14 ms·

Worse

• scottjad 13y ago
  What's with this stupid title where you have to read the thing to have any clue what it is about? Imagine if the front page were full with these kind of titles. We might as well change the titles to random numbers. The last post by this guy that I remember, and the second to last one to do well on the frontpage (perhaps explaining the current behavior), was titled "Off". Can you get any more vague? In that post all he said about anything being off was "The presenting executives seemed a bit off, too." My prediction is that before long he'll have a post at the top of Hacker News titled "And" where he ends it with "And that's what I think."
  • rhizome 13y ago
    I like the guy and his essays, but the titles appear to be a pseudointellectual attempt to be profound. UPDATE: Then again, judging from the comments here, maybe he was guessing (correctly) the point that nobody was going to address.
    • frou_dh 13y ago
      According to my HN commenter bingo card, what this top-level thread needs next is either complaining about TFA's background colour, or a heated debate about the actual definition of ad-hominem.
  • k-mcgrady 13y ago
    >> "What's with this stupid title where you have to read the thing to have any clue what it is about?" I think you've answered your own question. A lot of people will think it's a stupid title but be curious enough to click through.
    • michaelt 13y ago
      Or perhaps he chose a title appropriate for traditional blog/RSS reader format where readers are presented with the first paragraphs of the article, and the title is little more than decoration. The article author can hardly be blamed for the HN policy of using article titles even when they aren't descriptive.
    • larrys 13y ago
      I clicked through because at the time (will change depending on when someone reads my comment) it had 104 points, 55 comments and was the top link. But I guess more importantly (and this is a lesson) the title was ambiguous enough to not let me know that I wouldn't be interested in it. So for example if it said "Ruby" I would have been less likely to click because that's not of any interest to me. So my curiosity was piqued by the title. That and definitely the karma made me take a look. And the fact that I couldn't rule out interest. This also ties into the concept of "don't oversell". One of the things I learned as a kid was to stop selling once you have made a sale. Because if you said more after making the sale (and in some cases before) you could lose the sale. Salesman: "and the warranty on the refrigerator is fairly price as well" Buyer: "oh wait I need a warranty hadn't thought of that, cancel the order then".
  • hodgesmr 13y ago
    Perhaps it's a good thing that you have to read his whole piece to know what he's saying.
    • n09n 13y ago
      No it's not. I regret wasting my time reading this article. If it had a better title, I wouldn't have bothered.
  • Gromble 13y ago
    Who cares? I doubt he worries what HN commenters will think of his titles when he chooses them. It's a non-issue.
  • eridius 13y ago
    Why does it matter? He's writing this stuff for his blog, not for Hacker News. Anyone who reads his blog is going to read this article no matter what it's titled. The only problem here is Hacker News's insistence on using the original title even when it does provide enough context.
    • aragot 13y ago
      I would vote for letting users of HN put a custom title, so they can spin off an axis of study.
      • ForHackernews 13y ago
        You can put a custom title, it's just that HN's all-knowing, anonymous moderators will almost invariably revert it to match whatever's on the page.
        • toomuchtodo 13y ago
          I'm OK with moderator's reverting it, as long as that is communicated through the UX that it was reverted and the original title is still accessible.
        • danielweber 13y ago
          They did that on the "I'm not famous but dying of cancer at 35" post.
        • rdl 13y ago
          You sometimes have to edit the title just to make it fit in 80 characters. When I submit, I sometimes use the subtitle instead of the main title, or submit something like (in this case): "Worse: Business models and lock-in among Internet giants" which won't get reverted until it's already on the front page with a reasonable number of votes.
  • EC1 13y ago
    >My prediction is that before long he'll have a post at the top of Hacker News titled "And" where he ends it with "And that's what I think." I would laugh so hard at that.
    • richbradshaw 13y ago
      http://www.marco.org/2014/03/16/and http://www.marco.org/2014/03/16/and
  • eridius 13y ago
    Congratulations, his new post is titled And: http://www.marco.org/2014/03/16/and http://www.marco.org/2014/03/16/and
• gress 13y ago
  whilst it's true that Apple maps is not as good as Google maps yet, especially outside the US, it strikes me as the odd one out here. Apple wanted to make maps better but couldn't do so with Google as the supplier without making unacceptable privacy compromises. The current state is temporarily worse, but only because their supplier was uncooperative.
  • Steko 13y ago
    Yeah, that part is a misdiagnosis. Amazon and Google (and I guess Samsung and Facebook) all seem to want the full (Gates era) Microsoft. Conversely Apple certainly never wanted to be in the maps business but when their maps partner became their biggest competitor they didn't have a lot of other great options.
  • mikeash 13y ago
    There's more than two maps suppliers out there. While it's true that Apple probably couldn't realistically proceed with Google, nothing forced Apple to partner with the cheapest and worst one out there (TomTom) when making the switch. Apple Maps could have been much better if Apple had cared to make it so. They didn't, and that's on them, not anyone else.
    • gress 13y ago
      Who exactly are you suggesting they should have partnered with, and what do you know about what those other partners would have demanded in return? Seriously, if it's so easy for you to righteously deride them, you presumably have some credible suggestions about how they could make it better if only they wanted to.
      • mikeash 13y ago
        OpenStreetMap, Nokia, Microsoft, MapQuest, off the top of my head. Frankly, the claim that Apple Maps was the best possible mapping product Apple could have made requires far more support than the claim that Apple could have done better.
• state 13y ago
  I love to think of all of these things as opportunities. Giants are staggering around, losing focus and getting in to petty fights. Isn't that the perfect time for new things? How exciting.
• roberjo 13y ago
  If I click on one more movie title in AmazonPrime Instant Video that is simply not offered in any form at all (streaming, rental, purchase, nada), I am going to cry.
  • buro9 13y ago
    I'm sorry, I accidentally downvoted you when I was trying to upvote someone else. To make up for it, I've given an abundance of upvotes on some of your other comments elsewhere. My apologies.
