I’m seeing some hostility towards you as a hiring manager which is rough, because hiring manager is not necessarily HR. It often means the manager of the person being hired. So the person on a specific team responsible for filling positions on that team. I’m not sure if you directly hire for your team or it’s an HR term in your case, but just adding this here in case it helps someone not be rude to a random person on the internet.

Also, as a person who hires people on my team (I don’t use the hiring manager title, but yea) it’s ridiculous how awful some resumes are. We don’t use hiring software, and I personally review all the resumes, but we are a small team so I totally understand why that would be used. The overlap of people who don’t like filling out the forms but who also want to be evaluated on who they are rather than what’s on their resume is a circle. I don’t want to dismiss anyone who doesn’t have a degree, but just because a degree isn’t on the resume doesn’t mean they don’t have one. Plenty of people leave off the years they worked at a specific job. I can assume months or years, but the form would help clarify that without wasting anyone’s time. Decisions have to be made somewhere and if people want to be judged by people in their field, then their full time job will likely not be hiring, so sometimes they use these forms for standardization purposes. I don’t like them either, but they are not this evil thing they are made out to be.

Good Omens on Amazon

Yea, understandable in both of those scenarios, but neither was the case at the time.

FB has been terrible in my experience. Craigslist is still ok if you can filter through the spam. I once contacted a seller on FB for an item that was 300 cash. We had set a time for pickup later that day and I went to the bank to get the cash. I messaged them when I was 10 minutes out and they told me not to come because they had already sold it. I totally understand selling it if I had not been communicating or had been ignoring their messages, but the last thing we had messaged each other was just a few hours prior while agreeing on a time. They didn’t even bother letting me know they had sold it. I would have just arrived at the place and they never would have shown. That, among a lot of other issues, and I won’t buy or sell on FB anymore.

I don’t know how I overlooked possible App Store purchase increases. Good point!

That’s fair, but it might also just be that they think taking a small loss on providing the watch will boost sales of the phone for people who wouldn’t have gotten it otherwise, will also increase market share, and look better in reporting. If you weren’t going to get a pixel watch, but one came for free and you use it, now you become a watch user for their stats. Additionally, it further entrenches you in the Google ecosystem and familiarizes you with the product so you might end up purchasing the next generation. Also, it helps normalize this product amongst your peers. Completely understandable for Google to possibly take a loss, not that they definitely are. I have no idea what the actual cost versus price looks like.

It seems like we just have a difference of opinions, so I’m happy to agree to disagree, but just so that you don’t think I ghosted, I’ll at least reply.

The word hate in this context was meant more in the sense of “haters”, like unnecessary disparagement for the sake of disparagement, which seems in line with your use of the word ridicule.

I’m not sure what you personally would have preferred, but I do not think that this is particularly vague, given the context and the market. If someone’s parent or grandparent walks into an Apple store and is confronted with the base model, and then a pro, a pro max, and a mini, I feel like they will get an overall sense of how those differ. You’ll likely get people saying, well, I don’t need anything too fancy, I just use it to take calls and maybe look some stuff up, so I probably don’t need a pro, but I definitely don’t want the mini version, so maybe I’ll check out the base model, and if that is still too small, I’ll check out the pro max, even though I might not need the Pro aspect, I might like the Max aspect. Mini and Max makes sense in this context as part of an overall spectrum that a layperson could understand. I guess the argument could be that they could give the screen size specifically, but then it would need a different name depending on local usage of the metric system or not. Also, a lot of people don’t understand that some electronics are measured on the diagonal, so that might also be confusing. S/SE Is probably The worst bit of their naming conventions, and they worked on that.

I think it’s pretty evident that the reason they did not choose pretzel rectangle was because those words are not very information dense, or relevant to the product. I feel like this is kind of proving my point?

Considering the market, I don’t think that most people need the general name of the device to have every single specification included. So long as each iteration is distinct, and understandable, people who actually care about what chip is in it can find the information readily. I don’t think most consumers care about a17 or M2, or bionic, or whatever else, and if anything that kind of technical jargon would be more obfuscating.

I get that this is mostly just a meme at this point, but it’s really not a bad naming system. The switch from plus to max was a little weird but it kept things from being iPhone pro plus. It goes

1. Item
2. Iteration
3. Tech specs
4. size

Which is more informative than a lot of other options. Not a diehard fan or anything, but the hate for this particular issue seems overblown.