Anecdotal, but I'm 193cm, take a few 12+ hour flights per year, and have no problem not reclining. For what it's worth, I feel like I've experienced people on my shorter, domestic flights reclining their seats more often than on my longer, international flights.
I'm 6'4" with a lot of my height in my legs. Sitting comfortably (not slouching, mind you), my knees already barely rub against the seat in front of me. As soon as that seat is reclined, my knees get crushed and I have to either sit up even straighter or twist to the side, neither of which are comfortable. Or, I have to pay to be in a higher fare class with more space.
Have you tried the exit row instead? Sure, you might have to agree to help others, but if you aren't willing to do that regardless of the row, then that just says a lot about you.
Yepp, I generally will try for the exit row or the first row in a section (sacrificing no under seat storage), but they tend to be the first seats booked. Since I'm usually traveling with multiple other people and we prefer sitting together, it makes it pretty difficult to reliably select those seats with extra leg room. I haven't seen any airlines that charge "+$25 for the extra leg room" on 12+ hour international flights, but if they exist I'd love to know which ones they are!
It's been awhile 2017ish, but I used to book flights for a team of photographers that traveled a lot. They all had their individual preferences for aisle/window, exit row. Maybe it was because they all had lots of butt-in-chair miles, but their upgrades were typically $25 for domestic US travel. Maybe I'm conflating that as the price for everyone when it was the price for their status only???
The physical requirements are an issue for a lot of people. E.g. a tall senior citizen, anyone flying with a small child, anyone with a visible disability (temporary or otherwise).
I know American at least has some rows with extra leg room that aren't the exit row. (Though obviously if you want more space you have to pay for it.) Not sure about others.
Yes, it's usually called "premium economy" or something like that. I was resistant for a long time, but eventually decided that being able to walk the next day without pain was worth the extra cost. That said, they tend to fill up quickly -- so not always an option.
Many airlines don't let you choose your seat without paying extra. But yeah, maybe if you're that tall that's just an unfortunate extra cost you have to bear.
At some point you have to do the math. Is +$25 for the extra leg room worth it for a 3 hour flight? 6 hour flight?
I flew from DFW to Sydney on a flight that was not fully booked. They made an announcement for a $150 upgrade to have an entire row to yourself. Once in the air, all of the armrests could be raised to allow you to lay flat. $150/17hours ~= $9/hour for a comfortable-ish sleep on a long haul flight. That's better math than the app subscription model threads have.
I did find this later, but that's also very unintuitive. I'm looking at a call log, why would I filter my calls to look at voicemails? I mean even the options there are categorically inconsistent. It is "Calls", "Missed", "Voicemail". voicemail is a different category than received and missed. I'm expecting that because that's what used to be at the top of that page. They taught me that that's what I should expect from the filtering option.
My solution was to change from "Unified" to "Classic" which changes the bottom bar from [("Calls" "Contacts" "Keypad") "Search] to ["Favorites" "Recents" "Contacts" "Keypad" "Voicemail"]. THE ICONS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME SIZE. The only difference is the spacing between them.
But again, this is fucking crazy because going back to the classic mode, if I click on a recent name it starts dialing them. But in the unified mode it gives me information. The unified makes the whole name act as if I'm pressing the info button.
The problem is that Apple created an anti-pattern, TO ITSELF. They taught users that an action did one thing and then used that action to do something completely different. No one on iOS 26 should expect that clicking the call line will take you to the information page and should instead expect that doing so will start dialing that person.
For Google Maps, They have an “official” limit of 500 where anything beyond that is not guaranteed. In practice, the current limit is 3,000.
I’m wondering if Apple Maps is doing something similar where they set a low official limit that they can walk back on / to in the future, as to avoid legal responsibility
Hello! I'm Lewis Godowski, a creatively-driven lead engineer with over a decade of experience across the Apple ecosystem. Passionate about the little details of good design and a strong advocate for the human-centered design process.
