Tag Archives: Professional Services

Disney+ is also cracking down on password sharing

Posted on by

Say goodbye to your best friend's neighbor's great aunt's Disney+ account. Disney CEO Bob Iger said in an interview with CNBC that the streamer is cracking down on password sharing worldwide this summer. The company enacted the same restrictions for Canadian subscribers last fall.

The move is hardly a surprise, as Disney's CFO Hugh Johnston shared the plan during an earnings call in February. "Paid sharing is an opportunity for us. It's one that our competitor is obviously taking advantage of, and one that sits in front of us. We've got some very specific actions that we're taking in the next couple of months." Disney-owned Hulu started its own crackdown on password sharing on March 14, and both streamers' terms of service explicitly ban people from using other customers' login information (Though its latest announcement indicates Disney is actually ready to enforce it). 

Streamers across the lineup are restricting password sharing, and it seems to be working — for them, not us. According to analytics firm Antenna, Netflix's United States signups increased by 102 percent during the first four days after the rule went into effect, compared to the 60 days prior. There were an average of 73,000 new signups daily, far outpacing cancelations. Max will also start restricting sharing this year, fully cracking down in 2025.  

Disney+ will start its clampdown in some countries come June, expanding to a second wave of countries in September. It's unclear as of now which group the US is in, but Disney will likely provide a breakdown when the dates get closer. Disney+ currently costs $8 monthly with ads and $14 monthly for ad-free viewing. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/disney-is-also-cracking-down-on-password-sharing-103010857.html?src=rss

Disney+ is also cracking down on password sharing

Posted on by

Say goodbye to your best friend's neighbor's great aunt's Disney+ account. Disney CEO Bob Iger said in an interview with CNBC that the streamer is cracking down on password sharing worldwide this summer. The company enacted the same restrictions for Canadian subscribers last fall.

The move is hardly a surprise, as Disney's CFO Hugh Johnston shared the plan during an earnings call in February. "Paid sharing is an opportunity for us. It's one that our competitor is obviously taking advantage of, and one that sits in front of us. We've got some very specific actions that we're taking in the next couple of months." Disney-owned Hulu started its own crackdown on password sharing on March 14, and both streamers' terms of service explicitly ban people from using other customers' login information (Though its latest announcement indicates Disney is actually ready to enforce it). 

Streamers across the lineup are restricting password sharing, and it seems to be working — for them, not us. According to analytics firm Antenna, Netflix's United States signups increased by 102 percent during the first four days after the rule went into effect, compared to the 60 days prior. There were an average of 73,000 new signups daily, far outpacing cancelations. Max will also start restricting sharing this year, fully cracking down in 2025.  

Disney+ will start its clampdown in some countries come June, expanding to a second wave of countries in September. It's unclear as of now which group the US is in, but Disney will likely provide a breakdown when the dates get closer. Disney+ currently costs $8 monthly with ads and $14 monthly for ad-free viewing. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/disney-is-also-cracking-down-on-password-sharing-103010857.html?src=rss

Amazon just walked out on its self-checkout technology

Posted on by

Amazon is removing Just Walk Out tech from all of its Fresh grocery stores in the US, as reported by The Information. The self-checkout system relies on a host of cameras, sensors and good old-fashioned human eyeballs to track what people leave the store with, charging the customers accordingly.

The technology has been plagued by issues from the onset. Most notably, Just Walk Out merely presents the illusion of automation, with Amazon crowing about generative AI and the like. Here’s where the smoke and mirrors come in. While the stores have no actual cashiers, there are reportedly over 1,000 real people in India scanning the camera feeds to ensure accurate checkouts. 

It’s also incredibly expensive to install and maintain the necessary equipment, which is likely why Just Walk Out technology was only adopted at around half of Fresh stores in the US. There have been plenty of frustrating issues for consumers when using this system, from receipts being sent out hours after purchase to completely mismanaged orders. In other words, it took a vast array of sensitive equipment and 1,000 people staring at video feeds to do the job of one or two people sitting behind cash registers at each store. Ain’t modern innovation grand? To be fair, Amazon reached out to Engadget to say that the tech "has continued to scale while reducing the number of human reviews year-over-year." 

