Mord
Apr 28, 12:59 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Really? That doesn't matter? Well then why don't we have men compete in all the women's events at the Olympics? Oh wait, it does matter
I'm not defending the attackers. I think it was terrible. Horrifying video. It's hard to believe people are like this.
I do think this whole "biology doesn't matter, it's how you feel in your heart" nonsense is obviously nonsense.
He has every right to dress like a girl. I don't even mind if he uses a female bathoom. But those things don't make someone female. The characteristics that allow doctors to assign genders to new-borns do not change as people get older.
HAHAHA, funny, you happened to pick the *worst* possible example there, Transsexuals can and do compete in the Olympics, as long as they've been taking hormones that bring them to the typical range for their gender for a period of 2 years before competing. People do change gender physically.
I'm not going to bother to repeat myself with a detailed argument, feel free to read back through my discussion with MattSepeta.
Really? That doesn't matter? Well then why don't we have men compete in all the women's events at the Olympics? Oh wait, it does matter
I'm not defending the attackers. I think it was terrible. Horrifying video. It's hard to believe people are like this.
I do think this whole "biology doesn't matter, it's how you feel in your heart" nonsense is obviously nonsense.
He has every right to dress like a girl. I don't even mind if he uses a female bathoom. But those things don't make someone female. The characteristics that allow doctors to assign genders to new-borns do not change as people get older.
HAHAHA, funny, you happened to pick the *worst* possible example there, Transsexuals can and do compete in the Olympics, as long as they've been taking hormones that bring them to the typical range for their gender for a period of 2 years before competing. People do change gender physically.
I'm not going to bother to repeat myself with a detailed argument, feel free to read back through my discussion with MattSepeta.
MrKobie
Jan 12, 02:50 AM
The iPhone looks pretty cool, but it's a logical progression - certainly not a revolution. If it was so revolutionary there wouldn't have been so many predictions about it. Instead, a lot of the predictions were actually aiming too high.
And it really is this fan-boy attitude of 'Steve is our hero, everything he does is wonderful' that keeps apple products so expensive. If you were all a little more critical they'd have to work a little harder to earn your money.
600 bucks for a phone (with contract) with only 8gigs of ram for my music? It's not 3G. It's got WiFi but doesn't do VOIP? I think I'll pass on this one.
And it really is this fan-boy attitude of 'Steve is our hero, everything he does is wonderful' that keeps apple products so expensive. If you were all a little more critical they'd have to work a little harder to earn your money.
600 bucks for a phone (with contract) with only 8gigs of ram for my music? It's not 3G. It's got WiFi but doesn't do VOIP? I think I'll pass on this one.
mantan
Apr 15, 09:39 PM
If competition results in innovation, why has the Windows PC not evolved into something better. Lord knows that arena is packed with competition.
The downward pressure on prices actually inhibits innovation. R & D is the first thing to go when the pressure gets high. The focus becomes, "How can we make this cheaper?" Let that go on for a couple decades and you get such poorly made PCs that they are disposable.
The market doesn't need the PC to evolve anymore. From a hardware perspective, most people could use hardware made 5 years ago to do the simple applications they use.
On the other hand, PC software has evolved where there has been a need and competition drives it.
Building things cheaper at the sake of cutting costs and innovation doesn't work. The american automobile industry is a living proof of that.
The downward pressure on prices actually inhibits innovation. R & D is the first thing to go when the pressure gets high. The focus becomes, "How can we make this cheaper?" Let that go on for a couple decades and you get such poorly made PCs that they are disposable.
The market doesn't need the PC to evolve anymore. From a hardware perspective, most people could use hardware made 5 years ago to do the simple applications they use.
On the other hand, PC software has evolved where there has been a need and competition drives it.
Building things cheaper at the sake of cutting costs and innovation doesn't work. The american automobile industry is a living proof of that.
Neodym
Oct 3, 05:28 PM
Unfortunately this is EXACTLY why Apple ISN'T producing a headless mid-range Mac. They will lose out tremendously on display sales. They either want to sell you a display within the unit (iMac, MacBooks) or sell you a display with the unit (Mini, Pro). Mini users will buy one because A. they're in the store and B. don't know any better. Pro users will buy one because they are top-of-the line, beautiful screens and they, generally, have money to burn. Mid-range users (and prosumers) know well enough that they can get a cheap, good-enough monitor for $200 from NewEgg or eBay (for the daring). Instead, we prosumers either have to settle for the iMac or splurge on the Mac Pro.
