ncbill
Jan 9, 07:46 AM
There�s little point in putting flash memory in a consumer-grade notebook.
The expense is enormous (retail: 32GB SSD $250, 64GB SSD $1500 vs. $150 for a 2.5″ 250GB SATA hard drive)
Power savings don�t increase runtime significantly, since other systems use far more power than the hard drive.
The big advantage to SSD is shock resistance: great for a Toughbook, but pointless in a MacBook.
The expense is enormous (retail: 32GB SSD $250, 64GB SSD $1500 vs. $150 for a 2.5″ 250GB SATA hard drive)
Power savings don�t increase runtime significantly, since other systems use far more power than the hard drive.
The big advantage to SSD is shock resistance: great for a Toughbook, but pointless in a MacBook.
arn
Apr 27, 03:19 AM
fwiw, here's some data from this news thread: http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/26/android-jumps-past-ios-in-overall-u-s-smartphone-usage/
The top rated posts:
Macman1993
13 hours ago at 12:07 pm
Some will be bothered about IOS not being the most dominant. I personally don't care, I just want the best mobile OS.
Rating: 15 Positives / 2 Negatives
brendu
13 hours ago at 12:12 pm
One interesting thing to note. Apple held 25% of recent acquirers with 2 phone models. The iPhone 4 and iPhone 3GS. They are also on only 2 carriers, and have only been with Verizon for part of the time leading up to the march survey. Android however is on dozens of handsets and all four US carriers. I would say apple is doing amazingly well when you consider those specifics. I am not worried about iOS not having a larger chunk of the market, I am blown away that it has 25%.
Rating: 12 Positives / 0 Negatives
komodrone
13 hours ago at 12:39 pm
"...in total penetration" THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID. yeah I signed up for an account just to post this.
Rating: 10 Positives / 0 Negatives
Eddyisgreat
13 hours ago at 12:15 pm
If the iPhone were buy one get two free as well then I bet those numbers would be different :D
Rating: 9 Positives / 1 Negatives
VanMac
13 hours ago at 12:09 pm
Competition is good :) Keeps Apple on their toes Don't need another MS Monopoly.......
Rating: 12 Positives / 4 Negatives
Slix
13 hours ago at 12:14 pm
iPhones are still better.
Rating: 12 Positives / 5 Negatives
supmango
13 hours ago at 12:12 pm
I really hope that Apple sees trends like this and realizes it's time to change their game plan. No more once a year phones. Time to kick the innovation level up a few notches. Time for over the air OS updates, over the air app installs, wireless syncing and everything else Android has offered for some time now.
iOS does over the air app installs. Other than that, yes I agree that Apple needs to do those things. Oh, and I use Android because it's the only option on my carrier (its the least repulsive option anyway). But it sucks, and doesn't seem to be getting any better. I think the only reason it is seeing growth like it is is because of cheap hardware, and, as in my case, being the only real option on certain networks.
Rating: 6 Positives / 0 Negatives
Millah
2 hours ago at 11:13 pm
inevitable as android devices are available everywhere and in every price segment. remember, half of all American workers earn $505 or less per week.
The funny thing is, almost every single Android owner I know are people who could care less about "smartphones," really don't know much about technology, and only bought one because it was very cheap or free when they upgraded, and they were told that it could "run apps like the iPhone." These are people who had cheap free phones before they upgraded. And realistically, the majority of people are like that. But when we compare the industry profit percentages, it paints a much different picture. Which goes to show that market share is irrelevant especially in the cell phone business where cheap free phones are dominant. Its going to be interesting when Apple tries to go after this segment. I'm sure they'll come up with something clever.
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
Michael Scrip
12 hours ago at 01:13 pm
Deceptive Report... Let's not forget, Apple iOS encompasses more then just iPhones. If you included the iPad and iPod Touch which both run Apple iOS then Apple's market share is still ahead of Android.
It's not *that" deceptive... they did include "US smartphone usage" in the headline. Here's why... Apple's smartphone is called "the iPhone" And then you've got "Android" which is a tons of phones from many manufacturers. When comparing smartphone numbers... it's the iPhone vs. many Android phones. You're right... if you wanna have a platform battle... iOS vs Android... you'd have to include iPods and iPads. But this is a comparison of phones...