There’s also some major privacy concerns here. Remember those cameras and sensors? They can be used to collect biometric information as people shop. This goes beyond Amazon’s palm-scanning tech, as the cameras and sensors measure the shape and size of each customer’s body for identification and tracking purposes. This led to a class action suit in New York that accused the company's Amazon One technology of collecting biometric identifier information without properly disclosing the practices to consumers. 

The suit says that Amazon ran afoul of the state’s Biometric Identifier Information Law, which requires businesses to tell customers if they are collecting data used for identification purposes. Peter Romer-Friedman, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, told The Seattle Times that “Amazon owes its customers an explanation about how it’s operating these systems before people enter — so that people can decide for themselves whether they want to provide measurements of the size and shape of their body as a condition of getting a sandwich.” The company says that Just Walk Out, however, doesn't rely on the same biometric identifiers. 

Amazon tried to sell the technology to other retail chains, but didn’t get too many bites. It teamed up with Starbucks in a few locations and there was a small launch in hospitals for medical staff, but that’s about it. One sticking point? These systems require high ceilings to accommodate the cameras and sensors. Reuters also suggested that many retailers consider Amazon a competitor and disruptor, souring them on a technology partnership. Those 1,000 off-shore cashiers probably didn’t help with the sales pitch either.

Just Walk Out technology will continue to be offered in many stores in the UK. As for the US, Amazon says the removal of these systems is part of a larger effort to revamp its retail grocery arm. The company plans on bringing its Dash smart carts to retail locations, after a test at several Whole Foods and Fresh stores. These smart carts are equipped with scales and sensors to track spending in real time and, of course, allow consumers to skip the checkout.

Update, April 3, 2024, 2:10 PM ET: This story has been updated to include information provided by an Amazon rep regarding the specifics of the Just Walk Out technology. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/amazon-just-walked-out-on-its-self-checkout-technology-191703603.html?src=rss

Amazon just walked out on its self-checkout technology

Posted on by

Amazon is removing Just Walk Out tech from all of its Fresh grocery stores in the US, as reported by The Information. The self-checkout system relies on a host of cameras, sensors and good old-fashioned human eyeballs to track what people leave the store with, charging the customers accordingly.

The technology has been plagued by issues from the onset. Most notably, Just Walk Out merely presents the illusion of automation, with Amazon crowing about generative AI and the like. Here’s where the smoke and mirrors come in. While the stores have no actual cashiers, there are reportedly over 1,000 real people in India scanning the camera feeds to ensure accurate checkouts. 

It’s also incredibly expensive to install and maintain the necessary equipment, which is likely why Just Walk Out technology was only adopted at around half of Fresh stores in the US. There have been plenty of frustrating issues for consumers when using this system, from receipts being sent out hours after purchase to completely mismanaged orders. In other words, it took a vast array of sensitive equipment and 1,000 people staring at video feeds to do the job of one or two people sitting behind cash registers at each store. Ain’t modern innovation grand? To be fair, Amazon reached out to Engadget to say that the tech "has continued to scale while reducing the number of human reviews year-over-year." 

There’s also some major privacy concerns here. Remember those cameras and sensors? They can be used to collect biometric information as people shop. This goes beyond Amazon’s palm-scanning tech, as the cameras and sensors measure the shape and size of each customer’s body for identification and tracking purposes. This led to a class action suit in New York that accused the company's Amazon One technology of collecting biometric identifier information without properly disclosing the practices to consumers. 

The suit says that Amazon ran afoul of the state’s Biometric Identifier Information Law, which requires businesses to tell customers if they are collecting data used for identification purposes. Peter Romer-Friedman, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, told The Seattle Times that “Amazon owes its customers an explanation about how it’s operating these systems before people enter — so that people can decide for themselves whether they want to provide measurements of the size and shape of their body as a condition of getting a sandwich.” The company says that Just Walk Out, however, doesn't rely on the same biometric identifiers. 

