Skype: Over 750 Million Wasted Minutes Today. Can We All Switch To Google?

[OldChinaHam]

I've just wasted about 1.5 - 2 minutes reading this bs...

Actually, I really do not believe it is.

Far too infrequently do we consider the implications of not making sure that software which is used by billions of people around the world, conform to the principle that the least amount of time should be wasted on needless promotion of commercial products.

This is why so many of us are beginning to love opensource software.

We do not get mounds of ads and crazy useless software we do not need

Piled on top of what we do need.

Only my opinion, naturally

You don't seem to like any Microsoft products. That is fine. Why do you use them. Why don't you use other brands and stop complaining about Microsoft? Your posts on ThaiVisa forums complaining about Microsoft will not fix them for you. I don't think anything will.

Of course you could be posting just to increase your post count or create useless threads. Bike paths; tea; old houses; Microsoft....

MSPain

Because I am very interested in the opensource phenomenon that is upon us and rising in force.

Because Microsoft is also very interested in opensource, which they know is the wave of the future, which they must catch this time.

Because I like many things about using Microsoft products.

I do not care about my post count when I make these posts, and if I cared about my post count at this moment, then I would be elsewhere , submitting music I love to various threads.

I care about bike paths because I love to see families out enjoying nature on the paths, and so I do not consider the talking about bike paths to be a waste of time, if it is something that we like to discuss about Thailand.

Tea, same goes, it is a wonderful experience to be able to sit back with a cup of fine quality Thailand tea, look out at the Thailand Jungle, listen to the Thailand Jungle birds, and type on my computer using Microsoft-Opensource Software, without the waste-Manhours-time tommy rot options to un-click.

Old Thai Houses are beautiful, especially on the edge of the Jungle, and are interesting for people to walk by on a Sunday, when said people get out of the noisy city, to enjoy the jungle and the mountain in Chiang Mai.

I love computers and computer technology, linux, Microsoft products when done right, Apple products, and much more. And I like reading about them, and sometimes discussing them.

Edited July 25, 2013 by OldChinaHam

[bangkockney]

First, your maths is wrong:

( 5e8 / 6 ) minutes is ~ 158.5 years

Second, if you acquired a product with large user base wouldn't you be cross-promoting so you could, for example, increase your search share?

Further, Skype is provided for free and is feature-rich.

Last, are there not more important issues to boil your blood over?

[OldChinaHam]

First, your maths is wrong:

( 5e8 / 6 ) minutes is ~ 158.5 years

Second, if you acquired a product with large user base wouldn't you be cross-promoting so you could, for example, increase your search share?

Further, Skype is provided for free and is feature-rich.

Last, are there not more important issues to boil your blood over?

The maths is tricky. You have two separate groups to consider, those who waste 10 seconds which is everyone during the initial decision phase, then for the approx 15 percent that make the wrong decision, they need to come back and waste another 10 minutes rectifying the result of their first error.

Second we are only concerned with lost Man and Woman time, not cross-pollination of same. Also increasing search share is not to the advantage of the consumer group which is us. So, only the lost time to us is of concern to us.

Skype is not free, and Google is getting more feature-rich fast.

I am not concerned with boiling my blood, that is over at the cast iron skillet topic where boiling is of more concern. And, this wasted time is of direct and indirect concern to me, very much so.

This is why I started a topic about it.

Thank you.

[bangkockney]

The maths is not tricky. It's primary school arithmetic.

I gave you the answer for decision time for all users, which you got wrong, and haven't acknowledged.

Shall I do it all for you?

15% @ 10 mins ~ 1426 years

100% @ 10 seconds ~ 158 years

Can you add the two together?

Ignoring the fact that your premise is flawed (as benefits outweigh cost to the individual).

[OldChinaHam]

The maths is not tricky. It's primary school arithmetic.

I gave you the answer for decision time for all users, which you got wrong, and haven't acknowledged.

Shall I do it all for you?

