That depends on a lot of factors as well, a lot of fast food isn't made to order and some can be created ahead of time if you're expecting a lot of orders to come in. Fries, burger patties, some other fried goods like chicken fingers can be held for a little while without them going bad. There's always the chance that the people working the kitchen may have had the smaller order on hand but needed to make some fresh things for the larger order.
Halosheep
joined 1 year ago
As someone who worked in an understaffed fast food restaurant for like 3 years... No, going inside doesn't make your order faster. From my experience, orders get made in chronological order of when they were placed. You may be able to place your order quicker (if you're lucky there's enough staff to take an in-store order while there's people in the drive through) but you will probably still wait about the same since the food can only be made so fast, and the few people have to splits their attention even more.
If it's a normally staffed restaurant then you might have luck, but usually long wait times in the drive through aren't because the drive through itself is slow... Excluding the random people who pull up with the good ol', "can I get a uuuuuhhhhhhh...."
I think the way your commenting is wrong.
Are you including the fact that $100,000 in the 1950s is more than $1million after accounting for inflation?
According to some quick googling, $1,300,000 is the modern equivalent of $100,000 in 1950. That would put you in the top 5% earners (and very nearly in the top 1%). According to the IRS, the top 5% contribute about 65% of the tax burden.
The top 25% make up about 90% of contributions, but that starts around $70,000 annual income.
Ah yes, and when it no go it no go until go.
This is being reported poorly. This is a voluntary program that is intended for social media brand embassadors, aka, the people who go out and rep a brand. It makes sense to include some language requiring someone prepping your brand to show preferable to it.
Obviously, but we're talking about a really, really small subset of users that probably would earn Microsoft less than a week of coffee in their corporate office.
People who are technical enough to get around the system requirements to install windows 11 on a system that doesn't meet the minimum requirements is most likely technical enough to upgrade their own computer.
How does that make any sense? Does Microsoft get a cut of sales for component upgrades?
There aren't even 2.9billion people in the US.
I think that's an interesting way to look at it. I find it easier to do the mental gymnastics, as you call it.
People downvoting this comment are just mad that you're right.