On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:41:56 -0000, "tim...."
wrote:


"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
m...
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:42:20 -0700 (PDT), geraldthehamster wrote:

I cherish the vain hope that if enough of us refuse to use them,
they'll start putting sufficient numbers of staff on the tills. Fat
chance. Blatant example of putting cost-cutting before customer
service.

Quite agree. After the dreadful experiences of trying to use the ones
in Tesco I just refuse to use them anywhere. They are just so slow,
I'd rather spend the time in a checkout queue relaxed and day
dreaming than getting annoyed at a machine that can't keep up or just
takes too long to respond to each item scanned.

Its not so much the machines as the complete planks who try to use them
causing huge clues. The ones in our local Morrisons work almost 100%
properly, its the thicko's who use them.

I don't agree.

The ones in Tesco don't work well, and as someone who's day job is similar
products, I can see exactly what is wrong with them (rather than with me!)

tim



Tesco's are rubbish if you want to use your own bags.

the B&Q ones - the technique is to stuff up the first item and get the
girl to come and assist you with the rest of it.
--
http://www.halloweenfreebies.co.uk
http://www.holidayunder100.co.uk

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:34:09 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

... they have the droid voice that tells you do insert your debit card
AFTER you have already done so,

Probably borrowed the programming from those dreadful chip 'n pin
machines. You know the ones that say "Please insert card" you do so,
wait several seconds then it says "card inserted too early", you then
have to tell the checkout operator who has to reset the system.
Absolute crap, it shouldn't matter when in the process a card is
inserted, if it's to early just wait FFS, it should need the reset or
the card to be removed and reinserted. The prompts on some have been
changed but no all.

Where it is and is still telling you to take your receipt about 5
seconds after you've done so and set off on your way to the exits.

Yep, I some times feel they have less processing power than a ZX81,
they are so slow and labourious.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:10:02 +0000, Clint Sharp wrote:

This requirement to "weigh" items that don't need weighing

The requirement to weigh everything is to stop you nicking stuff, the
machine knows how much an item should weigh and it stops until it can
see that weight on the platform before you can scan the next item.

So I have to handle each object twice? Once to scan and place on
platform, then again to take off platform and place on conveyor so I
can put the next item on? This is progress?

course, the obvious scam is to show it a cheap tin of own brand product
(beans for instance) and put the equivalent weight premium brand product
in the bag.

I suspect the Tesco ones are (trying) to be a bit more clever. They
complain about "unexpected item" and there are what look like little
cameras looking at the conveyor. I suspect it can tell the difference
between Tesco Value beans and Heinz...

Which then begs the question why not just have a conveyor onto which
you place the goods, that then trundles the goods through a scan/ID
area? Conveyor could have regular marks down it on which each item
should be (more or less) placed.

I'm all for technology and it helping but I detest technology for
technologies sake or technology that is "the tail wagging the dog".
Zooming windows and animations as they are changed/opened/closed look
pretty for the first couple of times but then just become a PITA as
you have to wait for them. Or lists that "helpfully" move about,
normally just as you are about to click on the one you want. Or
scrolling that doesn't scroll the contents of the sub-window the
mouse is over.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article ,
Frank Erskine wrote:
Both the Tesco and Sainsbury ones round here are fine.

What's the alleged advantage of an automated checkout? Clearly it
does away with a humanoid (although they still need to be such around
for, say, alcohol purchases). In RL they seem to be much slower than a
checkout manned by real people. Is it just that most purchasers hate
the idea of having to speak to a real life human cashier? If so,
that's very sad.

It's even sadder that the average checkout person would rather be doing
absolutely anything other than serving customers. I can understand that,
of course - must be one of the most boring jobs ever invented. But at
least a machine doesn't find the need to chat to someone in front of me
when all I want to do is get out of the damned place and on with my life.

--
*I don't have a solution, but I admire your problem. *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:23:58 +0000, Frank Erskine wrote:

What's the alleged advantage of an automated checkout? Clearly it
does away with a humanoid (although they still need to be such around
for, say, alcohol purchases).

