stfnfhrmnn

I've got one specific example, where I know the quality has changed. I've bought the same modelf of sofa about 10 years apart. Ikea has done some serious value engineering. Both sofas look very similar from outside, but they are in fact very different. The newer frame appears to be somehwhat lighter, yet sturdier at the same time. The cushions however are now lighter and far less comfortable. They obviously spend a lot of effort into making everything more efficient and cost effective - some of it at a slight cost in perceived quality.

I don't know of a website that compares audio quality specifically, but I feel this still is the greatest impediment when it comes to ANY video or audio conference system. I get the impression that there is no system out there that allows for decent 'full duplex' audio, equivalent to a normal conversation where both sides might interrupt each other at times. I think this comes down to

  a) background noise reduction
  b) echo/feedback cancellation
  c) input latency

I assume input latency may not be such a big issue anymore, with ultra low latency codecs (presumably) being widespread now. Feedback cancellation is a problem if any side of the conversation is using speakers, rather than headphones. I guess chat services meet at the lowest common denominator, making fairly conservative assumptions and often cutting audio aggressively.

My personal list, best to worst, in respect to my requirements above:

  Google Hangouts
  Jitsi
  WhatsApp audio call
  Skype

Sibelius and Finale used to be the industry standard, but there is a new kid on the block for music notation: Steinberg Dorico

Other new tools like Staffpad are amazing, but they serve a somewhat different market.

I also use a Unique-per-service email address with Paypal, and I noticed that Paypal actually passes on that email address to the retailer when I pay with Paypal. I receive order confirmation emails (from those retailers) and quite a few unwanted newsletters to my unique paypal address now.

I have no idea what Paypal is trying to achieve by passing on this fairly personal piece of data. I always have to enter a separate email address with the retailer anyway, and because of this scheme, those two of course never match.

I was wondering that. There is more to retaining talent than just fixing the review system. If the company changes their product strategy dramatically and engineers aren't happy with that, money won't help. Surely the whole idea how Adobe implements CC is flawed. It'll discourage product innovation (customers already locked in anyway), dripfeeding features does suffice. Buying other products and companies to increase potential market and customers is the only way left to increase revenue. Which engineer wants that?

Just looking at Lightroom (because I'm a customer), there appears to have been a lot of change over the years. Highly visible engineers and managers lost to do their own thing, Spotify and other companies.

The about screen lists engineers involved, that has changed dramatically as well. I don't know how engineering is set up at Adobe, but it certainly looks like they have outsourced quite a bit of that product.

It will probably take several years for Adobe to realise that their license rental scheme was a shot in the foot...

Wow, very nice.

The difference between the spheres and the cones is not quite obvious, but it doesn't appear to matter.

Have you looked at some crowdfunding options, like seedrs, crowdcube or others? Those could work supplementary to 'traditional' investors.

Another simple fix: tell us who you are. The contact page is woefully generic and anonymous. Glasswire appears to be a company, more than one person. Where are you based? What's your background? Funding?

looks good!

Is there some functionality to save and resume later (from end-customer perspective)? Would be nice if I could give out unique URLs to a form, which then autosave anything entered there.