Imagine a booking site that anticipates your hotel preferences based solely on the type of computer you use. If this seems a bit absurd, you may want to take it up with Orbitz, which has begun using data-monitoring technology to direct Mac users to slightly more upscale (and expensive) hotels than those highlighted for PC users.
First reported by the Wall Street Journal, this practice is possible because retail sites can track whether visitors are coming in via Windows or other operating systems. They can even tell which sorts of devices — computer, iPad, Android, etc. — visitors are using.
According to the WSJ article, Orbitz’s analytics team has determined that Mac users spend an average of about 30 percent more per night than PC users on hotels booked through the site. So, although all Orbitz visitors have access to the same hotels at identical prices, Mac users are initially directed to view more expensive options.
My first thought was that it’s sort of like saying I’m more likely to prefer polka-dotted elephants to striped turtles because I drive a Volkswagen — the two are unrelated. On the other hand, there are statistics (including higher household income among Mac users) to back up the correlation.
All of this data tracking makes me wonder just how far the travel industry (or any industry, for that matter) will go in an effort to personalize content. I’m envisioning sites that direct iPad users to hotels that have iPod docking stations, and Windows XP (circa 2001) users being sent to deals for inexpensive chain hotels.
I recently returned from a marvelous trip to Amsterdam, where I toured museums, ogled tulips, sipped jenever, ate pickled herring and explored the city’s canals and historical monuments — by myself.
I was informed early on that I’d be on my own for the trip, which was my first to the Netherlands. To put it mildly, I was terrified. I’d heard horror stories about pickpockets and districts of the red-light variety, and I’ll do just about anything to avoid dining by myself. But, as someone who has an abysmal sense of direction, I was most worried about finding my own way through the city without the help of a travel companion.
Some people cringe at the idea of traveling alone, but overall, I was relieved to discover that in Amsterdam nearly everyone speaks English, maps are plentiful and the train system is easy to use. (I only got lost twice!)
The most important takeaway for me, however, was that I was able to do the trip at my own pace. In addition to spreading myself out in my non-shared hotel room, I went to sleep when I wanted, I woke up when I wanted, I walked everywhere, and I saw/toured/tasted more than 20 of Amsterdam’s most popular landmarks/museums/foods and beverages in just four days. The freedom to go at such a break-neck pace is something I probably wouldn’t have had if I’d brought a friend.
Have you traveled alone? If not, would you consider it? If so, what are some of the fun experiences you’ve had solo? Leave your comments below.
Anyone who’s traveled solo knows that it can be both rewarding and stressful. If you’re like me, you’ve probably discovered that dining sans companions can be one of the most awkward aspects of venturing out alone. (Let’s just say I was pretty discouraged when I ended up eating by myself during the first four nights of a six-night cruise last year.)
In a recent Independent Traveler poll, about 35 percent of voters said they either try not to dine alone or absolutely avoid it at all costs. Females who fall into either of those camps may want to check out Invite for a Bite, a Web site that allows women traveling alone to meet up for meals.
Founder Cressida Howard says on the company’s “about” page that she came up with the idea after listening to a radio broadcast during which several women lamented dining solo. Women who join the site can set up invitations asking for other female dining partners to join them for a bite … or a movie or whatever.
The site includes safety tips (after all, you’ll likely be meeting up with complete strangers), and according to the frequently asked questions section, it’s limited to females for safety reasons — and so as not to be confused with a dating site.
Would having dinner with someone you’ve never met be less uncomfortable than dining alone? Tell us your thoughts in the comments below.
If you’ve ever been stuck in traffic or a super-long line at airport security and wished there were an alternative, get a load of this: the world’s first flying car successfully completed a flight test two weeks ago — and in just a year’s time, you could be the proud owner of one.
According to Yahoo!, the Transition, a two-seater vehicle designed by Massachusetts-based Terrafugia, Inc., runs on regular unleaded gasoline and gets about 35 miles to the gallon on land, where it can reach speeds of up to 70 miles per hour. In the air, it will reach altitudes of 1,400 feet — much lower than commercial planes — and travel at about 115 m.p.h. At the end of the day, the driver can land it, retract its wings and park it in the garage. See the Transition in action in the video below:
About 100 people have already put down deposits, but, with a price tag expected to reach nearly $300,000, we wonder just how big (or small) the market will be. Operation of the flying car as a plane requires owners to pass a test and clock 20 hours of in-flight training time, which really isn’t much. In our opinion, it sure beats a full-body scan.
Some things to consider: Although the Transition is fun and quirky and would likely make Inspector Gadget jealous, it won’t get you out of that aforementioned traffic jam since it requires space to extend its wings and take off. Nor will it be a plausible alternative for long-haul commercial flights; it can only fly a few hundred miles before you’ll have to stop and refuel.