One humanoid can look after 4 or 6 self op checkouts, instead of just
the one they are sat at. It's pure profit motivation from the store,
it's nothing to do with customer service. Proper customer service
would have someone to unload your trolly, someone scanning, and
someone packing(*) into store (or your bags) and then back into the
trolly.

Which makes more profit? 1/4 of a person per checkout or 2 or three
people per checkout?

(*) And I mean trained in packing, not just stuffing things into the
bags willy nilly but placing neatly and tidyly in general product
categories and taking into account the robustness of the goods. Fruit
'n veg in one bag, hard heavy things at the bottom soft 'n squidy at
the top. Dairy/chilled in another again sorted by robustness, dry
goods another, bread and other soft goods another etc.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:45:43 -0000, dennis@home wrote:

The second set of scales are the collection area.
Its supposed to stop you putting stuff on without scanning it.

If I wanted to nick summat why would I bother taking it out of the
trolly?

Different design of self op checkout. They do have the small ones
that have a basket trough, scanner, bagging area but on the big
ones
designed to take trolly loads the "bagging area" is more like 8
foot
from the the scanner.

The ones with two conveyers?

Not seen twin conveyor ones. Just a basket trough, scanner, conveyor
to bagging area or basket trough, scanner, bagging area.

The other sang is that you then have a trolley load of goods you have
paid for, all on their tod 8' from where you are just waiting for a
tea leave to pass by... And as you are doing the (slow) scanning and
making payment you then have to bag and load the trolly, a task that
you do at the same time as a checkout operator is doing the scanning.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Dave Liquorice
wibbled on Tuesday 27 October 2009 10:19

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:10:02 +0000, Clint Sharp wrote:

This requirement to "weigh" items that don't need weighing

The requirement to weigh everything is to stop you nicking stuff, the
machine knows how much an item should weigh and it stops until it can
see that weight on the platform before you can scan the next item.

So I have to handle each object twice? Once to scan and place on
platform, then again to take off platform and place on conveyor so I
can put the next item on? This is progress?

Indeed. The logic of this escapes me. If you want to nick it, don't scan it.
And wrap it in foil to fool the nickage scanner by the door.

course, the obvious scam is to show it a cheap tin of own brand product
(beans for instance) and put the equivalent weight premium brand product
in the bag.

I suspect the Tesco ones are (trying) to be a bit more clever. They
complain about "unexpected item" and there are what look like little
cameras looking at the conveyor. I suspect it can tell the difference
between Tesco Value beans and Heinz...

That makes more sense - spotting the extra item in the bag that's not been
scanned. I suspect however, that the cameras are just doing video recording
in case they want to investigate someone later - or just do a random survey
of people fiddling the system.

snip

Or lists that "helpfully" move about,
normally just as you are about to click on the one you want. Or
scrolling that doesn't scroll the contents of the sub-window the
mouse is over.


I hate hover-activated drop down web menus. That disappear because you moved
your mouse 1px off the valid items 3 submenus down. Or the lists that are
too tall for the screen... Simple answer - they should be click activated
menus and bloody stay there while I wibble my mouse about until I click
again.

--
Tim Watts

This space intentionally left blank...

On 26 Oct, 18:19, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Has anyone got any idea how these Devil's scrotums work?

In theory you scan the item and place it on the scales.

The scales reject the item. You try again. The ******* thing then allows 4
items through before rejecting the 5th item and freezes up. And never try to
buy dowel using one unless you want large dowel and intend to shove it up
the managers arse when the machine goes wrong.

Not a bad setup.

No tills open and 3 staff watching the 4 self checkout machines. Make that
two staff available when one of them went to find someone that could allow
me to buy my items.

All I need is the correct weight of a nice drill that exactly matches a
large bag of nails, swap the barcode over and I will be even with the
*******s.

Adam

There is an old Scottish adage - 'kid on you're daft and you'll get a
free hurl'.

