You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
I got on at Nanaimo at 750ish and was stuck there about 5 mins before it moved. Ended up missing the seabus and therefore connecting bus and was late :/ Was late last week due to the fog and missed the bus that goes to the automall. I don't mind walking from Fell & Marine, but it doesn't get me to work on time
Advertisement
__________________
Quote:
Originally posted byThE ReMiX
--------------------- REMEMBER:-->RS is a place for car enthusiasts to come and get together because of their intrest and love for cars. Hating is not an option-take your immaturity elsewhere!
----///-\\\----Put This
---|||---|||---On Your
---|||---|||---profile If
---|||---|||---You Know
----\\\-///----Someone
-----\\///-----Who has died
------///\-----Of
-----///\\\----Cancer
----///--\\\-----Or whom maybe suffering from it
As much as I despise TransLink, I am going to "defend" them on their "out-of-date" tech a bit here.
A lot of people have the tendency to think that out-dated tech is a bad thing. In a lot of cases, they would be right. But at the same time, they would also be wrong in a lot of scenarios. Having worked in the technology field, I can assure you that a lot of times, the golden mantra of "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" is just so true.
Case in point -- suppose a business scans documents into electronic format using a piece of specialty software that scans stuff into a Windows XP PC. For far too many times, I have seen places that replaces any single piece of this equipment in the workflow for whatever reason it may be, and things promptly goes haywire. If the PC box got replaced, perhaps the software isn't compatible with Win7 / 8. Or maybe the scanner isn't supported by the new OS. Or maybe the scanning software is supposed to work, but somehow doesn't.
Applying the situation to TransLink, I obviously don't know how their IT systems work. But given the history and age of their systems, I would not at all be surprised if at least some of their stuff are still running on old legacy systems because those are the only things that can keep the system running.
The old systems are also a lot simpler and in many cases easier to troubleshoot, and if they provide everything needed to properly run things why the hell would you waste money on an upgrade to an untested system when your proven technology works? In these days of widespread internet usage many developers simply rely on updates to fix bugs found in overcomplicated software instead of properly QAing it in the first place, as much as people knock this old system can you imagine the backlash if they spent a bunch of money to upgrade to a new system and things got worse?
__________________ 1991 Toyota Celica GTFour RC // 2007 Toyota Rav4 V6 // 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee
1992 Toyota Celica GT-S ["sold"] \\ 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD [sold] \\ 2000 Jeep Cherokee [sold] \\ 1997 Honda Prelude [sold] \\ 1992 Jeep YJ [sold/crashed] \\ 1987 Mazda RX-7 [sold] \\ 1987 Toyota Celica GT-S [crushed]
Quote:
Originally Posted by maksimizer
half those dudes are hotter than ,my GF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevYouUp
reading this thread is like waiting for goku to charge up a spirit bomb in dragon ball z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_KarMa
OH thank god. I thought u had sex with my wife. :cry:
As much as I despise TransLink, I am going to "defend" them on their "out-of-date" tech a bit here.
A lot of people have the tendency to think that out-dated tech is a bad thing. In a lot of cases, they would be right. But at the same time, they would also be wrong in a lot of scenarios. Having worked in the technology field, I can assure you that a lot of times, the golden mantra of "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" is just so true.
Case in point -- suppose a business scans documents into electronic format using a piece of specialty software that scans stuff into a Windows XP PC. For far too many times, I have seen places that replaces any single piece of this equipment in the workflow for whatever reason it may be, and things promptly goes haywire. If the PC box got replaced, perhaps the software isn't compatible with Win7 / 8. Or maybe the scanner isn't supported by the new OS. Or maybe the scanning software is supposed to work, but somehow doesn't.
Applying the situation to TransLink, I obviously don't know how their IT systems work. But given the history and age of their systems, I would not at all be surprised if at least some of their stuff are still running on old legacy systems because those are the only things that can keep the system running.