• ksikka 13y ago
  Why don't you start better companies? Show them wrong. Don't just sit at your laptop, complain about how bad all these popular, massively used services are. If you don't like it, leave and make it better.
  • nav1 13y ago
    Because it's so easy to start a company and compete with Amazon.
    • marshray 13y ago
      I doubt it's ever been easier
  • yodhe 13y ago
    That strikes me as a statement that completely ignores the reality of the situation of creating a successful online retail presence. Also telling other people what to do seems incredibly naive, and the last part of your comment just strikes me as asinine.
    • ksikka 13y ago
      my point is, there's no need for the cathartic negativity in form of a blog post. 1. these companies actually do provide valuable services that we are better off for 2. an overwhelmingly negative blog post addresses the problem but not the solution, so it's not being constructive
      • andrewflnr 13y ago
        There is value in simply having things out in the open, explicitly. In this case the point of the post is to give perspective on where the industry is headed, and I found it valuable.
      • rhizome 13y ago
        You're begging the question that catharsis has no value.
• B-Con 13y ago
  > They want to lock everyone into everything. Just like everyone else. And we’re all worse off for it. I really like Schneier's commentary on how large companies are migrating toward a feudal system[1]. His perspective is from security, but the central point is universal. [1]: http://www.wired.com/opinion/2012/11/feudal-security/ http://www.wired.com/opinion/2012/11/feudal-security/
• nateguchi2 13y ago
  Personally, I find that eBay (at least in the UK) has proven itself to have the best shipping, selection, service and price. Especially with it's new "Fast and free" promotion
• bunkat 13y ago
  I feel like I must be the odd one here. My wife and I watch free Amazon Prime videos (i.e. bundled with the Prime service, I know nothing is actually free!) all the time. The selection is decent enough for us and they have lots of free television series that keep us busy. Between that and shipping that usually gets things here the next day, Amazon Prime is worth every penny to us.
  • Einstalbert 13y ago
    I absolutely love the prime service, and it has not become worse for me here in California. They had to start charging us tax but all it really meant was that we had closer and closer distribution centers. My overall service, in that regard, has only become better in the last few years. I use AP at least once a week between work and home purchases... can't say I have ever used the video stuff, though.
  • majormajor 13y ago
    Prime is better than ever for me too. I almost always get things the next day nowdays, even frequently for weekend orders (Saturday orders arriving Monday). The one hiccup was that the first thing they tried to send me on a Sunday got lost, but they handled it with great customer service and next-day shipped me a replacement during the week. And since then the few things I've had scheduled for Sunday have been fine, too. I'm in a big city, though. Maybe it's gotten worse for people in less densely populated areas that aren't so near their warehouses? --- The videos service is a mess UI-wise compared to its competitors, but considering how much free shipping I take advantage of I can't complain. But Marco certainly a point that the bundling (and branding, and messaging, and discoverability) is pretty bad. It works serviceably on my Kindle Fire and Samsung TV, but is a clear step down from the competitors in terms of interface, app availability, polish, etc.
  • rgbrgb 13y ago
    > free Amazon Prime videos I know that's how Amazon phrases it but this is the fallacy the OP is arguing against.
    • bunkat 13y ago
• jbinto 13y ago
  As a Canadian Amazon customer, I'm used to this second class treatment. With a fraction of the inventory, no "addon items", no access to Prime Instant Video or Kindle Lending Library, there's absolutely no reason for Amazon.ca customers to subscribe to Prime, even at $79.
  • graeme 13y ago
    It's worse, but I wouldn't say there's "no reason". I make almost all of my purchases on amazon; their selection has improved greatly in the past year. Adding Prime has removed much of the friction from the process. I don't have to group items together to get free shipping. Yet I also find I'm not making impulse purchases, so it works out well. Mental space is precious, so removing the planning from amazon purchasing has helped, even if I spend a bit more money.
    • Pxtl 13y ago
      Yeah, I've spent a couple of late nights scrambling trying to think of one item I want to buy from Amazon to pad an order out to the desired price. Freeing myself from that bit of mental gymnastics might be worth it.
      • jbinto 13y ago
        Interesting. I guess my usage of Amazon deviates from the norm then. I don't think I've ever struggled to put more than $25 in my cart, and I've never elected for a more expensive shipping option. Aside: On Amazon.ca, the cheapest (free) shipping method has always outperformed the promise for express shipping. If they say 5-8 days, it's there in 2-3. My record was ordering a product on a Saturday afternoon, selecting free shipping, and getting it Monday morning. I was dumbfounded that was even possible.
        • graeme 13y ago
          I often buy a single book, usually $11. I might buy a $14 book two days later, but I don't want to keep track, or buy more than I want to for free shipping
• thatthatis 13y ago
  I've been a prime customer for 7 ish years. I'm ok with the new price. Im extremely happy with the service, appreciate a lot of the new features (instant video, lending library), and overall Im not off put by tweaks like add ons that make the service more economically efficient and thus viable. I get way more than $100 worth of simplicity from being a member of prime. My only complaint: create an instant video app for android already.
  • Noxchi 13y ago
    Because they have a competing OS called Fire OS.
  • kybernetyk 13y ago
    My complaint is: Why do I have to install Silverlight on my Mac to use amazon video while you can stream to your iPad without silverlight?
    • anonova 13y ago
      Are you talking about Netflix? Amazon's video player uses Flash.
      • cowsandmilk 13y ago
        No, Amazon uses silverlight by default. Under their options for web player, they even say "Experience less buffering and enjoy HD titles with Microsoft Silverlight." and the option is "Silverlight (Recommended)"
        • anonova 13y ago
          Ah, I wasn't even aware since I don't have Silverlight installed, and Amazon automatically fellback to Flash. I installed Silverlight to compare, but it crashes in Chrome and I get "Content Permissions Error (6023)" in Firefox.
    • brewdad 13y ago
• Pxtl 13y ago
  Hope they don't do it here in Canada. With no Amazon Video service here, there already isn't much reason to buy Prime.