I suggest you take the initiative on that basis.

Stand in front of the machine with an intended purchase in one hand
and fifty pence piece prominently displayed in the other.

Gaze blankly at the machine. It will help if you have reading specs on
the tip of your nose, are gazing over the top of them, and if your
tongue is hanging out in the attitude commonly known as lolling.
Indulging in an occasional and sudden twitching motion may also help.

When the assistant shows you how to do the first item, don't then
eagerly proceed with the other items yourself. Maintain silence,
retain the expression of blank incomprehension and slowly nod your
head. This will give them the encouragement that with kindness and
careful training you might learn simple tasks.

Repeat the above until they've processed everything for you.

When they've bagged everything up, and sorted out the payment, you
should, of course, thank them profusely. In addition, lighten their
day by leaving them with something to think about. For example, try
asking, in cultured and educated tones, "Isn't it a pity what happened
to Marie Antoinette?" and then walking off. A backward glance will
probably confirm that they are standing there with a expression of
blank incomprehension, with their tongue hanging out in an attitude
commony known as lolling.

After sufficient similar experiences, add 'method acting' to your CV.

Toom

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:23:58 +0000, Frank Erskine wrote:

What's the alleged advantage of an automated checkout? Clearly it
does away with a humanoid (although they still need to be such around
for, say, alcohol purchases).

One humanoid can look after 4 or 6 self op checkouts, instead of just
the one they are sat at. It's pure profit motivation from the store,
it's nothing to do with customer service. Proper customer service
would have someone to unload your trolly, someone scanning, and
someone packing(*) into store (or your bags) and then back into the
trolly.

Which makes more profit? 1/4 of a person per checkout or 2 or three
people per checkout?

(*) And I mean trained in packing, not just stuffing things into the
bags willy nilly but placing neatly and tidyly in general product
categories and taking into account the robustness of the goods. Fruit
'n veg in one bag, hard heavy things at the bottom soft 'n squidy at
the top. Dairy/chilled in another again sorted by robustness, dry
goods another, bread and other soft goods another etc.

That is the only virtue of self scanning to me. At least a humanoid has not
bashed all your goods to oblivion whilst scanning it!

Toom Tabard wrote:
On 26 Oct, 18:19, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Has anyone got any idea how these Devil's scrotums work?

In theory you scan the item and place it on the scales.

The scales reject the item. You try again. The ******* thing then
allows 4 items through before rejecting the 5th item and freezes up.
And never try to buy dowel using one unless you want large dowel and
intend to shove it up the managers arse when the machine goes wrong.

Not a bad setup.

No tills open and 3 staff watching the 4 self checkout machines.
Make that two staff available when one of them went to find someone
that could allow me to buy my items.

All I need is the correct weight of a nice drill that exactly
matches a large bag of nails, swap the barcode over and I will be
even with the *******s.

Adam

There is an old Scottish adage - 'kid on you're daft and you'll get a
free hurl'.

I suggest you take the initiative on that basis.

Stand in front of the machine with an intended purchase in one hand
and fifty pence piece prominently displayed in the other.

Gaze blankly at the machine. It will help if you have reading specs on
the tip of your nose, are gazing over the top of them, and if your
tongue is hanging out in the attitude commonly known as lolling.
Indulging in an occasional and sudden twitching motion may also help.

When the assistant shows you how to do the first item, don't then
eagerly proceed with the other items yourself. Maintain silence,
retain the expression of blank incomprehension and slowly nod your
head. This will give them the encouragement that with kindness and
careful training you might learn simple tasks.

Repeat the above until they've processed everything for you.

When they've bagged everything up, and sorted out the payment, you
should, of course, thank them profusely. In addition, lighten their
day by leaving them with something to think about. For example, try
asking, in cultured and educated tones, "Isn't it a pity what happened
to Marie Antoinette?" and then walking off. A backward glance will
probably confirm that they are standing there with a expression of
blank incomprehension, with their tongue hanging out in an attitude
commony known as lolling.