Plus we think it raises safety concerns. Imagine “pilots” literally jetting around their suburban neighborhoods simply because they have enough room and low-lying airspace to do so. (We can just see 16-year-old Junior borrowing the keys and getting stuck in the power lines.) And the Transition still has to finish a series of crash safety tests before the federal government can attest that it’s up to the standards of other vehicles on the road.
No, that’s not a typo in the title. As America’s collective waistline expands, some airline passengers may be looking at even smaller seats on their flights. According to a report by TerminalU.com, airplane manufacturer Airbus may decrease the width of middle and window seats on its A320 aircraft models, which each offer two sections of three-abreast seating, separated by an aisle.
The move, which is still under consideration, would decrease each of the aforementioned seats by one inch (from 18 inches to 17) in favor of increasing each aisle seat by two inches (from 18 inches to 20). The larger seats would be designed to accommodate larger passengers — or merely those looking for more roomy flights. And, of course, airlines would have the option to charge extra for the “privilege.”
For years, we’ve been hearing horror stories of overweight passengers being booted from flights or forced to pay for two seats as per airline obesity policies. I’m glad the industry is taking a constructive look at the issue and presenting possible solutions, but I’m not convinced Airbus has arrived at the right one just yet.
Although an extra fee would likely be more affordable for larger folks than an entire second seat, there’s no word yet on how much airlines would charge for that extra fee. And, while this idea gives other fliers the option to choose more seat room, it also means that more passengers may find themselves needing — rather than wanting — to purchase for-fee seats as the size of a standard seat shrinks. I also wonder whether those sitting in regular seats would pay smaller fares since their seats are smaller — somehow, I doubt it.
And what about those who simply prefer sitting in the aisle? Some airlines already charge an extra fee for select aisle seats, and this would expand that unfortunate trend even further. Meanwhile, folks who prefer the window seat would have to sacrifice space to sit in their favorite spot.
I think someone needs to go back to the drawing board on this one. Perhaps this could be implemented for some rows but not all, or maybe some rows could include just two seats instead of three, essentially making each an entire half-seat larger.
What’s your take on Airbus’s idea — awesome or ill-advised? Sound off below.
I never thought I’d say this, but maybe — just maybe — those extra baggage fees are worth it after all. According to a report by CNN, in 2011 the airline industry’s rate of lost luggage was the lowest it’s ever been. Last year also saw the lowest-ever incidence of passengers being involuntarily bumped from their scheduled flights.
The U.S. Department of Transportation, which has collected luggage data for 23 years and bumping data for 16, released last year’s stats for the nation’s airlines on Tuesday.
So what does this mean for air travelers? The quick and dirty is that, overall, airlines reported an on-time arrival rate of about 79.6 percent, just a smidge better than 2010 (79.8 percent). Industry-wide instances of mishandled baggage clocked in at about 3.39 cases per 1,000 passengers (down from 3.51 in 2010), and involuntary bumps came in 0.81 occurrences per 10,000 passengers (down from 1.09 in 2010) — not too shabby.
As for the top-performing airline, AirTran did the best in the luggage-handling department, with just 1.63 reports of lost or damaged luggage per 1,000 passengers. Hawaiian Airlines, blessed with good weather year-round in most of its destination cities, came out on top in the flight delay sweepstakes: nearly 93 percent of its flights arrived on time in 2011. In terms of bumping, JetBlue had the lowest rate, with just 0.01 involuntary bumps per 10,000 fliers.
I know what you’re thinking: “Okay, great. But which airlines performed the worst?” American Eagle, American Airlines’ regional carrier, walked away with the highest rate of mishandled baggage, with 7.32 reported cases of lost or damaged luggage per 1,000 passengers. Then there’s JetBlue, which had the lowest percentage (73.3 percent) of on-time flight arrivals. And Mesa Airlines, another regional operator, took the title for most denied boardings in 2011, with 2.27 involuntary bumps per 10,000 passengers.
You crave it when you wake up in the morning, throughout the day and before you fall asleep at night. The more you do it, the more you want it, and there’s no such thing as “too much.” It’s travel. We here at Independent Traveler have heard some crazy stories of travel addiction from friends and relatives, and of course we’ve got a few of our own. But now it’s your turn.
Do you spend so much time at the airport that you know the TSA officers by name? Do you have more bottles of free hotel shampoo than you do pairs of underwear? If so, we want you to finish this sentence: “You know you’re addicted to travel when ____.”
Leave your submission in the comments below. We’ll gather your ideas, take the best of the best and craziest of the craziest, and compile them into a list that will have you seeking the nearest 12-step program. And, as an incentive, everyone who provides a submission will be entered to win a set of two shoe bags, perfect for keeping those nasty hiking boots or running shoes away from the rest of your wardrobe while traveling. We’ll choose a winner at random on Friday, January 13. (Be sure to include a valid e-mail address so we can contact you in case you win.)