The inverse of this is the fact that failure to adapt and evolve leads to eventual demise.
Think blackberry, they failed to see a shift, in 3 years they managed to fall 10 years behind their competition.
The inverse of this is the fact that failure to adapt and evolve leads to eventual demise.
Think blackberry, they failed to see a shift, in 3 years they managed to fall 10 years behind their competition.
Of course the failure to adapt and evolve would lead to eventual demise. Another reality to take into consideration is, as the hardware ages, chances of failure / breakdown goes up, and it becomes increasingly impossible to repair / replace the dated technology.
All I'm saying is -- old / out-dated doesn't necessarily mean they are bad. Companies need to have back up plans as well as future upgrade plans to minimize system failure risks.
BTW, meme405, with TransLink, I don't really see how they'd have any direct competitors at all. Private vehicles, car sharing schemes, cycling, etc. are all only partial competitors to TransLink. Until teleportation becomes a reality, I'd say TransLink has its grip on public transportation nice and firm.
Of course the failure to adapt and evolve would lead to eventual demise. Another reality to take into consideration is, as the hardware ages, chances of failure / breakdown goes up, and it becomes increasingly impossible to repair / replace the dated technology.
All I'm saying is -- old / out-dated doesn't necessarily mean they are bad. Companies need to have back up plans as well as future upgrade plans to minimize system failure risks.
BTW, meme405, with TransLink, I don't really see how they'd have any direct competitors at all. Private vehicles, car sharing schemes, cycling, etc. are all only partial competitors to TransLink. Until teleportation becomes a reality, I'd say TransLink has its grip on public transportation nice and firm.
So because of the lack of competition they can afford to strive towards mediocrity?
I never said old tech has anything wrong with it, but when new technology comes along which would improve a companies bottom line, or could help simplify operations, they should absolutely at least explore the option...
Having 15% of you computers running older processors doesn't mean shit, I could care less about that, hell at my company we have dozens of people running old hardware, it doesn't matter because these people are not affected by this since the computer isn't the limitation, they are.
I'm not saying translink is fucked or not (at least not based on their tech being outdated). I'm just saying there is a flip side to your generic post.
So because of the lack of competition they can afford to strive towards mediocrity?
I never said old tech has anything wrong with it, but when new technology comes along which would improve a companies bottom line, or could help simplify operations, they should absolutely at least explore the option...
Lol I said evaluate it, not blindly try and adopt it since it might have possibly worked in another city...
Project fails . . . They went into it blindly. Didn't do their due dligience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meme405
My point is only that the danger of staying stagnant is just as real as the danger in taking a risk and initiating some change.
Staying stagnant . . . You're susceptible to change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meme405
I'm not saying translink is fucked or not (at least not based on their tech being outdated). I'm just saying there is a flip side to your generic post.
Here's an original one for you: Hindsight is 20/20.
The province should just privatize the system and let the people who depend on it fend for themselves. Like used cars, sometimes infrastructure are beyond economic value to maintain. Then, at least fear-mongers such as the Canadian Tax Payers Federation can find a new fish to fry.
Who cares about the poor anyway? If I can save a few bucks a year to maintain my stable of project cars, it's all worth it. Right?
Project fails . . . They went into it blindly. Didn't do their due dligience.
Actually the compass thing was a huge fail right from the start, I mean you could just see the hurdles, and translink faceplanted at every single one of them.
I will give them one thing, they kept getting up again, it's just too bad they just continued getting battered.
But yes, somewhere a long the line I think everyone can agree that this shit was not thoroughly thought out...
its always easier said than done and even easier to just point fingers. as said before, hindsight is always 20/20
nothing new ever works 100%. nothing can be improved without mistakes and obstacles.
you want a newer/updated system to run the trains? no problem. up goes the cost of either fares or pst or other revenue collection for translink. then in come the bitching.
oh, new system doesn't work 100% yet, more problems arise from the newer system in a shorter span timeframe than the number of huge errors made from the old system after all these years of running. more bitching.
there is just no pleasing everybody. all anybody can do in any business is to deal damage control when accidents/incidents happen. accidents happen simply because they are accidents. if anybody can foresee any of it, there wouldn't be any accidents.
you think the current systems in the world had their own "compass" system up and running right at the get go? i highly doubt it.