Mmmh - i see it a little different:
Why shouldn't the so-called "prosumers" be interested in beautiful and top-of-the-line monitors as well as the "pros"? Even worse - the target clientel for a Pro computer often earn their living on those machines and they might need raw power, but not necessarily a "beautiful" screen - especially if the old one would still do its work.
Thus i would suspect prosumers to be more willing to "burn some money" for a nice Apple screen just because it fits their lifestyle, than someone who has to invest to earn money on it. And don't forget how Apple introduced the mini - it was targetted at users who ALREADY OWN a monitor (and keyboard and mouse).
So one of the main target groups for Apple monitors would be exactly the clientel which currently is not able to find something proper: A more powerful computer than the mini, but less pricey than a Mac Pro.
Therefore the gap between a mini and a Mac Pro is a little big indeed! Not only because of the initial purchase cost, but also because of the cost following when you have to buy "pro" equipment (like e.g. memory) at "pro" prices as well...!
The iMac aims at a completely different audience here and is a good complement, but never a replacement for a mid-class machine.
If Apple wants to continue to grow they HAVE to differentiate their lineup a little more! Personally i would not mind if they would do it in the stylish area and bring up some acrylic beauty again or even introduce some really new (or at least different) ideas. But it is not that important as long as the they eventually close that huge gap!
Regards
Neodym
Mmmh - i see it a little different:
Why shouldn't the so-called "prosumers" be interested in beautiful and top-of-the-line monitors as well as the "pros"? Even worse - the target clientel for a Pro computer often earn their living on those machines and they might need raw power, but not necessarily a "beautiful" screen - especially if the old one would still do its work.
Thus i would suspect prosumers to be more willing to "burn some money" for a nice Apple screen just because it fits their lifestyle, than someone who has to invest to earn money on it. And don't forget how Apple introduced the mini - it was targetted at users who ALREADY OWN a monitor (and keyboard and mouse).
So one of the main target groups for Apple monitors would be exactly the clientel which currently is not able to find something proper: A more powerful computer than the mini, but less pricey than a Mac Pro.
Therefore the gap between a mini and a Mac Pro is a little big indeed! Not only because of the initial purchase cost, but also because of the cost following when you have to buy "pro" equipment (like e.g. memory) at "pro" prices as well...!
The iMac aims at a completely different audience here and is a good complement, but never a replacement for a mid-class machine.
If Apple wants to continue to grow they HAVE to differentiate their lineup a little more! Personally i would not mind if they would do it in the stylish area and bring up some acrylic beauty again or even introduce some really new (or at least different) ideas. But it is not that important as long as the they eventually close that huge gap!
Regards
Neodym
MacRumors
Apr 29, 03:43 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/29/apple-tweaks-mac-os-x-lion-ui-in-response-to-criticism/)
With Apple having pushed out a new update (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/29/apple-seeds-new-version-of-mac-os-x-lion-11a444d-to-developers/) to the Mac OS X Lion developer preview program, those with access to the new build have been looking for changes in an attempt to see what Apple has been working on over the past few weeks.
One minor point that caught our eye is a change in the user interface elements for selecting subpanes within System Preferences. In this latest build, the active subpane is denoted by a sunken, darker button that appears as if it has been pushed, as shown in the Expos� & Spaces preference pane.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/162642-lion_subpane_button_new_500.jpg
Current "button" style subpane selector with Expos� active
Earlier builds of Mac OS X Lion had used a sort of slider animation where the active subpane was represented by a lighter colored button that confused many users when simply glancing at the pane without attempting to move the slider and thus having the animation to key on.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/162642-lion_subpane_slider_old_500.jpg
Earlier "slider" style subpane selector with Spaces active
In the face of that criticism, Apple appears to have rethought its mechanism for switching between subpanes and reverted back to a button style that appears more intuitive.
