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


The big difference between Waitrose and the rest (ASDA, Tesco,
Morrisons etc.) is that Waitrose attracts a better class of shopper.

Not having to deal with chavs and other assorted scum can only make it
easier for Waitrose staff to be pleasant, polite, helpful and - dare I
say it - probably a lot happier in their jobs.

And no, I'm not being a snob, because I shop mainly in Tesco,
Sainsbury's and Morrisons - my town doesn't have a Waitrose.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:30:01 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
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.


Apparently, the two major selling points for the self-checkouts are a
reduction in staff costs (obviously) plus also a reduction in fraud.

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
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.

Bag of Seabrooks: 31.8g

9.7g fat, of which 1.1g is saturated. 2.7g mono-unsaturated, 5.5g
poly-unsaturated.

They've always been fried in sunflower oil as long as I can remember, which
would explain that.

Sodium 0.3g.

Bag of Walkers: 34.5g

11.7g fat, of which 0.9g saturated, 9.3g mono-unsaturated, 1.0g
poly-unsaturated.
Sodium 0.2g.

So, despite all those efforts, they aren't really better on the fat content,
and not much better on salt.

In article ,
Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:59:23 +0000, Tim W wrote:
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.


The big difference between Waitrose and the rest (ASDA, Tesco,
Morrisons etc.) is that Waitrose attracts a better class of shopper.

Not having to deal with chavs and other assorted scum can only make it
easier for Waitrose staff to be pleasant, polite, helpful and - dare I
say it - probably a lot happier in their jobs.

Can you name a Waitrose within easy reach of a 'chav' area?

And no, I'm not being a snob, because I shop mainly in Tesco,
Sainsbury's and Morrisons - my town doesn't have a Waitrose.

Oh dear. ;-)

--
*If a turtle doesn't have a shell, is he homeless or naked?

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

In message , tim....
wrote

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
news:6o2dndAKedFxPXvXnZ2dnUVZ8rVi4p2d@brightview. co.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.


Customers are educated to the Aldi way if they even try to bag up at the
till. In Aldi everything goes back into the trolley and after you have
paid you are free to use the bagging area/shelves to pack your goods.

Around my way each Aldi staff member serves ten customers in the time a
Tesco member of staff takes to serve one.

--
Alan
news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:02:26 -0700 (PDT), Owain
wrote:

On 27 Oct, 18:38, Bruce wrote:
Apparently, the two major selling points for the self-checkouts are a
reduction in staff costs (obviously) plus also a reduction in fraud.

So the staff are less honest than the customers?


Where did I imply that the fraud was by the staff? I pointed the
finger neither at the staff nor the customers.

There is shoplifting and there is staff pilferage. The sum total of
that is the fraud that the self-service tills help to reduce.

"Owain" wrote in message
...
On 27 Oct, 18:04, "ARWadsworth" wrote:
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?
There is nothing embarrasing about buying condoms.

All right, Value Custard Creams then.

Owain

The trick is never to buy condoms.

They are supplied free by the NHS for everyone in the UK.

I use them so that I do not suffer from

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeNNxQuo1Jc


Adam

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:15:51 +0000, Alan
wrote:

In message , tim....
wrote

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
news:6o2dndAKedFxPXvXnZ2dnUVZ8rVi4p2d@brightview .co.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.


Customers are educated to the Aldi way if they even try to bag up at the
till. In Aldi everything goes back into the trolley and after you have
paid you are free to use the bagging area/shelves to pack your goods.

Around my way each Aldi staff member serves ten customers in the time a
Tesco member of staff takes to serve one.


And the result is that the stores need far fewer staff for similar
turnover, which means lower prices for the customers.

When a customer in Aldi tries to "beat the system" and slow everyone
else down, I (and a lot of other regular Aldi shoppers) get quite
annoyed, and with good reason.

If people want to benefit from Aldi's prices, they should learn to
speed up. If they want to shop slowly, they should shop elsewhere.

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?

Or which is cheaper to operate. If you want customer service like you
describe you would pay for it in increased prices.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:53:41 +0000, Neil wrote:
Thank you. I needed cheering up following a visit by the armed wing of the
same outfit "The Provisional B&Q" otherwise known as their 'Delivery
Service' (is that ever a misnomer) this afternoon. Whilst it always a
pleasure to renew ones aquaintance with the taciturn neanderthal that drives
their HIAB I had foolishly anticipated that the words "First drop of the
day" carefully scribed onto the whiteboard at the tradedesk would have
resulted in his cheery visage arriving at my jobsite rather earlier than
3.40.

Sadly my experience is that the phrase 'first drop of the day'
refers to something other than delivery :-(

"Owain" wrote in message
...
On 27 Oct, 18:38, Bruce wrote:
Apparently, the two major selling points for the self-checkouts are a
reduction in staff costs (obviously) plus also a reduction in fraud.