Amazon tried to sell the technology to other retail chains, but didn’t get too many bites. It teamed up with Starbucks in a few locations and there was a small launch in hospitals for medical staff, but that’s about it. One sticking point? These systems require high ceilings to accommodate the cameras and sensors. Reuters also suggested that many retailers consider Amazon a competitor and disruptor, souring them on a technology partnership. Those 1,000 off-shore cashiers probably didn’t help with the sales pitch either.

Just Walk Out technology will continue to be offered in many stores in the UK. As for the US, Amazon says the removal of these systems is part of a larger effort to revamp its retail grocery arm. The company plans on bringing its Dash smart carts to retail locations, after a test at several Whole Foods and Fresh stores. These smart carts are equipped with scales and sensors to track spending in real time and, of course, allow consumers to skip the checkout.

Update, April 3, 2024, 2:10 PM ET: This story has been updated to include information provided by an Amazon rep regarding the specifics of the Just Walk Out technology. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/amazon-just-walked-out-on-its-self-checkout-technology-191703603.html?src=rss

From its start, Gmail conditioned us to trade privacy for free services

Posted on by

Long before Gmail became smart enough to finish your sentences, Google’s now-ubiquitous email service was buttering up the public for a fate that defined the internet age: if you’re not paying for the product, you are the product.

When Gmail was announced on April 1, 2004, its lofty promises and the timing of its release reportedly had people assuming it was a joke. It wasn’t the first web-based email provider — Hotmail and Yahoo! Mail had already been around for years — but Gmail was offering faster service, automatic conversation grouping for messages, integrated search functions and 1GB of storage, which was at the time a huge leap forward in personal cloud storage. Google in its press release boasted that a gigabyte was “more than 100 times” what its competitors offered. All of that, for free.

Except, as Gmail and countless tech companies in its wake have taught us, there’s no such thing as free. Using Gmail came with a tradeoff that’s now commonplace: You get access to its service, and in exchange, Google gets your data. Specifically, its software could scan the contents of account holders’ emails and use that information to serve them personalized ads on the site’s sidebar. For better or worse, it was a groundbreaking approach.

“Depending on your take, Gmail is either too good to be true, or it’s the height of corporate arrogance, especially coming from a company whose house motto is ‘Don’t Be Evil,’” tech journalist Paul Boutin wrote for Slate when Gmail launched. (Boutin, one of its early media testers, wrote favorably about Google’s email scanning but suggested the company implement a way for users to opt out lest they reject it entirely.)

There was immediate backlash from those who considered Gmail to be a privacy nightmare, yet it grew — and generated a lot of hype, thanks to its invite-only status in the first few years, which spurred a reselling market for Gmail invitations at upwards of $150 a pop, according to TIME. Google continued its ad-related email scanning practices for over a decade, despite the heat, carrying on through Gmail’s public rollout in 2007 and well into the 2010s, when it really started gaining traction.

And why not? If Gmail proved anything, it was that people would, for the most part, accept such terms. Or at least not care enough to read the fine-print closely. In 2012, Gmail became the world’s largest email service, with 425 million active users.

Other sites followed Google’s lead, baking similar deals into their terms of service, so people’s use of the product would automatically mean consent to data collection and specified forms of sharing. Facebook started integrating targeted ads based on its users’ online activities in 2007, and the practice has since become a pillar of social media’s success.

Things have changed a lot in recent years, though, with the rise of a more tech-savvy public and increased scrutiny from regulators. Gmail users on multiple occasions attempted to bring about class-action lawsuits over the scanning issue, and in 2017, Google finally caved. That year, the company announced that regular Gmail users’ emails would no longer be scanned for ad personalization (paid enterprise Gmail accounts already had this treatment).