A similar change has been made in iCal, where an earlier slider-style navigator (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/31/mac-os-x-lion-developer-preview-2-brings-new-look-for-ical/) was rolled out to select among day/week/month/year views but has now been replaced by more traditional button-style selectors.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/163551-lion_ical_button_style_selector.jpg
iCal selector buttons in latest Mac OS X Lion build
Article Link: Apple Tweaks Mac OS X Lion UI In Response to Criticism (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/29/apple-tweaks-mac-os-x-lion-ui-in-response-to-criticism/)
With Apple having pushed out a new update (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/29/apple-seeds-new-version-of-mac-os-x-lion-11a444d-to-developers/) to the Mac OS X Lion developer preview program, those with access to the new build have been looking for changes in an attempt to see what Apple has been working on over the past few weeks.
One minor point that caught our eye is a change in the user interface elements for selecting subpanes within System Preferences. In this latest build, the active subpane is denoted by a sunken, darker button that appears as if it has been pushed, as shown in the Expos� & Spaces preference pane.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/162642-lion_subpane_button_new_500.jpg
Current "button" style subpane selector with Expos� active
Earlier builds of Mac OS X Lion had used a sort of slider animation where the active subpane was represented by a lighter colored button that confused many users when simply glancing at the pane without attempting to move the slider and thus having the animation to key on.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/162642-lion_subpane_slider_old_500.jpg
Earlier "slider" style subpane selector with Spaces active
In the face of that criticism, Apple appears to have rethought its mechanism for switching between subpanes and reverted back to a button style that appears more intuitive.
A similar change has been made in iCal, where an earlier slider-style navigator (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/31/mac-os-x-lion-developer-preview-2-brings-new-look-for-ical/) was rolled out to select among day/week/month/year views but has now been replaced by more traditional button-style selectors.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/163551-lion_ical_button_style_selector.jpg
iCal selector buttons in latest Mac OS X Lion build
Article Link: Apple Tweaks Mac OS X Lion UI In Response to Criticism (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/29/apple-tweaks-mac-os-x-lion-ui-in-response-to-criticism/)
wlh99
Apr 29, 10:52 AM
Ok fellows, thanks for the waiting, my new house is a mess but at least all my furniture is here now. I follow both of your examples ( wlh99's E-mail project and the great explanation that Knight showed here). I first started a new project in order to avoid confusion and made some changes, the result is what I think " a working timer " with start, stop and reset buttons. If I see the code now it seems a bit obvious why the timer never stopped before. I can tell you right now that I never reset the global variables inside any cancel or reset button thus the timer always continued. I think that the first variable (NSInteger seconds = 0 before the first method) gets called only once after that we reset it to 0 using the reset or cancel method (we can do it separately like knight said), in my case I assign reset to be the one to set that to 0 and cancel to invalid the timer.
Knight and wh99, if you like to see the project running and tell me your throughs, just give me your E-mail addresses (I have Warren's already) so I can share it with you. For obvious reasons I'm not posting it and if some of you wonder why, it's for same reasons nobody posted the complete working code despite being able to make a timer in less than 3 minutes. (yes, I know it's because you think it would not help me and I understand)
Special thanks to Knight and wh99 for their patience and instructions.
Thanks also to everyone who gave his opinion on this matter.
* Here is photo of the log and UI
Glad you got it working. Trust me when I say, it is not obvious, and that it now seems so to you is an accomplishment.
Knight and wh99, if you like to see the project running and tell me your throughs, just give me your E-mail addresses (I have Warren's already) so I can share it with you. For obvious reasons I'm not posting it and if some of you wonder why, it's for same reasons nobody posted the complete working code despite being able to make a timer in less than 3 minutes. (yes, I know it's because you think it would not help me and I understand)
Special thanks to Knight and wh99 for their patience and instructions.
Thanks also to everyone who gave his opinion on this matter.
* Here is photo of the log and UI
Glad you got it working. Trust me when I say, it is not obvious, and that it now seems so to you is an accomplishment.
sarper
Apr 26, 07:34 AM
Before posting it's always a good idea to read the article and a little bit of the thread, not just the headline. Had you done any research, something I expect of developers, you would know that the general consensus is that it will be a larger screen with the same resolution. Also, Apple is giving you quite an amazing product and App Store to sling your wares instead of complaining you should maybe just put a little more effort into your applications and thank Apple for the opportunity they're giving you and others.