• EGreg 13y ago
  Disagree completely with the fearmongering. "Its shipping deals always felt unsustainable, so in the absence of other changes, I’d feel that the extra $20 per year was justified." So what exactly is the problem being decried? Amazon increases the cost of a "free shipping" plan that was previously seemed unsustainable. Oh, and Amazon bundles free videos with Prime as it wants to get into the media delivery business ruled by Netflix and make it cheaper. It already doss this with books but now wants to enter the game to challenge Google's Play and Apple's iTunes Store. This is MORE competition in the mobile OS + media delivery space. Let Amazon enter it. It already has one of the most sophisticated infrastructures in the world, with AWS - which by the way is its biggest revenue center. If you want to be concerned about anything, be concerned about the effect these economies of scale will have on the American worker. With self driving cars from google and packing robots from Amazon and giant data centers from Apple, who will need record stores, bookstores, newspapers, cab drivers, oh wait..
  • jey 13y ago
    > bundles free videos with Prime They're not free, they're part of the $99 fee. I don't watch TV and I don't want to be charged extra so they can give me "free" TV I didn't ask for.
    • djur 13y ago
      You're assuming that Amazon would be able to profitably offer a meaningfully cheaper "shipping-only" Prime service. I doubt it. Shipping is expensive, and the kind of people who would be inclined to subscribe to that service are likely to be the ones who make heavy use of the free shipping. If $99 isn't worth the shipping options you get from Prime, and you aren't interested in the video service, there's always the option of not using Prime and paying for shipping as you use it.
    • dlp211 13y ago
      You are going to get charged $99 either way. Prime video has always been, and continues to be an add on to the Prime membership. Remember when we paid $79 just for shipping, then they added video much later? I'm not saying it will always be this way, I can see there being a multi-tier Prime system sometime down the road.
• brwnll 13y ago
  Marco is using a complete straw man here He takes a optional add on service (Amazon Prime) which a company offers value to its "its most dedicated customers". Then he compares it to other companies require of you to use their service. You are in no way required to have Amazon Prime to use Amazon. If it doesn't make sense to you, then cancel it. Amazon is still happy to have you as a customer without it. It feels like people are complaining they bought a car, asked for the sunroof option, and now are loudly complaining that cars shouldn't have sunroofs.
  • robotresearcher 13y ago
    They bought a car, chose the sunroof option, got the sunroof plus a bluetooth module they don't use. Every time they use the sunroof, they have to click through a popup advertising the bluetooth. The cost of the bluetooth may or may not have been included in the sunroof price, it's not clear.
    • philwelch 13y ago
      Ironically, some cars I've been looking into lately only offer the sunroof bundled with some touchscreen navigation system I don't really want.
  • midnitewarrior 13y ago
    Yeah, Marco is just being a whiner here. Amazon Prime is a great service, and Amazon Instant Video as an included bonus to Prime is a great deal. I don't know what his problem with Amazon is, but he's way off base in my opinion.
    • npsimons 13y ago
      I don't know what his problem with Amazon is, but he's way off base in my opinion. His problem with Amazon is that they aren't Apple. In all fairness, he does call out Apple (a little bit), but I do think that the issues with Amazon or Google are nothing compared to the lock-down you get with Apple (or used to with Microsoft).
• tptacek 13y ago
  As an aside: for me, Amazon Instant Video is _much_ better than Netflix Streaming. I pay for both (Amazon unintentionally, because I bought Prime for the shipping), watch both on a PS3, and spend 2x the amount of time in Amazon as I do in Netflix. Apart from the free catalogs, which are comparable between the two services, Amazon also has an enormous paid streaming catalog. Like most nerds, the value of an hour of my time is such that even thinking about the price of paid streaming content is a waste of time, so Amazon's paid streaming catalog is a great win for me; 9 times out of 10, whatever I want to watch, I can get through Amazon. Amazon also does a better job of maintaining my library of past purchases and my wishlist than either of Netflix or iTunes. I didn't buy Prime to get the videos, but the videos aren't s small feature. Amazon executes streaming content as well as anyone else, and if you haven't checked them out (because you use Netflix, for instance) you should. Also: I don't think streaming media is at all out of place in Amazon's core offering. They started with books. Then digital media, just like Borders did. Then "everything else", which is what people seem to think of Amazon as now --- the Walmart of the Web. But: then Kindle (consolidating their reach into content), then streaming media, then publishing. It doesn't seem at all weird to me that the Internet's largest retailer of paid content would have a streaming media service; online content delivery would otherwise obsolete one of their original offerings.
  • swanson 13y ago
    I share your love for Amazon Instant. One of my biggest "time vs money" aha moments was when I realized I was spending 15-20min trying to find working streaming links to watch a 22min piece of content (not to mention plugging in my laptop over HDMI, making sure it was charged/plugged in). Spending a couple bucks a week on Amazon Instant for the season passes to shows I watch has more than paid for itself in terms of time. Additionally, I can download them for offline viewing on my Kindle Fire - instead of dicking around with ripping dvds or finding some software to convert from one video format to another.
    • Chronic26 13y ago
      Netflix does everything you just said, better.
• stugots 13y ago
  >There’s nowhere to go. Amazon has either destroyed or bought every competitor that has ever come close to its retail business. There's nowhere to go because people like you gave their money to Amazon. Congratulations! Shall I cry you a river now?
• RandallBrown 13y ago
  I buy enough stuff from amazon that I would spend way more than $100 a year on shipping anyway. Getting the free videos and kindle lending is just a nice little bonus. It's too bad Marco hasn't watched any videos on Amazon. They have some pretty good original shows. Betas is a funny caricature of the startup life we all live. It's cheesy, but relatively accurate and at times pretty funny. Alpha House is fantastic. It's like a comedy version of House of Cards.
  • eridius 13y ago
    > Betas is a funny caricature of the startup life we all live. It is? I tried watching the first episode and I couldn't even make it through the whole thing. That shows was the most cringe-worthy thing I've seen in a very long time.