After sufficient similar experiences, add 'method acting' to your CV.

Beautiful. Made my day!

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:55:52 -0700 (PDT), Owain
had this to say:

On 27 Oct, 01:00, Frank Erskine wrote:
I 'like' Seabrook's (plain (salted)) crisps.
Not that I use crisps on a regular basis.

Didn't you see Dispatches last night?

No. I don't have a TV set.

--
Frank Erskine

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:55:03 -0000, Clot wrote:

That is the only virtue of self scanning to me. At least a humanoid has
not bashed all your goods to oblivion whilst scanning it!

It's a very rare checkout operator that mistreats the goods. I
suspect they don't last long as checkout operators once they get a
compliant or two against them or they modify their behaviour.

Checkout ops generaly have a brain unlike the shelf stackers, it's
not quite a simple a job as it first appears.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Oct 27, 9:50*am, mogga wrote:

the B&Q ones - the technique is to stuff up the first item and get the
girl to come and assist you with the rest of it.
--http://www.halloweenfreebies.co.ukhttp://www.holidayunder100.co.uk

Not strictly on topic, but at B&Q a few years ago I piled a load of
shopping to be scanned, with the third item being some paint remover
or white spirit, thus requiring confirmation that I was indeed over
18. The spotty youth putting the products through didn't notice the
prompt on screen, and I think the other items beeped through. I
think I saved close to £60.

I had the kids with me, so paid without too much thought to how much
it all cost, only to realise when I got home that a large amount of
the items simply hadn't been charged for as he hadn't confirmed the
prompt on screen.

I considered myself blameless - their mistake. Had I noticed at the
time I suspect I would have had a moral problem with not telling him
his mistake.

Matt

Frank Erskine wrote:

What's the alleged advantage of an automated checkout? Clearly it
does away with a humanoid (although they still need to be such around
for, say, alcohol purchases). In RL they seem to be much slower than a
checkout manned by real people. Is it just that most purchasers hate
the idea of having to speak to a real life human cashier? If so,
that's very sad.


There is no advantage at the moment for the consumer. But just wait. In
a couple of years time you will be expected to use them. There will
still be manned checkouts for those who want them but there will be a
£5.00 checkout fee it you do so.

If you buy alcohol or cigarettes they will introduce a £2.00 per item
age verification fee.

You will be able to pay by credit card but there will be a £2.50 fee per
transaction for doing so.

Need a trolley? You will have to put a pound coin the the slot to be
able to use one. This is non-refundable.

Parking will be £5.00 for up to three hours.

A coffee and a Mars bar in the cafe will be £4.50.

But the groceries will be cheap :-)

Andrew

Who, you guessed it, flew with Ryanair over the weekend.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:27:40 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

On 27/10/09 01:23, Frank Erskine wrote:

What's the alleged advantage of an automated checkout? Clearly it
does away with a humanoid (although they still need to be such around
for, say, alcohol purchases). In RL they seem to be much slower than a
checkout manned by real people.

What they need is faster humans, such as the ones in Aldi, who are
equipped with tills designed to be fast, rather than pretty.

Or Waitrose, where there are actual human beings of some intelligence on
the tills.
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

In article ,
Andrew May wrote:
If you buy alcohol or cigarettes they will introduce a £2.00 per item
age verification fee.

I'd love to be under age and try to put some alcohol free Becks through
the auto checkout at Tesco. Because it puts the flag up. Could be an
interesting discussion...
I'll bet there are products containing alcohol which don't flag it.

--
*Whatever kind of look you were going for, you missed.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:58:41 +0000, Tim W wrote:


Wing Yip (Chinese Supermarket) in Croydon (well, more Waddon) have the
correct idea. You potter round and fill your trolley.

You queue up behind at most one person, choosing from the dozen or so
staffed tills.

Then you stand back while one bloke unloads everything, the girl rings it up
and another girl packs it for you. By the time you've typed you PIN on the
card machine, your trolley is reloaded with bagged goods ready to push to
the car.