How come people still keep picking up on this point, it surprises me, especially from a developer. A larger screen doesn't necessarily mean problems for apps, a change in resolution does. That, coupled with the previous rumors of a bigger screen with the same resolution mean that if this is true, it doesn't make any difference to developers because there will be the same number of pixels in the screen. All it means is that everything will be very slightly bigger.
It's exactly like you say, if you assumed a certain resolution when coding your app, only a change in resolution affects you. Screen size means nothing, it's all about the pixels. 960x640 is the same whether it is on a 3.5" screen or a 4" screen for a developer.
Oh please don't be so smart. What you say means to lose the pixel density of Retina Display. Would you want that?
How come people still keep picking up on this point, it surprises me, especially from a developer. A larger screen doesn't necessarily mean problems for apps, a change in resolution does. That, coupled with the previous rumors of a bigger screen with the same resolution mean that if this is true, it doesn't make any difference to developers because there will be the same number of pixels in the screen. All it means is that everything will be very slightly bigger.
It's exactly like you say, if you assumed a certain resolution when coding your app, only a change in resolution affects you. Screen size means nothing, it's all about the pixels. 960x640 is the same whether it is on a 3.5" screen or a 4" screen for a developer.
Oh please don't be so smart. What you say means to lose the pixel density of Retina Display. Would you want that?
ipedro
Jan 9, 12:20 PM
Keynote Stream Available Live On Cnn Pipeline.
QuarterSwede
Apr 25, 12:21 PM
Fake. Display looks like paper / printed.
It looks like a retina display to me. People often thought the display was paper on first glance on the demo units after the iPhone 4 announcement.
Doesn't the status bar look taller? I remember a thread on here talking about how they overheard engineers discussing iOS 5 and that was one of the things that would be different. It was going to allow for an SBSettings type of thing and maybe a place for notifications to scroll? Anyways, cool. But I think this is fake.
It looks about the same as my iPhone 4's status bar.
It looks like a retina display to me. People often thought the display was paper on first glance on the demo units after the iPhone 4 announcement.
Doesn't the status bar look taller? I remember a thread on here talking about how they overheard engineers discussing iOS 5 and that was one of the things that would be different. It was going to allow for an SBSettings type of thing and maybe a place for notifications to scroll? Anyways, cool. But I think this is fake.
It looks about the same as my iPhone 4's status bar.
rhett7660
Apr 21, 02:41 PM
Sorry, this idea is horrible. People are going to downrate posts because they disagree with someone's opinion, not because it's a bad post.
I can easily see the fanboys downrating anyone who mentions Microsoft, Android or any of Apple's competitors in a positive light.
I think you meant this can both ways. Some will mention Apple products and there are a select few who will vote negative....
I can easily see the fanboys downrating anyone who mentions Microsoft, Android or any of Apple's competitors in a positive light.
I think you meant this can both ways. Some will mention Apple products and there are a select few who will vote negative....
Yakuza
Apr 16, 08:58 AM
What about if the Apple logo lights up white briefly to act as the inbuilt flash?
that would be very cooooool, even if it wasn't a flash, the apple logo light up when playing around with the phone would really be nice
agree. it would be a neat design for the phone but im hoping its differnt than that. plus if it were all metal the signal would be horrible.
The iMac is all aluminum, and it needs the wi-Fi signal, and it seems to work fine.
I don't see how the writing on the iPhone is crooked or whatever, maybe I'm blind. The photo looks real. But I hope it's not, and if it is real, I hope that's just a prototype, because I don't like the square shape and the angular edges on the back.
That's my thought. a prototype. a very first prtotype
that would be very cooooool, even if it wasn't a flash, the apple logo light up when playing around with the phone would really be nice
agree. it would be a neat design for the phone but im hoping its differnt than that. plus if it were all metal the signal would be horrible.
The iMac is all aluminum, and it needs the wi-Fi signal, and it seems to work fine.
I don't see how the writing on the iPhone is crooked or whatever, maybe I'm blind. The photo looks real. But I hope it's not, and if it is real, I hope that's just a prototype, because I don't like the square shape and the angular edges on the back.