    • RandallBrown 13y ago
      I actually thought the same thing as I watched it. Once I realized that the cringe was intentional and that it was poking fun at how ridiculous some "startup people" are, I actually started to like it. It's not my favorite TV show by any means, but I definitely enjoyed it.
      • eridius 13y ago
        Sure, it was intentional, but that doesn't make it any more watchable.
  • WalterSear 13y ago
    Prime's prepaid shipping deal is more and more a shell game these days, since the price of an object sold with Prime is often (usually?) as much as, or more expensive than, an identical one including 2-day shipping.
  • deletesystem32 13y ago
    Sounds positively hilarious…
• coldcode 13y ago
  Hmm all I get is an empty page. Yet another case of not being able to handle HN traffic?
  • TDL 13y ago
    Same here. I don't think it has to do with HN traffic since Arment's blog is often on the front page.
  • tptacek 13y ago
    Doubt it; his blog is a static site.
  • k-mcgrady 13y ago
    I got that for a few minutes too but it started working again.
  • palebluedot 13y ago
    That is an interesting coincidence, because around the time of your post, I was having a similar problem on a couple of other sites (techmeme and recode). The pages loaded OK, but were completely blank.
• LukeB_UK 13y ago
  Just getting a blank page. Google cache here: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.marco.org%2F2014%2F03%2F15%2Fworse http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%...
• Aoyagi 13y ago
  You know, when if I had problems like that, I would show my discontent with the only meaningful way: I'd stop using the service. Like I do it with Google (aside from Youtube, where I can't comment any more), Facebook and many other things a lot of people keep complaining about but never do the one thing that matters. STOP USING THE DAMN THING.
  • marshray 13y ago
    Sure, but now you have lost the primary benefit of the service. Some principles are definitely worth that total walkout. But modern companies are masters at figuring just how much they can annoy their customers without pushing too many of them to leave. The point of the article is that, for us customers, things get "worse".
• efremjw 13y ago
  so don't pay for it you moron
• res0nat0r 13y ago
  Meh. Of course this is "worse", it isn't something from the Gods Who Are Named Apple. > Amazon announced this week that it’s increasing the price of Amazon Prime from $80 to $100 per year, its first price change since its introduction in 2005. > This has not been a popular decision, to put it lightly, but most Prime customers — which I’ve been since 2005 — aren’t really going anywhere. There’s nowhere to go. Amazon has either destroyed or bought every competitor that has ever come close to its retail business. This sounds redundant. There is complaining about lack of competition, yet you still keep using the service (and are part of destroying that competition by using Amazon). The addon program has added items which would have never been on the site previously, so that is a win, I'm sure other items which just can't be shipped by themselves cost effectively have been removed, but times change. Streaming videos are also an addition that are a win for those who use it. Also your bill is going up from $6.66 a month (the cost of one beer) to $8.33 (the cost of 1.5 beers) a month for streaming video and 2 day shipping on tons of items, I don't see a ton to complain about. I'm surprise the price hasn't been jacked up years ago just due to increasing shipping costs across the board.
  • nuclearzenfire 13y ago
    I guess you missed: "Apple’s Maps is still worse and has fewer features than Google Maps" "Many of Apple’s other applications and services have suffered as well as they’ve spread themselves too thinly and competed on more fronts."
  • teach 13y ago
    > The addon program has added items which would have never been on the site previously, so that is a win This isn't correct. I have items in my purchase history that were not Add-On items and now are. Maybe some new items are here because of add-on, but it's also true that existing items used to be purchasable by themselves and now are only available as add-ons.
    • res0nat0r 13y ago
      Those items would have been deleted from the site without the addon program and not available anymore at all because it is probably no longer viable to ship them standalone, so the addon program is a is a net win.
• gcb0 13y ago
  Most civilized countries it is illegal to force one product with another. "married sale"
• adventured 13y ago
  "Showing this once is bad enough, but I see it regularly. Amazon is now annoying their best customers with desperate, obnoxious, tricky interstitial ads. (Of course, the checkbox is checked by default.)" Email Bezos. He takes this sort of thing very seriously, assuming you can present a rational argument. He won't reply directly, but he will see it. Jeff@
• TrainedMonkey 13y ago
  Worse for whom? This is actually wonderful for amazon shareholders as it demonstrates that amazon finally started to think about generating some serious cash surplus. All that said I have no amazon stock and I am a prime user, so I feel your pain.
  • jsolson 13y ago
    No, it doesn't. It will likely generate more free cash flow, though, allowing Amazon to invest in more things more quickly.
• dustcoin 13y ago
  I didn't see any mention of inflation. $79 in 2005 when prime was launched is equivalent to $96 today.
  • saosebastiao 13y ago
    People don't feel inflation the way that the CPI states it. The CPI's "basket of goods" is full of things that nobody cares about (like CD-ROMs, VCRs), and it is supposed to apply to the whole country, despite how diverse expenditure types can be (For example, I spend < $200/mo on transportation, but $2500/mo on rent, whereas when I lived in Cleveland it was nearly the opposite).
• hotpockets 13y ago
  I don't know where this guy lives, but prime has only been getting better. I've never seen a next day fee greater than 3.99. Same day delivery was added not too long ago and it costs 3.99. what unbalanced bs link bait.
  • gergles 13y ago
    Here, I found one for you with about 45 seconds of effort: http://snappy-app.com/s/show.php?pass=a550109d1fb9b47c65d29adb7d3b6049 http://snappy-app.com/s/show.php?pass=a550109d1fb9b47c65d29a... In my experience, many items are well over $3.99. "Local express delivery" and/or one-day shipping has always been $7.99 or higher in NYC. Prime's 'extra' features for even faster shipping are abysmal compared to what it used to be.
• hotpockets 13y ago
  I don't know where this guy lives, but prime has only been getting better. I've never seen a next day fee greater than 3.99. Same day delivery was added not too long ago and it costs 3.99. what unbalanced bs link bait.