Given tehy are subject to the same minimum wage laws Tescos etc are, why
can't they all do that?

Tescodroids don't breed as fast.
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
...
Both the Tesco and Sainsbury ones round here are fine.

What's the alleged advantage of an automated checkout?

In theory * as there's more than one checkout per queue
there's less chance of getting stuck in a queue behind a
customer who wants to change something, argue about a price
demands to see the manager or where a bar code is missing.

* That is before automated checkouts became poplular and
started to attract people who clearly don't have a clue as to
how to use them.

They're also very handy for breaking up £20 notes hot out
of the ATM if you need pound coins for parking meters etc
with a smallish purchase. As you don't attract sour looks
and or comments from the till operator. Although this
clearly only applies in specific circumstances.

Thats in supermarkets. When I first saw them in B&Q I
had to chack it wasn't April Ist TBH.

Oh and B&Q want to charge 5P for their cheapo carrier bags
I noticed.

michael adams

....

Clearly it
does away with a humanoid (although they still need to be such around
for, say, alcohol purchases). In RL they seem to be much slower than a
checkout manned by real people. Is it just that most purchasers hate
the idea of having to speak to a real life human cashier? If so,
that's very sad.

--
Frank Erskine

"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:39:28 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
had this to say:

In article o.uk,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
Quite agree. After the dreadful experiences of trying to use the ones
in Tesco I just refuse to use them anywhere. They are just so slow,
I'd rather spend the time in a checkout queue relaxed and day
dreaming than getting annoyed at a machine that can't keep up or just
takes too long to respond to each item scanned.

Both the Tesco and Sainsbury ones round here are fine.

What's the alleged advantage of an automated checkout?

The fact that almost no-one except me queues up to use them.

An advantage that will disappear when they are the only option :-(

tim

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 04:14:04 -0700 (PDT), Owain wrote:

On 27 Oct, 10:02, "Dave Liquorice" wrote:
Yep, I some times feel they have less processing power than a ZX81,
they are so slow and labourious.

They do run Windows for Checkouts.

Owain

Defenestration 1618?
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 27/10/09 01:23, Frank Erskine wrote:

What's the alleged advantage of an automated checkout? Clearly it
does away with a humanoid (although they still need to be such around
for, say, alcohol purchases). In RL they seem to be much slower than a
checkout manned by real people.

What they need is faster humans, such as the ones in Aldi, who are
equipped with tills designed to be fast, rather than pretty.

The problem with faster scanning is that you are still held up by the 50% of
the population who insisting on bagging everything before even thinking
about getting their purse out of their handbag with which to pay.


tim

Dave Liquorice wrote:

Or
scrolling that doesn't scroll the contents of the sub-window the
mouse is over.

Always been a problem with Windoze as wheely-mice weren't about when the
event model was written in about 1986.

However, there are a couple of utilities about that solve this - the
best one I've found is a bit of Freeware called KatMouse. Scrolls the
non-focussed window you're over instead of the one with focus. Makes
using Windows slightly less painful.

--
Scott

Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?

PeterC
wibbled on Tuesday 27 October 2009 13:42

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:27:40 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

On 27/10/09 01:23, Frank Erskine wrote:

What's the alleged advantage of an automated checkout? Clearly it
does away with a humanoid (although they still need to be such around
for, say, alcohol purchases). In RL they seem to be much slower than a
checkout manned by real people.

What they need is faster humans, such as the ones in Aldi, who are
equipped with tills designed to be fast, rather than pretty.

Or Waitrose, where there are actual human beings of some intelligence on
the tills.

I notice that both my local Waitroses (Tonbridge and Paddock Wood) always
seem to have the same faces around, even after umpteen years - and we're
not talking the older generation either. And nothing's too much trouble for
them.

Says something about them, if they can attract, train and retain a good
calibre of staff.

--
Tim Watts

This space intentionally left blank...

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew May wrote:
If you buy alcohol or cigarettes they will introduce a £2.00 per item
age verification fee.