That's my thought. a prototype. a very first prtotype
Popeye206
Jan 15, 04:09 PM
... The iPhone is a great piece of kit, but this software update is a great disappointment. Generally I know where I am, so the psuedo GPS thing is something I can't see myself using (and to be honest if I didn't know where I was, then I'm pretty damn sure that there wouldn't be any O2 coverage anyway!).
Not to be a pain, but the phuedo GPS is like the coolest thing for people like me that travel... now I'll be able to find myself with one click. I love that feature!
What I thought was missing was Multiple Delete for email and copy and paste. I really wished they we're in this update... the rest I'm very happy about! Besides... this is the only phone I've ever had that has any upgrades! That alone is cool! My iPhone just keeps getting better! :-)
Not to be a pain, but the phuedo GPS is like the coolest thing for people like me that travel... now I'll be able to find myself with one click. I love that feature!
What I thought was missing was Multiple Delete for email and copy and paste. I really wished they we're in this update... the rest I'm very happy about! Besides... this is the only phone I've ever had that has any upgrades! That alone is cool! My iPhone just keeps getting better! :-)
Jay42
Jan 6, 08:26 AM
^^That would be excellent if someone could capture the stream.
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070105150245.shtml
We'll update that page. It's linked to this thread.
arn
This was just what I was looking for, thanks arn. I like to get the full effect ;)
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070105150245.shtml
We'll update that page. It's linked to this thread.
arn
This was just what I was looking for, thanks arn. I like to get the full effect ;)
nasty devil
Mar 24, 04:58 PM
Happy 10th brithday ;)
EricNau
Jan 12, 12:25 AM
they didn't release iwork and ilife probably b/c of Amazon putting it up on their website early
Actually, I believe it wasn't released at MacWorld for two reasons...
1) Time. They keynote ran about 2 hours as is (already above the average). Introducing two new software suites would easily add another 45 minutes (making the event much too long).
2) The focus was clearly the iPhone, and Jobs didn't want anything to steal its glory.
It makes much more sense to introduce the iPhone at MacWorld and have a separate event for Leopard, iLife, and iWork.
Actually, I believe it wasn't released at MacWorld for two reasons...
1) Time. They keynote ran about 2 hours as is (already above the average). Introducing two new software suites would easily add another 45 minutes (making the event much too long).
2) The focus was clearly the iPhone, and Jobs didn't want anything to steal its glory.
It makes much more sense to introduce the iPhone at MacWorld and have a separate event for Leopard, iLife, and iWork.
Ommid
Apr 25, 11:55 AM
Looks good, I've been holding out since my first-gen iPhone.
...hopefully we'll see a Summer or Fall release? :)
Wow! You're patient!
...hopefully we'll see a Summer or Fall release? :)
Wow! You're patient!
MacNut
Apr 27, 05:23 PM
I meant that supposedly the issue is that women don't feel comfortable having men in the bathrooms because they'll look and stuff. What if instead of men there's a lesbian there? Isn't that the same thing?Only if they are walking around naked. There are still going to be stalls right?
mmcc
Mar 29, 09:00 AM
I wrote:
I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive.
Part of the previous appeal of the Mac software market to developers was the fact that Apple customers would accept increased costs for Mac software titles just as Apple charges a premium for its hardware because "it is worth it." Developers could coattail onto this and therefore ask higher prices for Mac software as compared to equivalent titles on other OS's.
Once the Mac App Store opened, that premium pricing advantage was wiped out overnight. Apple customers now expect to pay less just as the mobile App Store has reduced app pricing -- and in many cases expecting equivalent prices from the iPhone to the Mac desktop.
Do not underestimate this effect on developer's bottom lines.
I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive.
Part of the previous appeal of the Mac software market to developers was the fact that Apple customers would accept increased costs for Mac software titles just as Apple charges a premium for its hardware because "it is worth it." Developers could coattail onto this and therefore ask higher prices for Mac software as compared to equivalent titles on other OS's.
Once the Mac App Store opened, that premium pricing advantage was wiped out overnight. Apple customers now expect to pay less just as the mobile App Store has reduced app pricing -- and in many cases expecting equivalent prices from the iPhone to the Mac desktop.