Google, of course, still collects users’ data in other ways and uses the information to serve hyper-relevant ads. It still scans emails too, both for security purposes and to power some of its smart features. And the company came under fire again in 2018 after The Wall Street Journal revealed it was allowing third-party developers to trawl users’ Gmail inboxes, to which Google responded by reminding users it was within their power to grant and revoke those permissions. As CNET reporters Laura Hautala and Richard Nieva wrote then, Google’s response more or less boiled down to: “This is what you signed up for.”

Really, what users signed up for was a cutting-edge email platform that ran laps around the other services at the time, and in many ways still does. It made the privacy concerns, for some, easier to swallow. From its inception, Gmail set the bar pretty high with its suite of free features. Users could suddenly send files of up to 25MB and check their email from anywhere as long as they had access to an internet connection and a browser, since it wasn’t locked to a desktop app.

It popularized the cloud as well as the Javascript technique AJAX, Wired noted in a piece for Gmail’s 10-year anniversary. This made Gmail dynamic, allowing the inbox to automatically refresh and surface new messages without the user clicking buttons. And it more or less did away with spam, filtering out junk messages.

Still, when Gmail first launched, it was considered by many to be a huge gamble for Google — which had already established itself with its search engine. “A lot of people thought it was a very bad idea, from both a product and a strategic standpoint,” Gmail creator Paul Buchheit told TIME in 2014. “The concern was this didn’t have anything to do with web search.”

Things obviously worked out alright, and Gmail’s dominion has only strengthened. Gmail crossed the one billion user mark in 2016, and its numbers have since doubled. It’s still leading the way in email innovation, 20 years after it first went online, integrating increasingly advanced features to make the process of receiving and responding to emails (which, let’s be honest, is a dreaded daily chore for a lot of us) much easier. Gmail may eventually have changed its approach to data collection, but the precedent it set is now deeply enmeshed in the exchange of services on the internet; companies take what data they can from consumers while they can and ask for forgiveness later.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/from-its-start-gmail-conditioned-us-to-trade-privacy-for-free-services-120009741.html?src=rss

From its start, Gmail conditioned us to trade privacy for free services

Posted on by

Long before Gmail became smart enough to finish your sentences, Google’s now-ubiquitous email service was buttering up the public for a fate that defined the internet age: if you’re not paying for the product, you are the product.

When Gmail was announced on April 1, 2004, its lofty promises and the timing of its release reportedly had people assuming it was a joke. It wasn’t the first web-based email provider — Hotmail and Yahoo! Mail had already been around for years — but Gmail was offering faster service, automatic conversation grouping for messages, integrated search functions and 1GB of storage, which was at the time a huge leap forward in personal cloud storage. Google in its press release boasted that a gigabyte was “more than 100 times” what its competitors offered. All of that, for free.

Except, as Gmail and countless tech companies in its wake have taught us, there’s no such thing as free. Using Gmail came with a tradeoff that’s now commonplace: You get access to its service, and in exchange, Google gets your data. Specifically, its software could scan the contents of account holders’ emails and use that information to serve them personalized ads on the site’s sidebar. For better or worse, it was a groundbreaking approach.

“Depending on your take, Gmail is either too good to be true, or it’s the height of corporate arrogance, especially coming from a company whose house motto is ‘Don’t Be Evil,’” tech journalist Paul Boutin wrote for Slate when Gmail launched. (Boutin, one of its early media testers, wrote favorably about Google’s email scanning but suggested the company implement a way for users to opt out lest they reject it entirely.)

There was immediate backlash from those who considered Gmail to be a privacy nightmare, yet it grew — and generated a lot of hype, thanks to its invite-only status in the first few years, which spurred a reselling market for Gmail invitations at upwards of $150 a pop, according to TIME. Google continued its ad-related email scanning practices for over a decade, despite the heat, carrying on through Gmail’s public rollout in 2007 and well into the 2010s, when it really started gaining traction.

And why not? If Gmail proved anything, it was that people would, for the most part, accept such terms. Or at least not care enough to read the fine-print closely. In 2012, Gmail became the world’s largest email service, with 425 million active users.

