe that show even attractive african american women can have trouble with low click through / match / rating on dating sites.
So if the model was trained on who folks wanted to date (as a measure of attractiveness) the model could still be somewhat accurate, even though not accurately measuring attractiveness.
How would models work on rating who would be a good NBA player / runner etc. I wonder if just being white would get me downrated.
I'm somewhat curious if many indications of competence can be considered indications of wealth / social status?
Does this disqualify them from consideration?
Resume quality IS actually pretty easy to pick up on. Some folks go totally overboard for non-design roles - I'd say there probably is a tasteful middle ground (ie, not super long with pages and pages - I've had folks do essentially powerpoints) and not just a mono font list in all caps (often some kind of auto resume spam mess). If you take the time to do a 1 or 2 page MAX clean resume, quasi responsive to posting, with a brief email note you are ahead of 60% of candidates already. With this hiring market it doesn't matter - employers will chase you anyways.
My guess, instead of charging netflix to place a CDN in their data center, they may offer youtube / netflix et all free CDN space/power, perhaps even PAYING youtube to put their stuff inside their network perimeter.
Totally not a problem. If you are in the f-off frame of mind then probably for the best!
You won't be pushed that hard for an exit interview if it was pretty clearly not a good fit. Some of these transitions are a relief for all concerned (employee AND manager).
If a manager has someone with leadership / significant upside potential I do think a discussion is worth doing if possible.
As someone who has done exit interviews on both sides some quick notes:
1) I would dial back dramatic sweeping criticism. Now is not the time to relitigate every grievance, claim doom will befall company etc.
2) Treat it as any other feedback cycle. Here's what was working well, here some areas I might look at improving. Keep it light and friendly.
3) Do a slight "I" perspective. I'm moving for higher pay and to have a bit of a bigger role / influence on decisions etc. I'm moving in part because progression options were unclear to me. I'm moving in part to be able to do a masters program with an EAP program, start a retirement plan match (401K) etc.
I had great references from all my former employers AND I did the exit interviews they wanted. They were friendly.
I left one very very cushy job, did a very friendly exit interview, they hired me back on as a consultant at x times my normal rate. It really worked out better. I'd had a split reporting structure internally (nightmare), and when I came back consulting each project had a clear "customer" I could work with / manage against. Everyone was happier. When I left I just said, One area that was tricky for me was the split reporting structure which made it harder to prioritize my work. When I consulted I had a point of contact clearly defined.
For a company that had a dude yelling Developers on stage - how in the world did they blow their dev stack so badly?
XAML, WPF, UWP, silverlight etc etc.
They owned with WinForms back in the day. There was nothing close to market share / productivity for LOB apps. Then it was like they just dynamited repeatedly, and kept on dynamiting?
I can't even imagine the wasted dev cycles, and now the wasted time using janky juddering online apps (even Vax/VMS green screen LOB apps were actually FASTER -> keyboard driven, no lag). If you tracked medical billing from vax/vms days (a fast typist could crank through billing slips and a tech forward clinical staff could checkin a patient and go with a few keyboard keys (including the good old F keys)). Now its wait wait wait, mouse click, mouse move, click, wait type, submit, wait.
God, if you have personal and work accounts under the same email bring on the insane pain. There is sometimes confusion on the MSFT backend (or was) in these cases and you'd get jammed into weird corners (ie, reset would do just your personal so you couldn't ever get a work account reset etc).
It's something about their federation tech vs google. Google, if you are in wrong service, nice switch account, one redirect it feels like.
Apple takes some risks, not everyone is fan, it costs a lot, but they have the money to burn, I don't get why they aren't allowed to try this stuff out.