So the staff are less honest than the customers?

Yep!

tim

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:02:26 -0700 (PDT), Owain
wrote:

On 27 Oct, 18:38, Bruce wrote:
Apparently, the two major selling points for the self-checkouts are a
reduction in staff costs (obviously) plus also a reduction in fraud.

So the staff are less honest than the customers?


Where did I imply that the fraud was by the staff?

By saying that there was less fraud with the self serve machines than with
the staff operated ones.

What opportunities for fraud by customers goes away with self serve
machines? ISTM, none at all go away, but a new one is introduced, and yet
the total overall fraud goes down. How can this possibly be unless the
difference is down to the staff?

tim

"Owain" wrote in message
...
On 27 Oct, 13:48, "tim...." wrote:
"Andy Burns" wrote in message
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.

They don't let you do that in Aldi. They scan things and drop them
back into your trolley. You pay and then take your trolley of stuff
through the checkout to the self-packing area.

Yes I know, for some reason I though you said ASDA (!).

But what does hold you up in Aldi with this system is, they can't start to
scan things until you have finished putting the things on the belt (and thus
they don't have an empty trolley to put them back into).

More than once I have been held up by someone being particularly slow at
putting things on the belt.

tim

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
.. .

"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.#

whilst I have no personal experience, isn't this cured with a generic
antibiotic?

tim

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

I hate the damn things with a vengeance that is massively over the top
considering what they actually do/are like.

But there is one fundamental issue that will start to crop up with
regularity. That is, what happens when a customer makes a mistake? And
of course, most particularly a mistake that could be interpreted as
trying to gain dishonestly?

Using the conventional tills, mistakes are largely down to the till
operator and the store.

But I confidently predict more and more occasions on which a customer is
accused of some form of theft or dishonesty due to simple careless or
inadvertence or the machine not working properly or something else
basically not criminal. And quite possibly not just accused but actually
prosecuted.

--
Rod

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:12:54 -0000, tim.... wrote:

But what does hold you up in Aldi with this system is, they can't start
to scan things until you have finished putting the things on the belt
(and thus they don't have an empty trolley to put them back into).

Er, why don't they do what CostCo does have an empty trolly at the
checkout when they start? Shopper comes along, starts unloading,
operator starts scanning and placing in pre-existing empty trolly.
When transaction is complete shoppers trolly is now empty and ready
for use by following shopper.

This doesn't work if they have those stupid trolleys that need a
pound shaped disc to be inserted to enable use.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 26 Oct, 22:15, 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?

Owain



Gaffer tape

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:49:44 +0000, Clint Sharp wrote:

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.

How can I bag it? The bagging area is 8' away at the other end of the
conveyor. Read what I wrote.

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,

Agreed but I was trying to make it simple as the scanners they
currently have are pretty crap. It also enables the system to get a
good look at the items and identify them that way as well.

RFID, I wonder. Have to be pretty short range and directional for it
to be 100% sure that a given product response is from a product in a
given trolly not in the next checkout or on the rack next to the
checkout. And how about shopping from a another store that you have
with you that is also stocked in this store?

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:03:02 GMT, The Medway Handyman wrote:

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

Or which is cheaper to operate.

Same difference.

If you want customer service like you describe you would pay for it in
increased prices.

Only beacuse the company would not be prepared to reduce their
primary raison d'être, namely making maximum money for their
shareholders.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:00:05 -0700 (PDT), Mr Fuxit
had this to say:

On 26 Oct, 22:15, 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?

Owain

Gaffer tape

Gardening gloves.

--
Frank Erskine

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 23:06:11 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:

How can I bag it? The bagging area is 8' away at the other end of the
conveyor.


That's why the ones with the belts are progressively being withdrawn,
and replaced with self-checkouts that have much larger bagging scales.
They can easily take a trolley load of groceries in bags.

The ones with belts have not proved popular. In many Tesco stores,
the staff are trained to encourage customers to use them; this is
necessary because people would rather queue for the self-checkouts
with bagging scales. They are also much harder for the staff to
observe/supervise, which is important when trying to reduce fraud.
Finally, they are less reliable because detritus accumulates in the
belt mechanisms. The debris causes the weighing scales (under the
first belt) to become inaccurate quite quickly, which means the
checkout has to be taken out of service and a service engineer called.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:51:35 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:59:23 +0000, Tim W wrote:
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.


The big difference between Waitrose and the rest (ASDA, Tesco,
Morrisons etc.) is that Waitrose attracts a better class of shopper.

Not having to deal with chavs and other assorted scum can only make it
easier for Waitrose staff to be pleasant, polite, helpful and - dare I
say it - probably a lot happier in their jobs.

Can you name a Waitrose within easy reach of a 'chav' area?


Reading? Leighton Buzzard? Northampton? Rushden? Ashford (Kent)?