Other sites followed Google’s lead, baking similar deals into their terms of service, so people’s use of the product would automatically mean consent to data collection and specified forms of sharing. Facebook started integrating targeted ads based on its users’ online activities in 2007, and the practice has since become a pillar of social media’s success.

Things have changed a lot in recent years, though, with the rise of a more tech-savvy public and increased scrutiny from regulators. Gmail users on multiple occasions attempted to bring about class-action lawsuits over the scanning issue, and in 2017, Google finally caved. That year, the company announced that regular Gmail users’ emails would no longer be scanned for ad personalization (paid enterprise Gmail accounts already had this treatment).

Google, of course, still collects users’ data in other ways and uses the information to serve hyper-relevant ads. It still scans emails too, both for security purposes and to power some of its smart features. And the company came under fire again in 2018 after The Wall Street Journal revealed it was allowing third-party developers to trawl users’ Gmail inboxes, to which Google responded by reminding users it was within their power to grant and revoke those permissions. As CNET reporters Laura Hautala and Richard Nieva wrote then, Google’s response more or less boiled down to: “This is what you signed up for.”

Really, what users signed up for was a cutting-edge email platform that ran laps around the other services at the time, and in many ways still does. It made the privacy concerns, for some, easier to swallow. From its inception, Gmail set the bar pretty high with its suite of free features. Users could suddenly send files of up to 25MB and check their email from anywhere as long as they had access to an internet connection and a browser, since it wasn’t locked to a desktop app.

It popularized the cloud as well as the Javascript technique AJAX, Wired noted in a piece for Gmail’s 10-year anniversary. This made Gmail dynamic, allowing the inbox to automatically refresh and surface new messages without the user clicking buttons. And it more or less did away with spam, filtering out junk messages.

Still, when Gmail first launched, it was considered by many to be a huge gamble for Google — which had already established itself with its search engine. “A lot of people thought it was a very bad idea, from both a product and a strategic standpoint,” Gmail creator Paul Buchheit told TIME in 2014. “The concern was this didn’t have anything to do with web search.”

Things obviously worked out alright, and Gmail’s dominion has only strengthened. Gmail crossed the one billion user mark in 2016, and its numbers have since doubled. It’s still leading the way in email innovation, 20 years after it first went online, integrating increasingly advanced features to make the process of receiving and responding to emails (which, let’s be honest, is a dreaded daily chore for a lot of us) much easier. Gmail may eventually have changed its approach to data collection, but the precedent it set is now deeply enmeshed in the exchange of services on the internet; companies take what data they can from consumers while they can and ask for forgiveness later.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/from-its-start-gmail-conditioned-us-to-trade-privacy-for-free-services-120009741.html?src=rss

Hulu on Disney+ officially launches, bringing together Mickey Mouse and The Handmaid’s Tale

Posted on by

Disney didn't waste much absorbing Hulu into its multimedia maw. After taking full ownership of Hulu last November, the company started beta testing integration with Disney+ a month later. Today, Hulu on Disney+ is officially coming out of beta, making it easy for subscribers to access content for both services. Really, though, it's a way for Disney to push the value of its Hulu bundle, which starts at $9.99 a month with ads. If you want to go ad-free and download content for offline viewing, there's the Duo Premium bundle for $19.99 a month. And if you don't have a Hulu subscription, you'll get a notification that you can join within Disney+ for $2 more a month.

Existing bundle subscribers can hop into Hulu's shows using a new tab on Disney+, and the company says Hulu content like Shogun and The Handmaid's Tale will also be highlighted in the main carousel of shows and content recommendations. If you're old school (like me) and subscribe to Disney+ and Hulu separately, you can also start viewing Hulu content easily (assuming you're using the same e-mail address for both services). 

I didn't have any trouble launching Shogun on my Disney+ app, but I was disappointed to find that my existing Hulu viewing progress didn't carry over. That'll be particularly annoying for people catching up on older multi-season shows, since they'll have to manually figure out where they left off.