• georgemcbay 13y ago
  Amazon could raise the price of Prime by 2x and I would still keep it. I buy so much shit through Amazon. I kinda wish I could spread my dollars out among more online retailers, but Amazon and Newegg are the only ones (based on lots of experience) who I can trust on the shipping front. If they say the package is going to be there on day XYZ, there is a 99.999% chance (in my experience) of it appearing on day XYZ. Of course this only applies when bought from them directly (or if 'fulfilled by Amazon', I try to avoid the 3rd party sellers who don't fulfill through Amazon as much as any other store I can't trust to get shipping right). Every other retailer I've dealt with online will do stupid shit like allow me to pay for 2 day shipping and then send the package out 3 days after I order it. Nail completely consistent and predictable shipping and I might buy stuff from you, otherwise you're at best 4th in line behind Amazon, Newegg and every brick and mortar store within 20 miles.
  • rlpb 13y ago
    > there is a 99.999% chance (in my experience) You have bought 100000 items, and only 1 didn't arrive on time? Really?
• nostromo 13y ago
  I think Amazon needs to get into the delivery business soon. Planet Money (an NPR show) created a t-shirt for fans and broke down the cost of each shirt. The biggest line item was shipping the finished shirts to customers. http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/12/13/250747279/episode-503-adding-up-the-cost-of-the-planet-money-t-shirt http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/12/13/250747279/episode-... Out of the total cost of $12.42, it cost $2.26 to ship. It cost $1.04 to accept payments. Compare these costs with the actual cost of the product: $0.60 for the cotton, $0.40 to spin the cotton into yarn, $1.00 for sewing. It seems unlikely that Amazon as it exists today will ever rival Walmart in volume and price since they avoid these last-mile delivery costs. Amazon should take on FedEx and UPS and try to disrupt the industry one key city at a time. They've already started delivering groceries in Seattle, so perhaps that's the first step to Amazon Delivery Service.
  • mgkimsal 13y ago
    Or just buy fedex.
  • mikeash 13y ago
    Those last-mile costs exist regardless. It's just that with Wal-Mart, the customer pays the costs in occasional lump sums to the local gas station and garage and very occasionally to the car dealership, rather than paying Wal-Mart. This is, of course, very much to Wal-Mart's advantage. Americans really hate to think about the cost of their cars and really love to drive them, so the perception will generally avoid factoring in the costs of driving to and from the store into the final prices. However, make a big enough difference and people will notice. If Amazon can offer a price that's lower than Wal-Mart's and deliver it for much less than it costs to drive to the store, people will notice. I don't see why they couldn't, eventually. Warehouse logistics are much easier when you don't have to deal with customers wandering around. Transport is subject to economies of scale like anything else, and it should be possible to make it much cheaper to use one truck to deliver to 100 houses than it costs to have 100 people individually drive back and forth. In short, I think I'm agreeing with you that delivery is where Amazon should concentrate if they want to compete in this area.
    • 13y ago
• zobzu 13y ago
  "They want to lock everyone into everything. Just like everyone else. And we’re all worse off for it." dat. every company mankind has produced. every ruler, too. Meh.
• RealGeek 13y ago
  I don't shop at enough Amazon to make prime shipping economically beneficial to me. In most cases free ground shipping is alright, and occasionally paying for 2 day shipping works out to be cheaper than $100 per year. I bought prime subscription anyway; not for shipping but for Amazon Instant Video. I won't be renewing it because Amazon Instant Video has been disappointing so far. There isn't enough content on Amazon Prime. Worse part, their Xbox app plays video in 360p resolution. I had similar experience with Netflix as well. Even after paying for several on-demand Video services, I have to use Torrents. Torrents offer the most convenience, it has the largest content library, best video quality and no stupid DRM & restrictions.
• blinkingled 13y ago
  While we are talking about Amazon Prime - there still seems to be a round about way to get Prime at the old yearly rate of $79 - even if you are a currently active Prime member. See this for details - http://www.reddit.com/r/deals/comments/20ckxa/you_can_lock_in_the_79_now_even_if_your_renewal/ http://www.reddit.com/r/deals/comments/20ckxa/you_can_lock_i...
• glanotte 13y ago
  I really couldn't disagree with this post any more. While I think he raises several points that are applicable to him, none apply to me. I have also been a prime subscriber since 2005 and it has paid for itself many times over in shipping costs alone. I have had bunk beds, computers, televisions all shipped second day for free. Rarely have I had issues, I would continue to pay for the service even if it was twice what it is now. And I do use the streaming service quite regularly. I have not had cable for quite some time so I use streaming services for close to 50% of my at home entertainment. Of that, I think the amazon library is one of the better available. At any rate, I have been and will hopefully continue to be a happy prime subscriber for at least another year.
• itsnotvalid 13y ago
  Just take a look at China with multiples of these. Many companies are using their influence to attack smaller companies and there is virtually no antitrust laws.
• rwmj 13y ago
  You should try not being a Prime subscriber. You get the interstitials appearing on every bloody purchase.
• mikeash 13y ago
  This is the key to the entire article: "There’s nowhere to go. Amazon has either destroyed or bought every competitor that has ever come close to its retail business." Without this, nothing else matters. If there are alternatives, then you keep using Amazon and Prime only if they're worth it. If Amazon ruins them, go somewhere else. Personally, I think it's completely wrong. I buy on Amazon because it's extremely convenient and because I can be pretty sure that they're going to offer a good price, likely the cheapest price available. However, any time I make a purchase that's more than $30 or so, I shop around. There is no shortage of other places to buy anything I've looked for. They usually have higher prices or worse service than Amazon and so I skip them. Occasionally they're better, and then I buy from them. There's no lock-in, there's no monopoly, there's nothing that makes people stick with Amazon besides better prices, better service, and inertia. If you don't like it, go somewhere else. It pains me to say this because that phrase is so overused, but it applies to Amazon well.