I don't expect perfection, but the Compass was a complete failure from the get go. According to this CTV news report, Translink currently loses ~$10M a year to fare evasion, but they pay Cubic Corp $12M per year to operate the Compass system once it is in place, and this does not include the up front costs to build the system in the first place.
Where else in the world do you find such a boneheaded plan???
I can't find the link anymore, but in another news report that I read, the Compass system was not meeting the data transfer performance requirements set out by Translink. IIRC, TransLink was expecting a processing speed of 0.3 sec per transaction at the bus tap out sensor, but the current system that this Cubic Corp implemented requries ~1 sec per tap out transaction. Again, what kind of boneheaded engineering firm would not implement alternative solutions to meet the required performance targets? I am not a mobile networking expert by any means, even with my basic IT understanding, I can think of at least several viable conceptual models that can work around the performance limitations to deliver the required performance targets. Why the hired engineering firm did not choose to implement this is completely beyond me.
In the end, it is the taxpayers that foot the bill.
there are certain things i do know that i am not at liberty to say in regards to the performance issue. but it is being worked on.
12M a year to operate the system is a lot but think of the bigger picture. every project has a time frame before its pros outweigh the cons. eventually, the system will pay off, but when? who knows.
based off other systems, the compass card may eventually get rid of zones and promote more ridership which in turns generate more revenue. it should decrease fare evasion (completely getting rid of fare evasion doesn't sound like its feasible) and thus increase revenue. data collected may improve routes more efficiently and may decrease operating costs.
the thing i do agree with is that they should have went with the companies that have built such a system before.
It's funny how one of the best bullet train country in the world, Canada can't even run skytrain properly.
Translink should stop buying cheap ass systems/trains from overseas like Korea and Taiwan, I know it's gonna cost more, but just stick to Canadian. They need to replace whole fleet to Canadian made Bombardier, as well as their operating systems. Bombardier - The only manufacturer of planes and trains
hrm, if the compass system is there to decrease fare evasion, how about having the actual skytrain employees have a presence in the stations and actually check fares. i bet that would be cheaper to pay their wages vs the compass system
hrm, if the compass system is there to decrease fare evasion, how about having the actual skytrain employees have a presence in the stations and actually check fares. i bet that would be cheaper to pay their wages vs the compass system
They already pay skytrain attendants $30/hr to stand in front of the stations. The union probably doesn't want them to work too hard either.
cuz you know, have a skytrain attendant at every station to check fare. they catch one with no fare, then now how many more will pass by without a fare? then how many people are you going to actually man at one station?
cuz you know, have a skytrain attendant at every station to check fare. they catch one with no fare, then now how many more will pass by without a fare? then how many people are you going to actually man at one station?
yeah but the $100 ticket makes up for those other people's fare they missed catching and then some...
The whole automated system just won't work for a 'world class' rail system. Just think, pretty much 90% of the world's leading rail system (e.g. japan, south korea, hong kong, stockholm, amsterdam) all are operated by humans.
Technology is never going to be 100% and I am pretty sure even if translink spends hundreds of millions to update its server and electronics, is still bound to fuck up somewhere due to its AI.
Honestly, if they want to create a better system, they should do what the rest of the world does... Get train operators/conductors and a team of trained station staffs. Not only will it be more efficient, it will also help create jobs.
i don't think it is more efficient. i can't find the vancitybuzz article that kenneth wrote but he made a good comparison between our transit system and other transit systems world wide. ours run on more frequent trips than staff operated trains and we wait less. especially during peak hours.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