That's just a few off the top of my head. I feel sure that there must
be quite a few more.


And no, I'm not being a snob, because I shop mainly in Tesco,
Sainsbury's and Morrisons - my town doesn't have a Waitrose.

Oh dear. ;-)


Sad, isn't it?

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:15:43 -0700 (PDT), Owain
wrote:

what's the B&Q equivalent of Value Condoms?


Latex gloves?

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:58:49 -0700 (PDT), Owain
wrote:

On 27 Oct, 17:48, Bruce wrote:
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?

B&Q sell tights? I knew they were targeting the ladies market but
really.


I'm sorry.

I cannot imagine how my mind could have taken that route. ;-)

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Bruce wrote:

Not having to deal with chavs and other assorted scum can only make it
easier for Waitrose staff to be pleasant, polite, helpful and - dare I
say it - probably a lot happier in their jobs.

Can you name a Waitrose within easy reach of a 'chav' area?

The Portswood branch in Southampton.

OK, "chav" is probably unfair, but the area certainly isn't noted as
home to the stereotypical Waitrose shopper. Mostly Eastern European
immigrants and students; more than half the houses on my road are HMOs.
I quite like living here, but the Waitrose always seemed a bit out of place.

Pete

michael adams wrote:

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

Mine started doing that a while ago. Lately I've been buying trolleyfuls
of things, so not needed a bag. But then yesterday I bought a pile of
electrical bits and bobs[1] and was resigned to bundling them all up in
my arms - but the yoof on the till bagged them all up for me while the
card machine was doing its thing. Dunno if they've changed their policy
or he'd simply been insufficiently brainwashed; hopefully the former.

Pete

[1] distress purchase; the difference between their prices and TLC's is
staggering in some areas.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:51:35 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
had this to say:

In article ,
Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:59:23 +0000, Tim W wrote:
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.


The big difference between Waitrose and the rest (ASDA, Tesco,
Morrisons etc.) is that Waitrose attracts a better class of shopper.

Not having to deal with chavs and other assorted scum can only make it
easier for Waitrose staff to be pleasant, polite, helpful and - dare I
say it - probably a lot happier in their jobs.

Can you name a Waitrose within easy reach of a 'chav' area?

Newcastle (upon Tyne).

--
Frank Erskine

Dave Liquorice wrote:

RFID, I wonder. Have to be pretty short range and directional for it
to be 100% sure that a given product response is from a product in a
given trolly not in the next checkout or on the rack next to the
checkout.

I believe that this is an area IBM is actively working on[1]. As I
understand it, a big part of the difficulty is with responses
interfering with each other when you excite a whole basket's worth of
tags at once. That and shiny foil crisp packets.

And how about shopping from a another store that you have
with you that is also stocked in this store?

This is really just a subset of the "detecting items after you've bought
them" problem. Not surprisingly, people (myself included) don't like the
idea that a scanner could be pointed at them in the street and report on
every item in their possession[2]. It doesn't take too big a tabloid
leap to characterise this as remote secret frisking. So there's clearly
a need for "one-shot" tags that are neutralised when the goods are sold.
These exist at present in the form of tags with their aerials in
perforated "wings" that get snapped off at the checkout, but that
doesn't really work for the "walk through an arch and get billed for
what you're carrying" model. Presumably you could fry the chips with a
strong enough transmission, but that's going to either (a) fry the
customers too or (b) be harmless to the customers but cause no end of PR
damage as they *think* they're being fried.

Pete

[1] I should point out that *I'm* not working on it, and have no special
insight in this area.
[2] If it's the kind of item that today would carry a barcode,
obviously. But that covers pretty much anything you buy in a shop.

"Pete Verdon" d wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

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

Mine started doing that a while ago. Lately I've been buying trolleyfuls
of things, so not needed a bag. But then yesterday I bought a pile of
electrical bits and bobs[1] and was resigned to bundling them all up in
my arms - but the yoof on the till bagged them all up for me while the
card machine was doing its thing. Dunno if they've changed their policy
or he'd simply been insufficiently brainwashed; hopefully the former.

I only noticed it at the weekend. There's a stand in the middle between
the checkouts holding the bags, and a notice bags 5p each.
Presumably the bags are bar-coded and you're supposed to scan them. They
probably make enough profit out of the honest people who do scan them to
compensate for the ones who don't bother, or don't even notice the price,
and members of staff being helpful.



Pete

[1] distress purchase; the difference between their prices and TLC's is
staggering in some areas.

I've just opened a set of B&Q taps bought ages ago which still have half the
moulding sand - or something similar - blocking up the internals. I bought them
so long ago I can't find the receipt so I'll have to schlep down there at the
weekend check out a good pair, buy them and then return the duff ones with the
receipt. Knowing B&Q they probably won't have any in stock, or will have reduced
them by 50% in the meantime, or any they do have in stock will also be rubbish.


michael adams

....