  • gingerlime 13y ago
    Shopping around, or going somewhere else is possible, but not that simple. Amazon created a pretty well-oiled system that makes competitor's lives very difficult. They usually offer the best price, a trustworthy service, they already store all your details, addresses, payment details etc. You know that if there's a problem, they'll sort it out. To shop around means: * figuring out if the site is trustworthy * trying to work out how much delivery would cost * registering for a new account * adding payment info * worrying about returns policy, lost deliveries and so on That's a pretty big hurdle in most cases, if you end up saving only a couple of bucks. better prices, better service and inertia are pretty huge. It feels a little like saying "there's nothing that makes people stick to Apple besides better UI, better software and the fact that all your digital media is already there" (ok, maybe it's not the perfect example, but pretty close).
    • mikeash 13y ago
      I agree with your characterization. That's my point, really. Amazon is preferable because it's better. It's not that there are no alternatives, it's that Amazon is the best one. That's a radically different situation, though. If Amazon makes their experience vastly worse, then everybody will leave. If there were no alternatives, then we'd be stuck. But we're not stuck, we're just using them because they're the best.
• ErrantX 13y ago
  Prime has hiked in price here in the UK too, with the bundled video. But. It's still worth it here IMO. In fact, Prime here in the UK is about a million lightyears ahead of the US because of the size of the country :) Free next day shipping is really brilliant for a heavy Amazon buyer like me. I was actually a Lovefilm user from before the Amazon buyout. I fondly remember the day they were primarily a physical rental service - the warehouse was not far from me and the postal service fantastic. Their catalogue was huge. Their online service has always been mediocre; about the same as Netflix, Sky and BT. But the combination of on-demand video and free next day is still worth it to me. After some research, IMO the combination of Sky (satellite TV with on-demand offering) and Amazon Prime (free next day delivery + on-demand video) is the best combination of price & coverage. I can get 99.9% of the things I want for reasonable price. Looking at the US service, it doesn't even compare :(
  • polshaw 13y ago
    Yes, the delivery situation is much better here, so much so that I can get free 2-day shipping to a shop a few minutes walk away (which is better in some ways as it doesn't require you to be in) since they have introduced collect+, making prime almost completely unnecessary for those near a collect+ location.
    • usethis 13y ago
      Same in Germany, price went up from 25 to 45 euros, but is definitely still worth it. Their video catalogue is not all that bad either, though lacking original language (non-dubbed) films. But then again, Netflix is not available in Germany so far.
• AndrewDucker 13y ago
  What I find frustrating is that when I go to the Amazon Video on my PS3 there doesn't seem to be a way to say "Just show me the free videos". It insists on mixing the free and paid ones. Which is rubbish when I'm just looking to see what's available to watch.
  • taeric 13y ago
    If you pick the "Prime Instant Videos" section at the top, it is exactly this, right? I don't think there is a way to "search" only for Prime videos. But if you are only wanting to browse, I am 90% sure that is covered. (Currently letting the kids watch stuff, so can't verify the section name.)
• yukichan 13y ago
  > because Amazon bundled in a video service nobody wants since 2011 I like Amazon video quite a bit actually.
• Meekro 13y ago
  Anyone who has a .edu email address can get Amazon student, which is free for 6 months and then 50% off forever. http://www.amazon.com/gp/student/signup/info?ie=UTF8&refcust=KX7MQVN6RADGKJHSKCQFDZEZZY&ref_type=generic http://www.amazon.com/gp/student/signup/info?ie=UTF8&refcust...
• Spooky23 13y ago
  I think the key assumption here that is wrong is that Amazon is this amazing retail outlet that you just need to use. I disagree, as someone who has been a huge customer. Why? Amazon prices suck, and have gotten increasingly less competitive over the years. The huge 3rd party vendor market on Amazon makes it very difficult to identify product that you want to. It on many cases as well. The whole premise of Amazon Prime was to push the uncertainty of shipping time out of online shopping out of the purchase equation. That experience is both being watered down and made more expensive. If they don't deliver on the premise/promise, there are literally thousands of competitors for just about any product. IMO, Amazon needs to stop patting themselves on the back and focus on the customer experience.
• cbsmith 13y ago
  Pretty sure NewEgg and crew have competitive options to Amazon...
• cbsmith 13y ago
  I feel in general there are some things getting muddled together that probably shouldn't. First, you have free services that are using various forms of the walled garden model to generate revenue. That's hardly surprising, new, and really anything worth complaining about. If you don't like it, go use that highly successful paid service that doesn't have the ad revenue. Oh wait... Then there is the thread about bundling all of Amazon's services through Prime. Prime is clearly a play to leverage all of Amazon's services in to one big compelling service. Since Amazon still provides their services at competitive rates without Prime, I'm not sure how anyone can gripe about this. Finally, there is the issue of Prime's price going up. I don't think it has anything to do with bundling other services, and everything to do with the program a) being successful (and you see this in competitors adopting similar services) and b) suffering from increased costs everywhere else. Guess what? No matter how much software, and the reverse inflation that comes with it, eats the world, the rest of the world still suffers from the usual challenges of increasing costs. In 2005, when Prime was launched, the price of first class mail has increased 32.4%, which is actually more than the 25% increase in Prime. Maybe there is no sinister agenda....
• jusben1369 13y ago
  And this year's Academy Award for Best First World Problems Post goes to................ Seriously, all of these companies compete for their customers. They're going to try and optimize their offerings to keep their customers. Sometimes they'll do a good job - like iMessage meaning no texting costs and locking people into the platform. Sometimes they'll do a sucky job, like Google + accounts. Half the time they'll be doing both simultaneously (iMessage and Maps) Those that irritate their customers over the long run will.......surprise surprise.....drive them to the better competitor platform. Both ways uphill in a snowstorm.
• api 13y ago
  http://www.redecentralize.org/ http://www.redecentralize.org/
• zygotic12 13y ago
  It's the end of the world I tell ya'll. Try using the inter web thingy.
• alexeisadeski3 13y ago
  Adjusted for inflation, isn't $80 in 2005 = $100 in 2014 Pretty sure it's darn near if not right on the money.
