Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

yeahyeahbird t1_iujv8ew wrote

In the workplace, pen and paper. Going "paperless" makes a lot of things way more complicated in working situations. I've seen hundreds of thousands of dollars sunk into designing systems to go wireless or paperless and it has made life infinitely more complicated for everyone involved and the vastly superior solution would just be pen and paper.

6

intercerebellar t1_iujv942 wrote

I used to install irrigation systems, and the old impact style heads (what many call "rain bird" heads) had vastly superior lawn coverage.

Sadly most models of these got phased out in the late 90's and only a few remain, but any time a large lawn had dry spots I'd put these in, and a couple weeks later it would be gone.

2

Apocryph761 OP t1_iujvjbl wrote

For me, plasma TVs. I am convinced the reason nobody makes them anymore isn't because of the weight, or because of energy consumption.

It's because if a plasma TV ever broke, it's because you broke it. Products built to last forever just aren't good business sense.

Got a 48" Panasonic Plasma TV back in 2008. Paid £500 for it brand new, state of the art back in the day as 720p "HD-ready". It's still my main TV now. Never once had a problem with it.

Same story with others I've talked to. Lots of people who switched from Plasma to LED, only to find they've had to replace their LED TVs after 3-5 years. Some not even as long as that.

I have a 4K gaming monitor for my computer, and I'm sure on paper it's a million times better than the old Plasma. But for the life of me, I'm just not seeing it.

1

Apocryph761 OP t1_iujx8i4 wrote

Replying to yeahyeahbird (#406,621)

This is the way.

I spent 10 years working in Optics in the UK. The NHS will cover the cost of eye tests (and in some cases, spectacles too) if you meet certain criteria (mostly age-related, but welfare recipients get it too).

Until just before the pandemic, NHS claims were done on something called a GOS1 form. You just gave your details and the reason for the NHS entitlement, signed at the bottom, and away you go. Processing these forms through Primary Care Trust (PCT) was a doddle, too. Honestly the hardest bit was ensuring the forms were filled correctly.

Now? Now it's all digital! (:

You have to get an iPad. Log into the website that's probably down (outage is hilariously common), and slow at best. Confirm details with the patient. Click through a number of pages in doing so, waiting for the loading times. Send the form digitally to the Optometrist and hope the form actually appears on their end (it's not a given that it will, and if it doesn't then you have to do everything all over again!), have them sign at the end of the test, then shove the iPad in the patient's face again to have them sign to confirm they've had the eye test. Then the form is digitally sent to PCT for processing, where it will probably get rejected for some BS reason and the clinic doesn't get paid anyway.

They tell us this is better. This is the future.
And they wonder why people are quitting optics in large numbers.

2

yeahyeahbird t1_iujz337 wrote

Replying to Apocryph761 (#407,541)

The amount of wasted budget is ridiculous. My boss was on a conference call about it once and the numbers were staggering. They had to get tablets for all the employees, purchase the app that closest fit what we were doing, but it wasn't really what we needed at all so we had to pay developers to adjust it and IT guys to tweak it and work with the people using it to relay information back to the people who could "improve" it and it was implemented without any kind of trial period or testing.

It set us back months and the cost was in the millions by the time it was usable, and even then, it was slower and more basic and less detailed, so nobody had enough information to be helpful at all when you had to look at it.

All this was to generate information that had to be printed and mailed out, when a box of ballpoint pens could have filled out the same paperwork.

2

Martipar t1_iuk06vl wrote

The compact disc.

I buy CDs, rip to FLAC for convenience but there is an audible difference when compared to MP3, I have some compilation albums in MP3 format (given away as samplers) and I know when listening to my music on shuffle if i've been served the version on the compilation album or the one i've ripped myself, it's just a bit off, it's mostly from hearing both songs a lot.

I used to listen to music via pretty shit earphones (usually Philips sport earphones which have an earclip though i've had all sorts over the years) now I use a pair of AKG Y500 headphones, my headphones, initially, didn't sound much better than my old headphones but going back to my old headphones is like listening via a speaker in a dustbin, all the faults are much more evident.

It's the same with media formats, once upon a time in the dark ages of 256MB MP3 players i ripped to 64K WMA files and they sounded fine, they sounded roughly like the CD did in my portable CD player with it's 1 or 2 watt speakers. However, going back to them after ripping to FLAC was horrendous and I felt embarrassed that i used to tolerate such bollocks.

So while I probably could take a song I was unfamiliar with, do a side by side comparison with and hear the differences immediately I know that I could hear both over a long period of time and start to notice the differences. Usually it's in the rumble of the drums or the wash of a cymbal but it's definitely there even if it's in he fringes of the sound rather than the core.

3

i_am_out_of_pie t1_iuk5wof wrote

SQL > NoSQL for the vast majority of applications that have to be maintained long term

2