Category Archives: Soapbox

Chrysler’s Super Bowl ad did it resonate with you?

A friend on Facebook posed the question “I’m curious, what was the impression of this ad for people outside MI?”.

I thought it might be interesting to expand the discussion here.

Here’s my West Coast 🙂 angle. I’d guess it resonates much better there than here. For me it’s very difficult to sell a surviving-the-hard-knocks storyline after the not-so-distant massive bailouts for a company that simply lost all sense of innovation let alone fiscal responsibility.

The ad has me admiring Ford’s decision to pass on the Super Bowl even more. Yet for Chrysler quite the opposite, they’ve seemingly learned nothing. This two minute production costs $12 million in Super Bowl ad fees alone forgetting the $9 million production costs. That’s 262, $80K/year UAW jobs for a year. They just don’t get it.

This line is revealing “Now it’s probably not the one you’ve been reading in papers.” clearly referring to the last few years of bad bailout press as though it’s all been a conspiracy! Amazing.

It’s hard to believe Chrysler feels ratcheting up the attitude to a fevered pitch is the best tact to sell this product. Admittedly, I’m not familiar with this model car but how about a bite of humble pie? Better yet, how about explaining why people should buy this car over an import beyond heaps of attitude.

Can you tell this touched a cord?  

What did you make of this ad?

[UPDATE] A few links/quotes:

Chrysler, which is 10 percent owned by the U.S. government because of a $12.5 billion bailout in 2009, had the lowest fleet gas mileage of any major automaker in 2009 at 19.2 mpg. –link

From Chrysler’s home page flash rotator:

Chrysler Group LLC to Invest $179 Million in Jobs for Michigan, Fuel Efficient Engines for North America

That’s dated December ’09, after the bailout they commit to fuel efficient engines. –link

Copyright and the Free Pascal project

Updated July 31, 2011 Another interesting battle brewing with regard to Open Source and copying of source code between Google and Oracle over Java.

If you’ve been following my blog recently perhaps you’re aware of activity related to a post I wrote back in September asking for a free version of the Delphi command line compiler. In a response to a comment asking if I’d ever tried the Free Pascal compiler I stated:

I haven’t tried the Free Pascal compiler for a number of reasons including the fact that it’s RTL/FCL violate Borland/CodeGear’s copyright. I’ve looked at the code closely and IMO copyright issues abound.

At that time, there were a few replies but over the last few days members of the Free Pascal core team as well as the FP community attacked me personally over this statement. Upon request I published one example illustrating my point using Classes.ExtractStrings. Unfortunately, this was met by further attacks until a comment from Marco van de Voort and subsequent email apology from Daniël Mantione, both members of the core Free Pascal team. The following republished with Daniël’s permission:

date:13 Nov 2007 15:25:14 -0800
subject:Weblog Mail from ‘Dani&#235;l Mantione’ on ‘Steve Trefethen’s Weblog’

Hello Steve,

I would like to offer apologies on behalf of the Free Pascal development team for the aggressive comments on your weblog. The situation puzzles us; that code you showed is more similar than one would expect with an independend implementation, yet it doesn’t look like being taken from Delphi source. Michael, who comitted it, cannot remember having written it so it might have been contributed by someone, but searches through e-mail archives haven’t revealed anything yet.

Anyway, it’s good that this is on the agenda now. Copyrights are something we have to be carefull about.

Best regards,

Daniël Mantione

In further support my statements I added five additional examples all from classes.pp which covers roughly 16% of that file, which is not exactly a “fringe file”. I’ll add that this more recent review took but a few minutes and is by no mean extensive nor exhaustive unlike a review I did earlier this year. DaniĂ«l has since provided me plausible explanations as to how these issues might have arisen and indicated that the core team is reviewing sysutils.pp and classes.pp.

Unfortunately, this is neither a new issue nor limited to sysutils.pp and classes.pp. I’m disappointed that seemingly no one from the Free Pascal team or community discovered nor, to my knowledge, raised these issues years ago.

And, fwiw, I haven’t been employed by Borland since June 28, 2007 nor, as was implied in a comment, do I have any financial interest in the company whatsoever.

Of course, this raises the issue of how do you go about validating the originality of Open Source source code in general? And no, I don’t have a good answer.

Laptops in Meetings

One of my pet peeves is laptop use during meetings when the use of said
laptop(s) is not related to the “business at hand”.  With but a single search
for “laptops in meetings“ Google yielded a great
on this exact topic from none other than Microsoft.  I gotta work on
getting Borland to adopt
these rules.  Having worked at MS I have first hand experience at how seriously
they take meetings and how they value efficiently run meetings, so it comes as
no surprise to find the above article on their website.  Thanks for sharing