  • AgentConundrum 13y ago
    $79 in 2005 is apparently $94.62 in 2014. http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=79&year1=2005&year2=2014 http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=79&year1=2005&y...
    • galago 13y ago
      The CPI is an average based on a somewhat arbitrary bundle of goods which individually vary in price. People are used to the price of internet services declining over time (e.g. Google drive pricing), but Amazon prime incorporates things like shipping and movie royalties, which probably follow inflation similar to the CPI. Delivery companies surely increase in efficiency by adopting new technology, but they are also highly dependent on the cost of equipment, fuel, and labor. In the first few paragraphs, Marco only mentions the nominal cost, not the fact that the real price has been declining for eight years. Amazon probably went with $100 because its about right, which might be high or low for their bottom line, because consumers respond well to round numbers.
• vonnik 13y ago
  Amazon's upselling and cross-selling methods are good examples of dark patterns: design working to harm its users. http://darkpatterns.org/ http://darkpatterns.org/
• amjaeger 13y ago
  Amazon Prime instant video has Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, who could ask for more?
• ahi 13y ago
  Many times on amazon i have found the same products from their marketplace vendors that cost the same with shipping as the prime product with "free shipping". With the exception of books which nobody can compete with on price, and large expensive to ship items, prime isnt a veey good deal.
• DodgyEggplant 13y ago
  That's why the most common financial board game is called "Monopoly"
• SquareWheel 13y ago
  "This has not been a popular decision, to put it lightly" From all the forum comments/responses I've seen, Prime customers seem just fine with it. Maybe we read different news websites?
  • johnward 13y ago
    I thought the same thing. I haven't really heard any complaints. Most comments are more along the line of "Amazon increased Prime rates by $20. I hope they don't figure out how much more I would actually pay"
• codeulike 13y ago
  This article is not about Amazon Prime particularly, its about this quote: They want to lock everyone into everything. Just like everyone else. And we’re all worse off for it. Thats the core of the problem. Current monetisation models are based on lock in and annoying ads, and no decent alternative models seem to be on the horizon.
  • npsimons 13y ago
    If he really wanted to call out lockin, he'd be shouting about Apple's lockin from the highest parapet, as they are much worse than just about everyone else out there (Microsoft included!). But of course this is Marco, so I was surprised when he called out Apple at all. I'm an Amazon Prime customer who has experienced no lockin, so I'm not sure what Marco is going on about.
    • josteink 13y ago
      I'm an Amazon Prime customer who has experienced no lockin, so I'm not sure what Marco is going on about. As someone not using Amazon prime, this is one of the great thing about services and leasing stuff vs owning it. I know some of you swear to owning everything, but in this new brave world of platform lock-in, owning things becomes a prison in a much more literal way than the Buddhists ever imagined. Had I bought stuff from the Apple iStore, I would be stuck with DRMed media I wouldn't be able to consume on any other devices than those made by Apple. If I've first invested in this system, leaving it means my media will lose may stop being playable, turning worthless, and existing devices may not work correctly with other music download-services, etc. This vertical integration becomes a set of vertical pilars surrounding you on all sides. Leaving one thing means leaving it all behind. It has a very high cost. Very few people will do that unless they are presented with something truly incredible as a reward. And things like that comes along very rarely. If I on the contrary used Spotify to consume music I would have nothing to lose if I stopped subscribing to their service. Leaving for a better service is completely free of cost and would only present me benefits.
• tuke 13y ago
  Apparently I can only stream "The Americans" from Amazon. So there. (Would love to be told differently; and I don't steal media.)
• slr555 13y ago
  It is definitely worth noting that Amazon has a shareholder problem. Yes, they have devoured everything large and small but profit margins are razor thin. One of the most brilliant things that Jeff Bezos did was telling his early investors not to see a return for several years, but the market does and will demand returns. Given that Costco makes most of its profit on membership fees it will be interesting to see if the Prime increase is sufficient to both sustain or improve service levels and increase profitability.
• mindcrime 13y ago
  I mostly agree with the OP here, but I will say this: Prime Instant Video was the main reason I actually finally signed up for Prime. The shipping part is nice, but I don't actually order that much physical "stuff" from Amazon. With the price increase, I'm not sure if I'll stay a Prime member or not though. I do use Prime Video, but I'm not sure I use it enough to justify this price.
• product50 13y ago
  For me, I believe Netflix content is far superior to Amazon's. That doesn't prove anything. I think the main point which Marco is trying to make it is the inflexibility I as a consumer should have over choosing what I want and pricing the products accordingly. In some ways, it is similar to the wireless carriers post paid plans (until T-Mobile and AT&T recently changed this) where you paid the same monthly bill whether you get your phone or use a contract one. Consumers do not have option to opt out and pay for the entire bundle - thus also getting a far inferior product (Amazon Instant Videos) with a far superior one (2 day shipping). After this Prime price change and the fact that California purchases are taxed, I will not be renewing my Prime account. I have noticed that for most of my electronic/tech product shopping, I don't use Amazon anyways as I always have found things cheaper on competing sites (Adorama, Newegg, eBay or Apple). For the rest, I am fine with 4 day shipping instead of 2 day and, as Marco mentioned, for increasing number of Amazon products are now classified as Add-on products which is not cool as well..
• taeric 13y ago
  I can't say that I feel at all betrayed or ill treated in the Amazon increase. Maybe I would be more annoyed if my change did not go into affect Jan of next year, but as it is, I feel I've gotten more than a fair deal out of this. Of course, I actually use the heck out of the video service... As noted in the top thread, it really is quite nice.
• jimhart3000 13y ago
  There are some areas where Amazon definitely outshines Netflix, particularly children's programming, which honestly is 80% of the streaming video my family does - Amazon has all the Nickelodeon shows, which Netflix doesn't, which is a key edge for them. We recently went back to cable after cord-cutting 5 years ago, and prime video allowed me to drop Netflix and Hulu without much disruption to our viewing.
• ribs 13y ago
  Waste of my time. Little insight. Hyperbole.