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:15:43 -0700 (PDT) Owain wrote :
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.

That was one of the reasons I had so many problems with them. Here in
Australia reusable canvas bags are sold everywhere and the self service
tills have an 'own bag' button which you press once you've put your bag
over the hook. There's also a 'start new bag' button if you're going to
fill more than one.

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on' Melbourne, Australia
www.superbeam.co.uk www.superbeam.com www.greentram.com

In uk.d-i-y, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Can you name a Waitrose within easy reach of a 'chav' area?

Cheadle Hulme is about a mile from Adswood.

--
Mike Barnes

wrote:
On 28 Oct,
Frank Erskine wrote:

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:51:35 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
had this to say:


Can you name a Waitrose within easy reach of a 'chav' area?
Newcastle (upon Tyne).

That must be new. The only one North of York /was/ at Durham, but closed
recently.


And in a few days it will be Glasgow Byres Road (assuming above is correct).

The only problem in finding branches reachable from chav areas is
identifying those areas. I'd always thought of Bluewater as pretty
chavvy. Is Ashford such a non-chav place? As for Oxford & South Mimms
motorway services...

--
Rod

In article ,
Frank Erskine wrote:
Can you name a Waitrose within easy reach of a 'chav' area?

Newcastle (upon Tyne).

You classify all of Newcastle as a chav area?

--
*Why can't women put on mascara with their mouth closed?

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

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:48:41 -0000, "tim...."
wrote:


"Andy Burns" wrote in message
news:6o2dndAKedFxPXvXnZ2dnUVZ8rVi4p2d@brightview. co.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.

I bag everything up before paying. Otherwise the daft checkout droid
starts scanning the next shopper's items and they get mixed up with
mine.

Automated checkouts don't seem to have reached us in the country yet.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:43:36 +0000, Tim W wrote:

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.

Add to this web pages that are hardcoded for an ultra wide screen so
you get unnecessary horizontal scroll bars when allowing the text to
wrap would be much better.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]

Dave Liquorice wrote:
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.

Perhaps I'm oversensitive about it having worked at an independent family
greengrocers for years when younger.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:59:23 +0000, Tim W wrote:
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.


The big difference between Waitrose and the rest (ASDA, Tesco,
Morrisons etc.) is that Waitrose attracts a better class of shopper.

Not having to deal with chavs and other assorted scum can only make it
easier for Waitrose staff to be pleasant, polite, helpful and - dare I
say it - probably a lot happier in their jobs.

Can you name a Waitrose within easy reach of a 'chav' area?

Mine is.

(You get a clue that you've just moved to a chav area when going to register
for council tax, the first question is "what benefits are you on?" and the
second question is "are you sure you're not on any benefits?", I kid you
not, I was lost for words!)

tim

"Owain" wrote in message
...
On 27 Oct, 21:12, "tim...." wrote:
They don't let you do that in Aldi. They scan things and drop them
back into your trolley. You pay and then take your trolley of stuff
through the checkout to the self-packing area.
But what does hold you up in Aldi with this system is, they can't start
to
scan things until you have finished putting the things on the belt (and
thus
they don't have an empty trolley to put them back into).
More than once I have been held up by someone being particularly slow at
putting things on the belt.

That only ever happens with the first person at a checkout

Um, no it doesn't (some people can be really slow at unloading their
trolley)

tim

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.co.uk...
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:12:54 -0000, tim.... wrote:

But what does hold you up in Aldi with this system is, they can't start
to scan things until you have finished putting the things on the belt
(and thus they don't have an empty trolley to put them back into).

Er, why don't they do what CostCo does have an empty trolly at the
checkout when they start? Shopper comes along, starts unloading,
operator starts scanning and placing in pre-existing empty trolly.
When transaction is complete shoppers trolly is now empty and ready
for use by following shopper.

This doesn't work if they have those stupid trolleys that need a
pound shaped disc to be inserted to enable use.

Are there any places left that don't?

tim

"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"Pete Verdon" d wrote in
message
...
michael adams wrote:

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

Mine started doing that a while ago. Lately I've been buying trolleyfuls
of things, so not needed a bag. But then yesterday I bought a pile of
electrical bits and bobs[1] and was resigned to bundling them all up in
my arms - but the yoof on the till bagged them all up for me while the
card machine was doing its thing. Dunno if they've changed their policy
or he'd simply been insufficiently brainwashed; hopefully the former.

I only noticed it at the weekend. There's a stand in the middle between
the checkouts holding the bags, and a notice bags 5p each.
Presumably the bags are bar-coded and you're supposed to scan them. They
probably make enough profit out of the honest people who do scan them to
compensate for the ones who don't bother, or don't even notice the price,
and members of staff being helpful.

It's not about making a profit. It's about being seen to "do" something (to
reduce usage)

tim