I'd love to be under age and try to put some alcohol free Becks through
the auto checkout at Tesco. Because it puts the flag up. Could be an
interesting discussion...
I'll bet there are products containing alcohol which don't flag it.

Could you try buying it at one of the times when their licence forbids
them to sell alcohol?

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:50:54 +0000, Scott M wrote:

Always been a problem with Windoze as wheely-mice weren't about when the
event model was written in about 1986.

How long have scroll wheel mice been about? Why hasn't the interface
had this added?

However, there are a couple of utilities about that solve this - the
best one I've found is a bit of Freeware called KatMouse. Scrolls the
non-focussed window you're over instead of the one with focus. Makes
using Windows slightly less painful.

Does it add automatic focus switch (after a few seconds) on mouse
over?
Having to click a window (and selecting something or perform another
unintended action is a right PITA. I guess most doze users haven't
used anything other than doze so don't realise how awful it really
is.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 27 Oct, 11:18, Owain wrote:
On 27 Oct, 10:44, Toom Tabard *wrote:

There is an old Scottish adage - 'kid on you're daft and you'll get a
free hurl'.
When they've bagged everything up, and sorted out the payment,

You can help them by putting the 50p in yourself.

In the coupon hole.

... *For example, try
asking, in cultured and educated tones, "Isn't it a pity what happened
to Marie Antoinette?" and then walking off.

What makes you think that history graduates don't get jobs on the
checkouts?
...
What makes me think that history graduates would know who Marie
Antoinette was?


I've found it works rather well in many social situations, whether or
not the person knows who Marie Antoinette was.

Also, whenever you invite anyone into your home, try asking them if
they'd like a glass of warm milk and butter.

Toom

Toom Tabard
wibbled on Tuesday 27 October 2009 15:21


Also, whenever you invite anyone into your home, try asking them if
they'd like a glass of warm milk and butter.

Sounds yum. Where do you live - I'll be right round!

--
Tim Watts

This space intentionally left blank...

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.co.uk...

Having to click a window (and selecting something or perform another
unintended action is a right PITA. I guess most doze users haven't
used anything other than doze so don't realise how awful it really
is.

I found the opposite - focus on mouseover as some Unix systems I used had
annoys me.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:59:23 +0000, Tim W wrote:

Says something about them, if they can attract, train and retain a good
calibre of staff.

Probably depends when you normally go shopping. I see the same faces
in our Tesco midweek daytime but go in later/earlier/weekend it's all
"young things".

--
Cheers
Dave.

"tim...." wrote in message
...

"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
...
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:42:20 -0700 (PDT), geraldthehamster wrote:

I cherish the vain hope that if enough of us refuse to use them,
they'll start putting sufficient numbers of staff on the tills. Fat
chance. Blatant example of putting cost-cutting before customer
service.

Quite agree. After the dreadful experiences of trying to use the ones
in Tesco I just refuse to use them anywhere. They are just so slow,
I'd rather spend the time in a checkout queue relaxed and day
dreaming than getting annoyed at a machine that can't keep up or just
takes too long to respond to each item scanned.

Its not so much the machines as the complete planks who try to use them
causing huge clues. The ones in our local Morrisons work almost 100%
properly, its the thicko's who use them.

I don't agree.

The ones in Tesco don't work well, and as someone who's day job is similar
products, I can see exactly what is wrong with them (rather than with me!)

tim

I don't find them too bad at all. But what does bug me is how difficult they
make it for you to re-use your own bags.

The planks who decide to put a trolleyful of shopping through a basket-only
self checkout really **** me off!

JW

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:59:23 +0000, Tim W wrote:

PeterC
wibbled on Tuesday 27 October 2009 13:42

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:27:40 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

On 27/10/09 01:23, Frank Erskine wrote:

What's the alleged advantage of an automated checkout? Clearly it
does away with a humanoid (although they still need to be such around
for, say, alcohol purchases). In RL they seem to be much slower than a
checkout manned by real people.