• hristov 13y ago
  I have tried amazon instant video. People keep saying they love netflix, but netflix has a huge problem - they keep losing content all the time. So I used Amazon instant video to watch a show that i started watching on netflix and which disappeared from netflix soon thereafter. Amazon instant video is ok once you start watching, but their software is pretty bad and much much worse than netflix. Both amazon and netflix have to spread their software on many devices (such as computers, tablets, tv's and dozens of settop streaming devices) but it seems to me on every single device i have tried the amazon software is really annoying. I think a big part of the problem is that they are trying to sell both free instant video and their paid service.
• jrockway 13y ago
  Hah, I think I wrote exactly the same post a couple days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7392846 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7392846
• noonat 13y ago
  I see arguments about whether or not Amazon Instant Video is worth the money, but I think that's beside the point, isn't it? The important part of the discussion here is that Amazon Instant Video is not of interest to a large number of existing Amazon Prime subscribers, and they are likely paying the price for those who use it. It's a bit of a frustrating trend to see companies bundling new technologies like this, often at the expense of their loyal customers. I am an Amazon Prime subscriber, and will continue to be one, but I would love it if Amazon Instant video were a separate subscription that I could choose to pay for on its own merits.
• chipotle_coyote 13y ago
  The entire larger point of the post seems to be being missed, which isn't specifically about Amazon Prime at all. The point is that the big players in the online services space are competing in a "my way or the highway" fashion that ends up making everything a little worse. You may not agree with Arment's take on Amazon Instant Video -- personally, I'm a Prime customer but haven't been interested in Amazon's video service because it seemed to mostly overlap with Netflix and because until fairly recently getting it on my TV was more of a pain than I was willing to put up with, because I have an Apple TV and Amazon and Apple wouldn't cross the street to piss on each other if they were on fire. But Google Maps is no longer used for iOS's native map program in large part because Google wanted access to iOS customers Apple didn't want to give, and because of that iOS native maps are worse (and Google lost tens of millions of map users). Google is making all their services a little worse by trying to tie everything up with Google+. Amazon's refusal to support EPUB makes my Kindle a little worse. And so on and so on. HN readers seem to engage in a lot of debate over whether Google and Amazon are "better" than Apple when it comes to ecosystem lock-in. But all of those services only work with approved devices using approved players with approved content. What you're arguing about is the size of the cage you're in.
• hownottowrite 13y ago
  Ego, greed, absence (or loss) of vision... This is how products are "improved" over time. For the most part, it's a natural result of a process driven by the demands of growth and managed by psychopaths.
• fh973 13y ago
  This might have an interesting product positioning aspect: Amazon is calling the product "prime", but it is actually a way to save money. Hence, this is no premium product and there is no actual perception as a premium product by customers. Raising prices for an actual premium product wouldn't be an issue, but it seems actual product aspects and not naming counts.
• mightyuhu 13y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKU6fKhYpYw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKU6fKhYpYw
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• Kequc 13y ago
  Fair points aside I want to know why people still harp on Google+ at this point. > Google, the geek world’s undeserved, unquestioned darling for well over a decade, has made all of its core products worse by forcefully shoving Google+ into them. This sentiment is so frustrating to me. Yes, Google introduced an identity service so they no longer needed to tie everything to one of your Gmail accounts. This means you can now link your Gmail accounts together, this development is fantastic. Along with it comes bundled a really good social network application. Which, hello everyone, don't use it if you don't want it. Allowing everyone with Google accounts to talk to each other in a social medium and aggregate content relevant to their interests. Youtube integration was arguably a detriment to Google+ because it caused an influx of terrible content from late Google+ adopters. Youtube is a social product, Google+ was a newer much more powerful social product. Google had two social products so it merged them together. Inarguably (at least I don't see how you could argue) improving Youtube. What is an example of Google+ making anything worse? When will tech bloggers embrace Google's introduction of their identity service, they badly needed one and Google+ is amazing by any standard.
  • JoeAltmaier 13y ago
    I think the idea is, G+ is cluttering up the api for everything else. When in fact it gets used not at all, by almost everybody. So that's definitely worse, for almost everybody, doing almost anything with Google products. So, that's worse.
• JoeAltmaier 13y ago
  I approach it differently. I pay no attention to the plans, the memberships, the cards and the programs. I buy the best deal I can get on the spot. It costs some more, but honestly I'm not talking about buying a car or a house so its 'petty cash' purchases we're talking about. And I get my dignity back. No more struggling to satisfy some program requirements; no getting 2nd-rate tickets because of the 'miles' I think I need. I just buy what I want, and I pay for it. SO no not a 'member' of anything. This is a 1st-world solution I know. But if you can afford it, well I recommend it.
• lnanek2 13y ago
  Canceled my Prime membership just now. I don't want any videos, I consider them a waste of time, so they are upping prices to make me pay for offering me a waste of time easier. Greeeeeat.
• davidedicillo 13y ago
  I wonder what the cost of Google Shopping Express will be. I found myself choosing GSE over Amazon several time because on smaller items is cheaper and you can't beat same day delivery.
• abruzzi 13y ago
  I'm surely a rare exception. I don't buy stuff from Amazon (I might if they would tell me what carrier they were going to use before shipping. Where I live I have a different address for USPS than I do for other carriers.) But I did subscribe to Prime for the video. I'm not sure I will stick with them with the price increase, since I don't use them half as much as I use netflix.
• eli 13y ago
  "But I suspect the changes to overnight rates and Add-On Items would have been enough to keep Prime’s shipping costs sustainable, and these haven’t been the only changes." That's seems extremely speculative.
• yef 13y ago
  I don't think Marco knows what lock-in means. Not to mention, his concluding sentence is a string of absolutes that almost makes me think he's writing a satire of some sort.
• untilHellbanned 13y ago
  wow 258+ comments on so much minutiae. we are lame.
• taude 13y ago
  Marco's wrong. Weird, I know. But we use our Prime streaming all the time. It's a nice little extra.