Do not underestimate this effect on developer's bottom lines.
Dr Kevorkian94
Mar 24, 03:03 PM
Happy Birthday now there should be a party
arn
Jan 9, 02:35 PM
sorry about the spoiler in the ticker guys
I'm sitting here trying to do updates... that one was a mistake on my part.
Really sorry. I removed it. we'll still post the link when it comes.
arn
I'm sitting here trying to do updates... that one was a mistake on my part.
Really sorry. I removed it. we'll still post the link when it comes.
arn
Lord Blackadder
Aug 8, 02:40 PM
You forgot something. You are comparing diesel to unleaded even in hybrid form. You need to compare the generators (unlead to unlead). Now image if those very high gas mileage diesel running as a hybrid.
The problem with battery right now is we are still working on a break threw. When we finally get a true break threw in battery technology I can see things really taking off.
Batteries are very efficient at story power. problem is they are a little on the heavy side but we are getting better at it.
Modern diesel hatchbacks like the Golf TDI (Euro engines, not the US-spec) can exceed 50-60mpg (http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/new/golf-vi/which-model/engines/fuel-consumption). The Volt is harder to measure because it's a plugin, so some power comes from the grid. GM's own webiste is rather mealymouthed about fuel economy. At one point they claimed over 200mpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt), but that included a full batery charge from the grid. Using only its onboard generator it gets about 50mpg (http://www.greencarreports.com/blog/1044209_now-we-know-2011-chevrolet-volt-will-get-50-mpg-in-gas-mode). So all the extra tech essentially fails to improve on a diesel. The plugin feature may actually make the car less green/efficient if you get the juice from a dirty or inefficient power plant.
I'd really like to agree with you, believe me. But the reason I'm skeptical is that we have no proof that a battery "breakthrough" is really on the horizon. I read somewhere that the overall efficiency of an electric car is currently only about 5-7% greater than a gasoline-powered car (EDIT here (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/fuel-cell4.htm) is a link for those numbers, but admittedly not a very good one). The energy efficiency of batteries is reasonably good, but they are still too big and heavy, as well as being expensive and dirty to manufacture. And again, electric cars are only as good as the powerplant they get power from, and that is where the biggest efficiency loss comes into play.
As for the mass rail system. You might be thinking of the east coast. Trying coming to some city west of the Mississippi and you will see how little rail they have and we just do not have any good way to put a rail system in. It is very costly to retrofit those system in and it is a very slow process. Slowly it is happening but really the system that was designed in the past was based around people driving their own personal cars around. That was 40+ years ago that was put in so now it is harder to do put it in now.
It's less logistics than politics, sadly. And you are right, it's not cheap. But we have to do it eventually. Moving to dependence on our interstates and letting passenger rail services atrophy was a mistake, and now we will be forced to fall back on our rail networks more.
Electric cars (that are able to fully charge in under 20 minutes) subsidized by a solar panel roof is the future. Don't think a 300 mile range would be out of the question (within a few years) and would def work even in large countries like the U.S.
If you look here, they are talking 5 minutes for 70% charge of the car, even though it is currently only a short range vehicle.
Link: http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/07/05/new-quick-charger-for-electric-cars-is-really-quick/
Two issues with that: First, solar panels are neither practical in most states, nor to they really have the lifespan to do more than break-even interms of paying for the,mselves.
Second, that juice still has to come from the power plants, with all the attendant downsides.
I really don't want to sound like a naysayer, but "going green" has become so fashionable that I think people are ignoring the engineering realities. We want whizz-bang electrics and hybrids when a simple diesel would be much easier to get on the market literally today and dramatically decrease our national fuel consumption (and dependence on oil imports) while we work to perfect the next step in alternative fuel vehicles. One step at a time, people!
Why are we letting Congress and the EPA block sales of diesels here that could be used in everyday cars in addition to series hybrids?
The problem with battery right now is we are still working on a break threw. When we finally get a true break threw in battery technology I can see things really taking off.
Batteries are very efficient at story power. problem is they are a little on the heavy side but we are getting better at it.