“This marks the most significant technical, operational, and product evolution for Disney+ since its launch – one that reflects a wider technology transformation that we have been undertaking," said Aaron LaBerge, President & CTO, Disney Entertainment & ESPN, in a statement. "That work is going to drive an enhanced, more engaging user experience with Disney+ and lays the foundation for the innovations and enhancements we are planning for the future.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/hulu-on-disney-officially-launches-bringing-together-mickey-mouse-and-the-handmaids-tale-152114434.html?src=rss

One of our favorite headphones for running is 20 percent off in the Amazon Big Spring Sale

Posted on by

Spring is officially here and if you've been itching to get back outside for a run, or you want to start a new workout regimen, the Amazon Big Spring Sale might have just what you need to upgrade the music portion of your routine. A number of Jabra earbuds have been discounted for the sale, including a couple of our top picks for the best headphones for running. Key among them is the Jabra Elite 8 Active, which is on sale for $160 — only $10 more than its record-low price. The same sale price can be found direct at Jabra as well.

These nearly bested the Beats Fit Pro for the top spot in our guide. Not only are the Elite 8 Active buds comfortable and secure when doing any kind of workout, but they're also IP68-rated for dust and water resistance. Jabra also put these earbuds through military-grade testing to protect them from extreme humidity, high temperature, rain and altitude, so it's fair to say these buds can take a beating (probably way more than what you'd put them through even during your sweatiest runs).

The Elite 8 Active have solid sound quality and ANC out of the box, but you can customize EQ settings using its companion mobile app. If you prefer bassy sounds to get you in the zone before a workout session, you can change the sound profile to accommodate that. They also support spatial sound with Dolby Audio, which is a great perk to have and it will make the Elite 8 Active an even better option for those who want just one pair of buds to use all day, every day, not only during workouts. Jabra's HearThrough transparency mode is also handy, especially for runners who often train outside, since it lets some sound in so you can stay more aware of your surroundings.

Our biggest gripe with the Elite 8 Active buds is that HearThrough doesn't sound quite as natural as the transparency mode on our top pick, the Beats Fit Pro. Otherwise, they're a fantastic option for runners or anyone else who wants a solid pair of wireless earbuds that provide a complete package when it comes to sound quality, ANC and protection against sweat and the elements.

If you're looking to spend even less, it's hard to find a better value in Jabra's lineup than the Elite 4 Active earbuds. Those are on sale for $90 right now — not a record low, but close to it. They're our budget pick in the same guide thanks to their comfy, IP57-rated design, good sound quality and ANC, solid battery life and support for multipoint connectivity. And even though you don't get spatial audio on the Elite 4 Active, they do support custom EQ with the Jabra mobile app.

Your Spring Sales Shopping Guide: Spring sales are in the air, headlined by Amazon’s Big Spring sale event. Our expert editors are curating all the best spring sales right here. Follow Engadget to shop the best tech deals from Amazon’s Big Spring Sale, hear from Autoblog’s car experts on the best spring auto deals on Amazon, and find spring sales to shop on AOL, handpicked just for you.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/one-of-our-favorite-headphones-for-running-is-20-percent-off-in-the-amazon-big-spring-sale-141545370.html?src=rss

Disney+ screws UK Doctor Who fans with global release strategy

Posted on by

The latest series of Doctor Who will debut on iPlayer and globally on Disney+ at midnight in the UK. The first two hour-long episodes land on May 11, which will then air on BBC One later that day in prime time. Those who know how time zones work will have already guessed that Doctor Who will now be available to view in the US on May 10 at 7pm ET and 4pm PT.

There are plenty of sucky things about living in the UK, one of which is that we’re a day behind the US TV schedule. Buzzy shows like Lost were often spoiled by the internet long before it was legally available to view here. To curb the rampant piracy, shows like Game of Thrones and Succession were broadcast at 2am or 3am.

That way, ardent viewers could DVR those airings and watch them before they got to work lest it be spoiled. Because, if you didn’t, you’d have to be extremely careful when you were treading around on the internet. There were very few shows I didn’t have spoiled for me given that I work on the internet all the damn day.

