3 ms·

> implying that power users are the only ones who should think about performance. 1.0 second is about the limit for the user's flow of thought to stay uninterr

by dlss 15y ago

> implying that power users are the only ones who should think about performance. 1.0 second is about the limit for the user's flow of thought to stay uninterrupted. This turns out to make a big difference in productivity. See http://www.useit.com/papers/responsetime.html http://www.useit.com/papers/responsetime.html I'm talking about anyone who values their time. You're talking about secretaries looking at cat pictures. You're also doing that on a thread started when a HNer said he purchases laptops via the same method. Please: 1. Read the whole thread to ensure your "points" weren't already made elsewhere 2. Consider not replying when you don't have any information not obviously inferable from your previous post.

achompas 15y ago
I'm talking about anyone who values their time. You're talking about secretaries looking at cat pictures. Calm down there, Sparky. Are you really suggesting someone doesn't value their time because they bought an Air over an X220 with a SSD? You understand that such an assertion is ridiculous, right? Here's a "point" for you: given the economic concept of utility, are you shocked that someone would pass on an X220 + Vertex in favor of an Air and a month of groceries? How about the idea that the marginal benefit of a Vertex 3 over an Air may be tiny enough to some that they'll pass? We haven't even discussed failure rates, which are anecdotally bad on older Vertexes; can you blame someone for choosing an Air, along with 3 years of service at any Apple Store? Also, another "point" for you: I sincerely doubt you would've responded like that in person, so you should probably re-read HN's commenting rules and think twice next time.
- dlss 15y ago
  1. I accept your point that those with limited capital sometimes need to sacrifice their potential -- if you can't afford college then your annual income will be lower (though perhaps not lifetime income). 2. Diminishing marginal utility is not usually considered to apply to time -- are you saying that your girlfriend would rather use a mac than add an additional ~year of work/play time to her lifespan? 3. Note that the concept of diminishing marginal utility is different than the concept of utility. 4. I'm like this in person.

by dlss 15y ago

achompas 15y ago

I'm talking about anyone who values their time. You're talking about secretaries looking at cat pictures. Calm down there, Sparky. Are you really suggesting someone doesn't value their time because they bought an Air over an X220 with a SSD? You understand that such an assertion is ridiculous, right? Here's a "point" for you: given the economic concept of utility, are you shocked that someone would pass on an X220 + Vertex in favor of an Air and a month of groceries? How about the idea that the marginal benefit of a Vertex 3 over an Air may be tiny enough to some that they'll pass? We haven't even discussed failure rates, which are anecdotally bad on older Vertexes; can you blame someone for choosing an Air, along with 3 years of service at any Apple Store? Also, another "point" for you: I sincerely doubt you would've responded like that in person, so you should probably re-read HN's commenting rules and think twice next time.

dlss 15y ago
1. I accept your point that those with limited capital sometimes need to sacrifice their potential -- if you can't afford college then your annual income will be lower (though perhaps not lifetime income). 2. Diminishing marginal utility is not usually considered to apply to time -- are you saying that your girlfriend would rather use a mac than add an additional ~year of work/play time to her lifespan? 3. Note that the concept of diminishing marginal utility is different than the concept of utility. 4. I'm like this in person.