Modern diesel hatchbacks like the Golf TDI (Euro engines, not the US-spec) can exceed 50-60mpg (http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/new/golf-vi/which-model/engines/fuel-consumption). The Volt is harder to measure because it's a plugin, so some power comes from the grid. GM's own webiste is rather mealymouthed about fuel economy. At one point they claimed over 200mpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt), but that included a full batery charge from the grid. Using only its onboard generator it gets about 50mpg (http://www.greencarreports.com/blog/1044209_now-we-know-2011-chevrolet-volt-will-get-50-mpg-in-gas-mode). So all the extra tech essentially fails to improve on a diesel. The plugin feature may actually make the car less green/efficient if you get the juice from a dirty or inefficient power plant.
I'd really like to agree with you, believe me. But the reason I'm skeptical is that we have no proof that a battery "breakthrough" is really on the horizon. I read somewhere that the overall efficiency of an electric car is currently only about 5-7% greater than a gasoline-powered car (EDIT here (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/fuel-cell4.htm) is a link for those numbers, but admittedly not a very good one). The energy efficiency of batteries is reasonably good, but they are still too big and heavy, as well as being expensive and dirty to manufacture. And again, electric cars are only as good as the powerplant they get power from, and that is where the biggest efficiency loss comes into play.
As for the mass rail system. You might be thinking of the east coast. Trying coming to some city west of the Mississippi and you will see how little rail they have and we just do not have any good way to put a rail system in. It is very costly to retrofit those system in and it is a very slow process. Slowly it is happening but really the system that was designed in the past was based around people driving their own personal cars around. That was 40+ years ago that was put in so now it is harder to do put it in now.
It's less logistics than politics, sadly. And you are right, it's not cheap. But we have to do it eventually. Moving to dependence on our interstates and letting passenger rail services atrophy was a mistake, and now we will be forced to fall back on our rail networks more.
Electric cars (that are able to fully charge in under 20 minutes) subsidized by a solar panel roof is the future. Don't think a 300 mile range would be out of the question (within a few years) and would def work even in large countries like the U.S.
If you look here, they are talking 5 minutes for 70% charge of the car, even though it is currently only a short range vehicle.
Link: http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/07/05/new-quick-charger-for-electric-cars-is-really-quick/
Two issues with that: First, solar panels are neither practical in most states, nor to they really have the lifespan to do more than break-even interms of paying for the,mselves.
Second, that juice still has to come from the power plants, with all the attendant downsides.
I really don't want to sound like a naysayer, but "going green" has become so fashionable that I think people are ignoring the engineering realities. We want whizz-bang electrics and hybrids when a simple diesel would be much easier to get on the market literally today and dramatically decrease our national fuel consumption (and dependence on oil imports) while we work to perfect the next step in alternative fuel vehicles. One step at a time, people!
Why are we letting Congress and the EPA block sales of diesels here that could be used in everyday cars in addition to series hybrids?
jholzner
Sep 12, 08:38 AM
movies and gaming video :rolleyes:
I just came here to post this info. I'll include the image in my post. Too bad it doesn't list a price. Looks like the rumors of it ONLY including Disney movies are wrong.
[Edit: yeah, later posters are probably right, just short clips]
http://static.flickr.com/95/241496992_e86c8584c0_d.jpg
I just came here to post this info. I'll include the image in my post. Too bad it doesn't list a price. Looks like the rumors of it ONLY including Disney movies are wrong.
[Edit: yeah, later posters are probably right, just short clips]
http://static.flickr.com/95/241496992_e86c8584c0_d.jpg
Clive At Five
Oct 19, 01:41 PM
Have you heard anyone say that they are anxiously anticipating Vista? Microsoft will try to generate some synthetic excitement over Vista, but in reality, hardly anyone will really care.
I couldn't disagree with you more.
I've been a Apple-user since infancy, practically, (so don't take me to be a MS fanboy), but I also appreciate PCs. I have a iMac G4 for home and a PC laptop which I used on campus and have continued to use out of college. I recently downloaded and installed Vista RC1, and regardless of its still-beta form, it is surprizingly stable (for basic uses), plus has a gorgeous user-interface (nevermind it's an obvious aqua rip-off). In fact, I'm almost to the point where I want to set Vista as my default OS.
