This is a parallel argument to the whole "to big to fail" nonsense and not really in line with the famous comparison of a single person to a machine. Company strategies are typically created by small groups of people who - especially in this case - know exactly what the impact and longer-reach implications of their decisions will be. It is entirely reasonable to hold the people of any organization accountable for the policies they enact via that organization.
HTTP auth is not an authentication system, it only describes how credentials should be passed from the client to the server and how the server should respond to them.
Webhooks would be much closer to a sane solution to this use case.
Why would you spam a web server asking repeatedly wether something has happened or not, instead of just providing him with an adress so that he can simply let you know in due time ?
It's not spamming any more than me opening their website myself in a browser, loading their entire webpage, looking "Is part 3 posted yet", and doing that every day until part 3 is posted.
Except this idea is automated, and wouldn't need to load the entire website.
Because then you have to maintain a publicly accessible server, and he has to maintain a database of everyone who has clicked the button. It wouldn't be "spamming", just loading a tiny endpoint once a day (or less!) is a trivial amount of traffic.
This article is about people who liked their company and their job and lost it all. It's something to lack empathy, but I'm always amazed that there are people so full of themselves that they will go out there and proclaim that they don't give a shit about other people's fate, as if it was something to be proud about.
Okay, you're right, and I actually do give a shit about the employees. The comment was coming from the perspective of interacting with users and the app, and I didn't think about the employee-side of the story when I wrote it.
It would depend on where you are pinging from and if they have anything closer to you to respond.
From where I am, google averages 4ms, yahoo is at 200ms+. Obviously because they dont have the money or marketshare to bother putting anything for me to route closer too.
Same experiment from my gigabit link in Silicon Valley. Looks like Yahoo is about 3 times slower but far more consistent
--- google.com ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 20 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 6.918/23.419/294.037/62.272 ms
--- yahoo.com ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 20 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 78.056/78.940/80.940/0.811 ms
Although what's interesting is that Yahoo is really more like 10 times slower (almost every ping was in the 6-8ms range), it's just that there was just that one packet at 300ms and other at 30ms that really blew out the average.
> It's set to 0 or 1 to enable/disable (can never remember which mapa to which)
That's crazy. Boolean logic is the most fundamental notion of computer science, I can still remember learning that in my very first course on my very first year.
Even if was a small % of the Apple lineup, the iPhone mini was one the best selling smartphones all brands considered. I for one switched to iPhone in 2020 specifically because there wasn't a single current-gen small form-factor Android phone anymore. I have a few friend that also made the switch with the 12 / 13 Mini for that reason.
The real reason the iPhone mini failed is not related to screen size, it's because its segment was canibalized by the cheaper alternative, the SE. The 2020 and 2022 sold like hot breads, wherehas their screen was almost an inch smaller than the iPhone mini. This is the proof that there a significant market for people who don't care about size and would gladly take the smallest option at a $100 discount from the regular one.
I think the "mini" name hurt it too. People thought it would be small, when the screen was in fact bigger than the screen on the 6/7/8 iPhones. It was a similar form factor without the forehead and chin.
The mini could have been simply, iPhone. The marketing would have been that they managed to add an extra .7" of screen, while reducing the overall size and weight. That's a great pitch. Who doesn't want a bigger screen in something that more easily fits in their pocket? Instead they called in a "mini", people thought it would be tiny and hard to use, so they didn't buy it.
The iPhone 12 mini screen was only .1" smaller than the screen on the iPhone 8 Plus... the giant option from just a few years earlier.
The mini was a marketing and brand strategy failure, plain and simple. It wasn't a small phone.
> Even if was a small % of the Apple lineup, the iPhone mini was one the best selling smartphones all brands considered
Correct. To back this up a little bit with numbers, the iPhone 13 Mini all by itself sold about the half of the rate of the entire Google Pixel lineup. I bet lots of phone manufacturers would love to have half the sales of Google's premier Android phone. I also switched from Android to iPhone solely because of the 13 Mini form factor (I prefer Android, but I prefer a human-hand-sized phone even more).
This is the case for me precisely - I’ve been dismayed at the “phablet” sizing trend, and leapt at the opportunity to keep my iPhone reasonably-sized - I’m on my second SE now and I’m kind of dreading what will happen when I need to eventually replace it.
I just want something small that will fit comfortably in my pocket, and I can use with one hand.
I owned 2 minis and would just replace screens and batteries whenever one got bad. Keep one in a drawer, take the broken one to the shop, rinse repeat.
I did this for years because I liked the form factor so much.
My new buying criteria for my iPhone is simply “buy the smallest one offered”.
But I’m willing to accept I’m not a big enough market segment to move the market.
The SE is a great phone, and a reasonable size. I will say ever more websites are starting to screwup their layouts on such "small" as indeed is iOS. Tiresome as hell
reply