What they need is faster humans, such as the ones in Aldi, who are
equipped with tills designed to be fast, rather than pretty.

Or Waitrose, where there are actual human beings of some intelligence on
the tills.

I notice that both my local Waitroses (Tonbridge and Paddock Wood) always
seem to have the same faces around, even after umpteen years - and we're
not talking the older generation either. And nothing's too much trouble for
them.

Says something about them, if they can attract, train and retain a good
calibre of staff.

They are 'partners' (or summat), so the better they do the bigger the
share.
Some of the cust. service and so-on are wives of solicitors, accountants
etc. who prefer to work rather than be at home.
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

Dave Liquorice wrote:

How long have scroll wheel mice been about? Why hasn't the interface
had this added?

Maybe 10 years. But it's to do with the way Windows messages are sent
from OS to apps so I suppose adding a patch for mice wheels is seen as
inelegant at MS (like that normally worries them!!)


Does it add automatic focus switch (after a few seconds) on mouse
over?
Having to click a window (and selecting something or perform another
unintended action is a right PITA. I guess most doze users haven't
used anything other than doze so don't realise how awful it really
is.

Personally, like Clive, I've never got on with that option but it is
already available in Wind95-XP (dunno about Vista, never used it.)
Download & install 'TweakUI' from Microsoft (appears as a Control Panel
add-on) and the option's on the 'Mouse' tab of it.

--
Scott

Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:45:43 -0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:



"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ill.co.uk...
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:07:50 -0000, dennis@home wrote:

They wait until the item is on the scales before they allow the next one
to be scanned. It can be a real pain.

This requirement to "weigh" items that don't need weighing (tins of
beans etc) might be where the instructions are failing. I scan an
item, it beeps to acknowledge the scan (eventually, the scanners seem
very slow and unreliable, yes I have tried just zooming the object
through, going through slowly, pausing in front of the window all to
no apparent effect on the reliabilty). Then I put the tin of beans or
what ever (that doesn't need weighing) on the conveyor. The scales,
IIRC, are built around the scanner like on the manned checkouts not a
seperate platform.

The second set of scales are the collection area.
Its supposed to stop you putting stuff on without scanning it.


Q someone that doesn't know the bit the bags are on is a big set of
scales saying they don't have to weigh everything. 8-)

Different design of self op checkout. They do have the small ones
that have a basket trough, scanner, bagging area but on the big ones
designed to take trolly loads the "bagging area" is more like 8 foot
from the the scanner.


The ones with two conveyers?


In this area (Bucks/Herts/Beds) most of those early models with the
belts have already been replaced with a type that has a longer bagging
scale, capable of taking a trolley load of bags. No more are being
made with belts.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:07:14 -0000, "Clive George"
wrote:

"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:06:20 +0000, Clint Sharp
had this to say:

In message
,
js.b1 writes
M&S and Asda machines work ok on light items like diet hot-choc (22g?)
Try a bag of Seabrook's crisps, screws up every time or maybe the
machine's trying to tell me something....

I 'like' Seabrook's (plain (salted)) crisps.

Not that I use crisps on a regular basis.

For those who live in a Seabrook's free zone, they do internet order boxes
at a not-unreasonable price - and you get to choose the mix of flavours.

(thought I'd mention it since I was recently surprised to see Walkers being
sold at 50p a bag, which just seems wrong to me).


Before you get too excited about how nice Seabrook's crisps are,
compare the fat content, and especially the saturated fat content.

Walkers have done a lot to reduce fat/salt content in recent years.

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:15:43 -0700 (PDT), Owain
wrote:
On 26 Oct, 18:54, "js.b1" wrote:
M&S and Asda machines work ok on light items like diet hot-choc (22g?)
if you drop them into a bag, but not if you drop them onto a loose bag
which cushions their impact (not registered).

Tesco tills object if you put your own bag on the 'bagging scale' but
if you scan your tin of something, put it in your own bag, then put
that on the bagging scale, it's (usually) within tolerance.

