I've emailed them, but don't have a reply yet. Presumably they're a bit inundated at the moment.
Took me a few attempts writing it before I managed an appropriately civil tone. Ended up venting my frustration cryptically instead, by including a pic of the Enterprise D in the footer.
We're definitely running. I already have most of our years worth of data imported into Linear. I was just curious how badly they were planning on ripping people off.
The export was mostly painless. Linear doesn't have direct support for a migration from Pivotal, so you have to use their CLI tool for the import, which relies on their API. My initial attempt failed because they wouldn't allow more than a set number of requests per hour. An email to their support later and I was able to get this raised to accommodate the amount of data we have. I haven't dug deep, but there weren't any options presented to bring comments or attachments in, which is unfortunate as some of that historical context is important for us.
I'm also scoping out Shortcut. Shortcut's interface feels a bit more familiar when coming from Pivotal. Their import process is even less polished though. For Pivotal you have to send an email to them, they reply with a template .csv that you have to ETL your data into.
There is nothing on their website I can find about this and they are still offering the other plans on their pricing page. What a poorly executed change.
The city of Seattle has their own version of this data that doesn't charge you to to see additional project details, contact information, permit schedules and more: https://web8.seattle.gov/sdci/shapingseattle/buildings
I believe the point was they are offering the reduced price as-is. What they aren't offering is a higher priced variant where have you have the right to repair.
Right, but they're never going to sell the "you will own everything and we will be pissed" version of the tractor. Because the value to the consumer for being able to repair what they own is less than the control premium that companies are willing to pay in order to lock people into branded repair. Furthermore, providing you the actual repairability often requires re-engineering the product to support it. Like, I don't think most people would pay just to have, say, Apple get rid of the iPhone's Face ID lock and nothing else. They want an actually repairable phone.
A similar problem happens with advertising. Theoretically I should be able to pay for first-party ad block from every site and social platform I visit. In practice the value that a larger ad inventory commands is always greater than the small fractions of people who would pay X/mo for an ad-free version of that service, minus however much it costs to maintain the ad-free option. Why serve a niche that cuts into your bottom line?
The few exceptions to the above that I can think of largely prove the rule:
* Framework and Fairphone are able to market repairable phones and laptops. In this case, they aren't actually charging a repairability premium over an existing product, they're just selling into higher-end markets. Repairability is built into both the product and the pricing in ways that aren't separable - you wouldn't be able to sell a cheaper Framework that isn't repairable.
* YouTube sells ad-free access, but this is mainly because online video ad revenue has cratered badly. Advertising is a moat that keeps YouTube out of profitability, not in it.
* Twitter tries to sell ad-free, except it's "less ads", and mostly exists because Elon desperately needs to justify how much money he spent on buying the crack factory he was addicted to.
Whether or not repairability commands a premium or having everything locked down comes with a discount is immaterial. Consumers are not in a position to actually realize said discount or pay said premium. Because it's not a matter of consumer choice. It's a matter of control. We (the MBAs) put shit in the product you were going to buy anyway, and it isn't immediately causing you to run to the hills, so we win.
Components are much more likely to fail from being used consistently than due to the sheer passage of time. I would take a car that has been kept untouched in a garage over many years before I would take its equivalent model year that had been driven 300,000 miles.
For example, rear and side window motors tend to fail first because the mechanical components are used the least, become more full of dust, the rubber tracks harden, motors work harder and burn out.
The garage will help a lot but when a vehicle is on the road for 10-20yr issues specific to it's service that can't easily be foreseen or simulated in tested pop up.
Author here. As sigden mentioned, ES6 Proxies can not be transpiled. That is one reason why they are not yet commonly used. You can find out more about them here: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Web/JavaScript/Referen... (They are pretty awesome).
