evdawg

I didn't know about this. Still, I was expecting a little longer of a communication with support-- 'escalation' or at least 'the ask' should have been done before the public shaming, in my mind. All I see now is a cordial and polite explanation from Instacart.

Lets get real: outside of two $8 charges that he's not even asked to be reversed, this is exactly the same service that he describes as "great" in the same post.

The author didn't even ask for what he wants: his year of free delivery under $35.

I'm sure Instacart would have no problem at the very least waiving two $8 fees.

My advice to people calling into customer service departments? Just ask. The person on the other line can't read your mind. If you ask for what you want, you'd be surprised at how often you'll get it.

I think this is another case of "Failures were justified and assigned an appropriate cause". In reality, the author didn't have the discipline to balance work and entertainment. This sounds like tantamount lazyness to me; who doesn't want to be having "fun" all the time instead of work or school?

I have difficulty putting it into words but this sounds like one big excuse blaming society/parents/school for his failures rather than himself, which is where they lie.

I think the big difference is that thumb tacks are not a toy. These are a toy. They're marketed as a toy. They're given to children as a toy.

This is a spectacular move by Microsoft because it takes the main feature from Nintendo's upcoming WiiU: a touch-screen for games.

Nintendo has released an entirely new system, while Microsoft has kept up with Nintendo's innovation by using devices you already own.

We contacted 37signals when they originally announced their intention to sell Sortfolio. Having bought and sold sites before we asked for some pretty standard information about traffic, revenue, etc. These questions weren't answered and we did not pursue the matter further.

I'm not surprised the site wasn't sold; the "business" of buying and selling sites isn't exactly very "37signal"-y.

With a price now available it's much more transparent for everyone involved; I hope though that this time they are able to accommodate due diligence.

Rails needs to do a release solely focused on speed. Dropping 1.8.7 is a good step for a lot of people, but I feel Rails itself has gotten slower since 2.x and I know a lot of people would agree with me.

I do a lot of work in CodeIgniter as well as Rails (w/ Ruby 1.9.2 in production), and there's no doubt that my CodeIgniter apps on slower servers with little-to-no deliberate optimization are faster than my Rails apps.

For just one particular example, I have found rendering partials in Rails are such a point of poor performance that I have often found myself avoiding it.

There's this red herring (and a pet peeve) that making the framework 'less bloated' by dropping components or making them optional equals performance. You'll even see a comment on this blog post asking which components to remove to improve performance! It doesn't work that way when the core components of Rails remain slow.

While the speed of Rails had Ruby 1.8.7 to blame for a long time, now that it's being dropped I think 4.0 has a unique opportunity to optimize for 1.9 and make a big difference to the overall speed of the framework.