So you can imagine my dismay to learn that Doctor Who, one of the crown jewels in the British TV firmament, will now be treated the same way. It’s hard not to feel annoyed given that the bulk of the series’ funding comes from the license fee paid by the majority of TV owners in the UK. It seems mad, to me, that the global simulcast isn't tied to the UK broadcast, rather than this obvious tweak to ensure the US gets it first. Especially when the alternative is to stay up until 2am on a Saturday morning. 

(Yes, I know there’s precedent for this, The Five Doctors aired on PBS two days before the UK airing, and the TV movie aired on Fox twelve days earlier. But that was in the pre-internet heyday when you didn't have every big moment from the show shared by its own official social channels mere seconds after it aired.)

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/disney-screws-uk-doctor-who-fans-with-global-release-strategy-155040558.html?src=rss

How 19 years of Amazon Prime has satisfied our need for speed

Posted on by

Just as Engadget was hitting publish on its first posts, I was putting a freshly minted English degree to use working at an indie bookshop in Los Angeles. In seemingly unrelated news, Amazon had just reported its first profitable year after switching from selling books to selling “everything” four years before. (It still sold a lot of books.)

Our bookstore did a good job keeping shelves stocked with a balance of the more worthy popular hits and smaller, better fare. But we couldn’t have every book a customer might want, so we offered to order any in-print title. If a distributor had it, it’d take about a week to get in, longer if we had to go through the publisher. That seemed fine for most customers.

But sometimes “about a week” was too long. A few people came right out and said, “Nah, I’ll order it on Amazon.” In 2005, Amazon launched Prime, the membership program that, for $79 a year, gave customers unlimited two-day shipping on most orders. At launch, CEO Jeff Bezos called it “‘all-you-can-eat’ express shipping.” No one knew at the time how hungry the world was for Amazon’s brand of convenience. And now, nearly two decades later, we’ve seen the shifts that accommodate that buffet — in labor, retail and the entire customer experience.

Prime wasn’t an overnight success. It’s estimated that six years after launch, just four million households paid for the service. But 10 years later, in 2021, Bezos claimed it had accrued 200 million members worldwide. Outside of that milestone, Amazon hasn’t made its membership numbers public, but it’s likely the figure is higher now.

That shipping should be both free and fast has become an expectation, and no company has done more to alter the landscape of logistics than Amazon. On its own, the company operates over a hundred warehouses in the US, each ranging from 600,000 to four million square feet. Each one employs between 1,000 and 1,500 people, and an army of around 750,000 robots works alongside humans in many locations.

The company operates a fleet of cargo planes, is experimenting with drone deliveries and deploys thousands of delivery vans — though none of those Amazon-branded vans are driven by actual employees. Rather, separate companies, known as delivery service partners (DSP), subcontract drivers to operate those vans. Amazon employs 1.5 million people either full or part time (with one million in the US), but those figures don’t include independent contractors and temporary personnel. In addition to the DSP program, Amazon Flex lets individuals use their own cars to deliver smile-emblazoned packages to porches. The company outsources delivery to traditional providers too, relying on both UPS and the US Postal Service, the latter it has compelled to deliver packages on Sundays since 2013.

Such vast orchestration to deliver Stanley Quenchers and pimple patches faster than anyone has paid off. However, it’s hard to look at growth and revenue numbers without considering the human costs. Contracted drivers pee in bottles because meeting quotas leaves no time for bathroom breaks. Workers sustain serious injuries at automated warehouses. The company has been sued for retaliatory firing, intrusive employee surveillance practices and failure to follow COVID safety guidelines. Amazon again made the dirty dozen list in 2023 for workplace safety, according to the advocacy group National COSH. And while it has taken steps to improve, with better compensation, the company takes anti-union actions typical of a massive corporation, joining others in calling the National Labor Relations Board “unconstitutional.”