Most recently, I was brought onto a new strategic business unit build to turnaround, manage, and lead an underperforming team of ~10 iOS engineers at a top 3 global motorcycle manufacturer. I had two main responsibilities I needed to balance: doing some heavy lifting as an individual contributor, and more importantly people management (upwards with product stakeholders, laterally with other pods and work streams, and downwards with my team). I identified and reduced inefficiencies in our scrum sprint cycle rituals, and established a standard architecture, code style guide, and best practices document for the client's codebase, resulting in a 28% increase in velocity and allowing us to deliver on schedule for an in-person launch event with 150+ dealerships.
Unfortunately, my current role has been transforming more and more into a business/digital consultant, which means a lot of my time is spent working on slide decks and high-level architectures that never see the light of day. It's bumming me out and taking me away from what I really enjoy: writing code, learning new skills, and wearing multiple hats to solve problems.
Ideally, I'm looking for an iOS (or Vapor, a server-side Swift framework) role as either manager or IC that lets me really flex my Swift and iOS expertise.
Hello! I'm Lewis Godowski, a software engineer with ~10 years of experience across iOS and backend. I find joy in dogs, desserts, and the small details of good design. I am a strong advocate for end users and their experience with a product.
Most recently, I was brought onto a new strategic business unit build to turnaround, manage, and lead an underperforming team of ~10 iOS engineers at a top 10 global motorcycle manufacturer. I had two main responsibilities I needed to balance: people management (upwards with product stakeholders, laterally with other pods and work streams, and downwards with my team) and doing some heavy lifting as an individual contributor. I created structure and improved hygiene in the team, codebase, and sprint/scrum life cycle, which stabilized our velocity and allowed us to find our rhythm and deliver on schedule.
Unfortunately, my current role has been transforming more and more into a business/digital consultant, which means a lot of working on slide decks and high-level architectures that never see the light of day. It's bumming me out and taking me away from what I really enjoy: writing code, learning new skills, and wearing multiple hats to solve problems.
Ideally, I'm looking for an iOS (or Vapor, a server-side Swift framework) role that lets me really flex my Swift expertise.
Anecdata, but a few weeks ago I drove from LA to SF in my 2018 Model 3 (long range, single motor). It has a 75 kWh battery pack, my drive was 417 miles, and I drove 70 mph for probably 90-95% of the trip. I used a total of 95 kWh, which equates to ~329 miles on a full charge (100-0%). My efficiency was 226 Wh/mi.
There are absolutely other times when I'll get substantially less range, but it's understandably when I'm driving faster of more aggressive, or it's colder outside, or it's primarily uphill, or there's a strong headwind, etc.
There are a lot of different factors that can affect a car's range (regardless if it's an EV or ICE), and it seems like Tesla has decided to show the EPA range on the dashboard because there's no way they could magically know where you're driving if it's not entered in the navigation system. Once you start navigation however, it's able to factor in all these externalities and give a very accurate estimate. On the first leg of the above trip, I arrived to charge within 3% of Tesla's estimate.
Shouldn't the car know the current temperature (or at least the battery temperature), whether or not the AC is on, etc? Other EVs take those into account regardless of whether or not something is plugged into navigation.
Personally I just toggle to only show the percentage and ignore the battery range estimate. When on longer trips, the nav estimate is usually spot on, or at worst a couple of % off due to my not-predictable driving behavior.
My iPhone can send me alerts that I’m going to be late to work based on its tracking of my daily commute and you’re telling me that a machine that is constantly connected to a GPS network, sending data back to home base, and (almost?) capable of driving itself has “no way” of “magically knowing where you’re driving” unless you tell it?
If only they could use some of that data and processing power to back out someone’s standard commute, driving behavior, and local temperature.
On top of that, my car can remember the MPGs I got for the last tank (and every tank before that) and estimates my range off of that. Apparently that’s “magic” according to the comment you replied to. Tesla apologists always have some excuse.
That's exactly what the Tesla does. When I get into the car at 8AM, the car assumes I want to drive to my partner's workplace, and gives me directions to get there, taking into account current traffic and weather conditions, and a reliable estimate of what the battery will be when I get there.
> in every EV range comparison I’ve ever seen, teslas are the ones that can’t meet their claimed range by a fair margin. Other brands are almost always close to accurate or in some cases do noticeably better than claimed.
What's your source? Cause I don't think that's true... [1][2]