I quite like self-scan as it means nobody can see me buying anything
embarrassing, but what's the B&Q equivalent of Value Condoms?


Tights with holes in them, like the condoms?

In message o.uk, Dave
Liquorice writes
So I have to handle each object twice? Once to scan and place on
platform, then again to take off platform and place on conveyor so I
can put the next item on?
No, every item has to be weighed but it's weighed on the platform where
you bag it, you scan the item, the machine goes off, looks up the
barcode in the database and tells you to bag the item, it then waits
until it sees the platform scale register an increase in weight that
corresponds with the weight that is in the database for that item.
This is progress?
Opinions may vary but I generally use them at Tesco because they can be
very fast late at night when I do my shopping. If I have more than a bag
of items then I use a normal checkout.

I suspect the Tesco ones are (trying) to be a bit more clever. They
complain about "unexpected item" and there are what look like little
cameras looking at the conveyor. I suspect it can tell the difference
between Tesco Value beans and Heinz...
Perhaps... I wouldn't be at all surprised but the bag only ones aren't.

Which then begs the question why not just have a conveyor onto which
you place the goods, that then trundles the goods through a scan/ID
area? Conveyor could have regular marks down it on which each item
should be (more or less) placed.
Not really necessary with a decent barcode scanner, of course, RFID is
the way forward for this, run your trolley past the sensor and it's all
read in an instant, tallied up and charged to your RFID credit card too.
Ideal for fraud, someone nicks your contactless card and has at it with
dozens of drive through small transactions.


--
Clint Sharp

"Clive George" wrote in message
o.uk...
"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:06:20 +0000, Clint Sharp
had this to say:

In message
,
js.b1 writes
M&S and Asda machines work ok on light items like diet hot-choc (22g?)
Try a bag of Seabrook's crisps, screws up every time or maybe the
machine's trying to tell me something....

I 'like' Seabrook's (plain (salted)) crisps.

Not that I use crisps on a regular basis.

For those who live in a Seabrook's free zone, they do internet order boxes
at a not-unreasonable price - and you get to choose the mix of flavours.

(thought I'd mention it since I was recently surprised to see Walkers
being sold at 50p a bag, which just seems wrong to me).

The Yorkshire Crisp Company is even better.

Adam

"Owain" wrote in message
...
On 27 Oct, 01:00, Frank Erskine wrote:
I 'like' Seabrook's (plain (salted)) crisps.
Not that I use crisps on a regular basis.

Didn't you see Dispatches last night?

Crisps and chocolate cake are lower in salt and sugar than breakfast
cereals!

Owain


I wonder how much salt was in the kebab I had for breakfast?

Adam

"Owain" wrote in message
...
On 26 Oct, 18:54, "js.b1" wrote:
M&S and Asda machines work ok on light items like diet hot-choc (22g?)
if you drop them into a bag, but not if you drop them onto a loose bag
which cushions their impact (not registered).

Tesco tills object if you put your own bag on the 'bagging scale' but
if you scan your tin of something, put it in your own bag, then put
that on the bagging scale, it's (usually) within tolerance.

I quite like self-scan as it means nobody can see me buying anything
embarrassing, but what's the B&Q equivalent of Value Condoms?

Owain


There is nothing embarrasing about buying condoms.

I would be embarressed if I ever had to buy clap treatment pills at the
chemists though.

Adam

ARWadsworth wrote:

"Owain" wrote in message
...
On 27 Oct, 01:00, Frank Erskine wrote:
I 'like' Seabrook's (plain (salted)) crisps.
Not that I use crisps on a regular basis.

Didn't you see Dispatches last night?

Crisps and chocolate cake are lower in salt and sugar than breakfast
cereals!

Owain


I wonder how much salt was in the kebab I had for breakfast?

Adam

Sod it, I'm with Warren Buffett on this one. Eat what suits your
metabolism. No five a day ******** for him, and he looks pretty
sprightly on it