The point of saying all this is that Vista IS going to be a solid OS* and IS going to be a "threat" to OSX. If anything, I think that hardly anyone cares about OSX. To a lot of people, OSX is something they saw once that looked cool but didn't seem like a relevant option given how they used computers (of course they don't know that they're usually wrong). Now there will be a version of Windows that looks and feels like that other cool thing... which is exactly what they want. Average users aren't analytic about their computer purchases like we are. We know Macs are better because we've studied the options... but MS knows most people won't study. And to those people, Windows Vista is going to be a very alluring option... and will keep them from using those brain cells.
These people and everyone else who has made the decision to use a PC (myself included) are greatly anticipating Vista's release (or in my case, Vista SP1), and it will be a welcomed addition to the PC-user's home.
-Clive
*DISCLAIMER - Vista won't likely be very solid until SP1. Vista is/will be a prime example of bloatware (7.5GB installed) due to its backward compatability and poor overall design. Fortunately for PC users, even the premium hardware demands will be met easily enough by today's CPUs. My laptop (2 years old) cannot run Aero Effects or any other special features of Vista, but still runs very smoothly with the features disabled. And, yes, I've had some blue-screens but that's because I was tampering with drivers and settings... something the average user won't be doing. And again, lastly, I repeat that I use a PC to suppliment my Desktop Mac. My PC Laptop was purchased at a time before Intel Macs were available... nor had any prospect of being able to dual-boot to Windows. It was a near-mandatory OS decision due to specific software needed for college classes... and, yes... LAN party gaming (which IS a college requirement, BTW).
I couldn't disagree with you more.
I've been a Apple-user since infancy, practically, (so don't take me to be a MS fanboy), but I also appreciate PCs. I have a iMac G4 for home and a PC laptop which I used on campus and have continued to use out of college. I recently downloaded and installed Vista RC1, and regardless of its still-beta form, it is surprizingly stable (for basic uses), plus has a gorgeous user-interface (nevermind it's an obvious aqua rip-off). In fact, I'm almost to the point where I want to set Vista as my default OS.
The point of saying all this is that Vista IS going to be a solid OS* and IS going to be a "threat" to OSX. If anything, I think that hardly anyone cares about OSX. To a lot of people, OSX is something they saw once that looked cool but didn't seem like a relevant option given how they used computers (of course they don't know that they're usually wrong). Now there will be a version of Windows that looks and feels like that other cool thing... which is exactly what they want. Average users aren't analytic about their computer purchases like we are. We know Macs are better because we've studied the options... but MS knows most people won't study. And to those people, Windows Vista is going to be a very alluring option... and will keep them from using those brain cells.
These people and everyone else who has made the decision to use a PC (myself included) are greatly anticipating Vista's release (or in my case, Vista SP1), and it will be a welcomed addition to the PC-user's home.
-Clive
*DISCLAIMER - Vista won't likely be very solid until SP1. Vista is/will be a prime example of bloatware (7.5GB installed) due to its backward compatability and poor overall design. Fortunately for PC users, even the premium hardware demands will be met easily enough by today's CPUs. My laptop (2 years old) cannot run Aero Effects or any other special features of Vista, but still runs very smoothly with the features disabled. And, yes, I've had some blue-screens but that's because I was tampering with drivers and settings... something the average user won't be doing. And again, lastly, I repeat that I use a PC to suppliment my Desktop Mac. My PC Laptop was purchased at a time before Intel Macs were available... nor had any prospect of being able to dual-boot to Windows. It was a near-mandatory OS decision due to specific software needed for college classes... and, yes... LAN party gaming (which IS a college requirement, BTW).
flopticalcube
Nov 25, 07:02 PM
Mighty Mouse has shipped. Woohoo! Told me it would be 2 weeks!
I noticed that given my two order numbers are about 20000 apart and the orders are 4 hours apart, they were doing 5000 sales an hour from apple.ca yesterday?
Anyone know if that is alot?
I noticed that given my two order numbers are about 20000 apart and the orders are 4 hours apart, they were doing 5000 sales an hour from apple.ca yesterday?
Anyone know if that is alot?
No comments:
Post a Comment