15% @ 10 mins ~ 1426 years

100% @ 10 seconds ~ 158 years

Can you add the two together?

Ignoring the fact that your premise is flawed (as benefits outweigh cost to the individual).

It is not that I did not acknowledge it. I did acknowledge it. And it is tricky.

This is why I was waiting for you to do it for me. Again, thank you.

Also, if my premise is flawed, then why should we ignore it?

And, why should we pay for more costs than are warranted? That is:

Why be forced to pay for a Bentley with a plastic HulaHoop stuck on as an extra hood ornament,

When you can otherwise ride in a Bentley with a Hula Hoop girl inside riding beside you for free with no hoop?

This is the real implied question I was posing in this topic, besides of course wasted Man and Woman hours.

We should be able to have the Hula Hoop Girl, the ride in the Bentley, without any need to pay for an extra hoop stuck on, unless it is a closed source software that we do not have control over, and we are forced to either use the one with the hoop, or use nothing at all if we want to communicate with Skype customers, using a different network, such as SIP, for example.

What Say You Now?

Edited July 25, 2013 by OldChinaHam

[bangkockney]

A 10s cost is warranted, vs, in your terms, the cost of getting all your Skype contacts to switch to another service.

What is 10s as a fraction of an individual's lifetime? Even if prompted many times over, what significance does it have? ~ 0

Remember you're at the computer anyway when prompted, you haven't sat down to use the computer exclusively to update Skype.

I could construct a similar argument that says since I need to wait for a given programme to load, it's a waste of time and therefore computers are inherently bad. You wouldn't accept that argument would you?

Is using Excel bad because it has a load time cost? Or does it save time vs computing by hand and therefore the load time cost is insignificant? And Libre Office?

[OldChinaHam]

A 10s cost is warranted, vs, in your terms, the cost of getting all your Skype contacts to switch to another service.

What is 10s as a fraction of an individual's lifetime? Even if prompted many times over, what significance does it have? ~ 0

Remember you're at the computer anyway when prompted, you haven't sat down to use the computer exclusively to update Skype.

I could construct a similar argument that says since I need to wait for a given programme to load, it's a waste of time and therefore computers are inherently bad. You wouldn't accept that argument would you?

Is using Excel bad because it has a load time cost? Or does it save time vs computing by hand and therefore the load time cost is insignificant? And Libre Office?

Of course I think I understand and tend to agree with your argument, especially when you refer to Libre Office.

I am mostly thinking not of me the individual wasting 10s of time, once, but the total damage of lost productivity added up over all individuals impacted by poor performing software and poor thinking when adding these "choices" on Skype.

This can really drag down efficiency for business and the economy, something which we should pay more attention to, if we want our economies to become more efficient. I am fairly sure that many economists would agree with my argument.

What say you now?

[OldChinaHam]

A 10s cost is warranted, vs, in your terms, the cost of getting all your Skype contacts to switch to another service.

What is 10s as a fraction of an individual's lifetime? Even if prompted many times over, what significance does it have? ~ 0

Remember you're at the computer anyway when prompted, you haven't sat down to use the computer exclusively to update Skype.

I could construct a similar argument that says since I need to wait for a given programme to load, it's a waste of time and therefore computers are inherently bad. You wouldn't accept that argument would you?

Is using Excel bad because it has a load time cost? Or does it save time vs computing by hand and therefore the load time cost is insignificant? And Libre Office?

Of course I think I understand and tend to agree with your argument, especially when you refer to Libre Office.

I am mostly thinking not of me the individual wasting 10s of time, once, but the total damage of lost productivity added up over all individuals impacted by poor performing software and poor thinking when adding these "choices" on Skype.

This can really drag down efficiency for business and the economy, something which we should pay more attention to, if we want our economies to become more efficient. I am fairly sure that many economists would agree with my argument.

What say you now?

[flashysite]

You just wasted 10 seconds of my time reading 1st para