Apart from worker issues, Amazon’s dominance has made life harder for retail businesses in general, particularly the big chains. The Amazon Effect became shorthand for the mall-emptying squeeze of e-commerce on traditional retail. Even businesses that team up with Amazon don’t fare well. Third-party sellers on the site are subject to punitive measures and must contend with increasing fees, which sometimes put them out of business. Sellers who do perform well have seen products copied and sold by Amazon’s private label. Notable partnerships have had dismal results, such as when Borders outsourced its early web sales or the exclusivity deal with Toys ‘R’ Us. Of course, Borders no longer exists, and Toys ‘R’ Us filed for bankruptcy in 2017.

Trying to beat Amazon on speed and price is pointless. Joining them is unwise. So retailers compete in other ways. At the bookstore, we focused on our strengths: a varied, multi-talented staff who could size up a customer’s reading tastes and stick a good book in their hands. If someone came into our store circa 2005 and said they were into fantasy, there’s a good chance our book buyer would pass them a copy of George R.R. Martin’s latest, years before HBO had anything to do with it.

We had a curated ‘zine section and hosted live events with bestselling authors, cult magazine founders and local writers. But mostly, we capitalized on folks who wanted something more from their shopping experience than just speed and convenience, people who didn’t mind if it took a week to get a book, as long as it came with a little local community. Some just wanted to browse books while sitting under the tree (there’s a tree in the middle of the store), petting a cat (in my day, that was Lucy) and listening to what we felt were pretty wicked playlists.

Today, Skylight Books is still a force of creativity and verve in the Los Feliz neighborhood, and it has even expanded into an annex next door. In general, after the initial casualties from the retail apocalypse and COVID, independent bookstores are doing OK, with established names staying put and new stores opening. Elsewhere in the retail industry, big chains continue to close locations, but independent retail seems to be growing. Personally, I enjoy the new bakeries, brewpubs and bulk stores that have sprung up around the neighborhoods where I now live.

I can’t, as a commerce writer, ignore that a decent portion of my job directs readers to Amazon’s website. The company is playing a part in displaying the very words you’re reading, as Engadget’s site is facilitated by Amazon Web Services (AWS) through Yahoo’s cloud partnership. The company is one of the biggest on the planet, the second largest employer in the US and a good portion of every retail dollar spent in the US goes into Amazon’s revenue chest.

With its acquisition of Whole Foods’ 500+ stores, Amazon is doing fine in the physical retail sector. Yet the company doesn’t tend to win when it tries to fabricate other retail experiences. Amazon Books, Amazon Style and Amazon 4-Star were all small-scale retail spaces that tried to leverage Amazon’s brand, massive trove of buyer data and cutting-edge retail technology. At their peak, those stores comprised about 70 brick-and-mortar locations, all of which are now closed. The cashierless Amazon Go still has more than 20 locations in the US, but Amazon shut down nine of them in 2023 and hasn’t announced plans to open more.

Those misfires could be statistically inevitable; more than half of new businesses go under before they hit the 10-year mark. But perhaps those stores failed because, as physical spaces, they couldn’t capitalize on Amazon’s primary strength: zero-effort buying. Shopping at Amazon.com isn’t particularly pleasant. The website is cluttered and confusing. Suspect products and fake reviews erode shoppers’ trust. It isn’t even the cheapest place to shop. But that 1-Click™ buy button and turbo delivery makes stuff appear on our doorsteps like it slid there on greased rails.

Yet when people get up the energy to leave their homes, they may hope for more: human experiences created by people from their own neighborhoods who do what they do out of passion, not because market data indicates dollars to be had in a given sector. With its trillion-dollar valuation, Amazon isn’t going anywhere, but under its massive shadow, there’s still room for businesses that focus on the human element of commercial transactions, places where people might want to spend some of the time Amazon’s speed and convenience may have saved them.

To celebrate Engadget's 20th anniversary, we're taking a look back at the products and services that have changed the industry since March 2, 2004.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/how-19-years-of-amazon-prime-has-satisfied-our-need-for-speed-141557261.html?src=rss