>Supermarkets compete with each other on price. Margins are very thin, and supermarkets are much more efficient than they were decades ago.
That's too generic. How much exactly do these "connected fridges" contribute to that?
That's too generic. How much exactly do these "connected fridges" contribute to that?
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=supe...
How much does these savings contribute to their overall costs?
How much difference in that over dumb fridges?
How much difference in that over what can be replicated by a localized control system, at most sending reports through an "output only" line?
And what exactly would remote repair fix if some fridge hardware fails (that's not just switching to a failover hardware, that could just as well be decided by a local controller)? Since the answer is close to nothing, how much of the "remote repair" need isn't cyclical, addressing issues coming from complicating their fridges to the degree that remote repair is required?
Right. Operating efficiency is just the pretext. Congratulations on uncovering the real story about networked supermarket fridges.
In all honesty, I can't prove that these systems help supermarkets reduce their operating costs. It just seems the overwhelmingly obvious and likely explanation for their adoption. If you want to argue otherwise, then I'd say you owe us more than just a list of skeptical questions.