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
righttime
13 hours ago at 12:27 pm
Wow. A platform that is available on all four major carriers and has dozens of phones, passed the iPhone (which *just* became available on its second carrier) in overall usage. So I guess Google should be patting themselves on the back for this historic achievement.
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
There isn't a huge amount of activity, but take it for what it's worth. Also, I think this was before we fixed the IE issue. It should work in IE now.
arn
The top rated posts:
Macman1993
13 hours ago at 12:07 pm
Some will be bothered about IOS not being the most dominant. I personally don't care, I just want the best mobile OS.
Rating: 15 Positives / 2 Negatives
brendu
13 hours ago at 12:12 pm
One interesting thing to note. Apple held 25% of recent acquirers with 2 phone models. The iPhone 4 and iPhone 3GS. They are also on only 2 carriers, and have only been with Verizon for part of the time leading up to the march survey. Android however is on dozens of handsets and all four US carriers. I would say apple is doing amazingly well when you consider those specifics. I am not worried about iOS not having a larger chunk of the market, I am blown away that it has 25%.
Rating: 12 Positives / 0 Negatives
komodrone
13 hours ago at 12:39 pm
"...in total penetration" THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID. yeah I signed up for an account just to post this.
Rating: 10 Positives / 0 Negatives
Eddyisgreat
13 hours ago at 12:15 pm
If the iPhone were buy one get two free as well then I bet those numbers would be different :D
Rating: 9 Positives / 1 Negatives
VanMac
13 hours ago at 12:09 pm
Competition is good :) Keeps Apple on their toes Don't need another MS Monopoly.......
Rating: 12 Positives / 4 Negatives
Slix
13 hours ago at 12:14 pm
iPhones are still better.
Rating: 12 Positives / 5 Negatives
supmango
13 hours ago at 12:12 pm
I really hope that Apple sees trends like this and realizes it's time to change their game plan. No more once a year phones. Time to kick the innovation level up a few notches. Time for over the air OS updates, over the air app installs, wireless syncing and everything else Android has offered for some time now.
iOS does over the air app installs. Other than that, yes I agree that Apple needs to do those things. Oh, and I use Android because it's the only option on my carrier (its the least repulsive option anyway). But it sucks, and doesn't seem to be getting any better. I think the only reason it is seeing growth like it is is because of cheap hardware, and, as in my case, being the only real option on certain networks.
Rating: 6 Positives / 0 Negatives
Millah
2 hours ago at 11:13 pm
inevitable as android devices are available everywhere and in every price segment. remember, half of all American workers earn $505 or less per week.
The funny thing is, almost every single Android owner I know are people who could care less about "smartphones," really don't know much about technology, and only bought one because it was very cheap or free when they upgraded, and they were told that it could "run apps like the iPhone." These are people who had cheap free phones before they upgraded. And realistically, the majority of people are like that. But when we compare the industry profit percentages, it paints a much different picture. Which goes to show that market share is irrelevant especially in the cell phone business where cheap free phones are dominant. Its going to be interesting when Apple tries to go after this segment. I'm sure they'll come up with something clever.
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
Michael Scrip
12 hours ago at 01:13 pm
Deceptive Report... Let's not forget, Apple iOS encompasses more then just iPhones. If you included the iPad and iPod Touch which both run Apple iOS then Apple's market share is still ahead of Android.
It's not *that" deceptive... they did include "US smartphone usage" in the headline. Here's why... Apple's smartphone is called "the iPhone" And then you've got "Android" which is a tons of phones from many manufacturers. When comparing smartphone numbers... it's the iPhone vs. many Android phones. You're right... if you wanna have a platform battle... iOS vs Android... you'd have to include iPods and iPads. But this is a comparison of phones...
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
righttime
13 hours ago at 12:27 pm
Wow. A platform that is available on all four major carriers and has dozens of phones, passed the iPhone (which *just* became available on its second carrier) in overall usage. So I guess Google should be patting themselves on the back for this historic achievement.
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
There isn't a huge amount of activity, but take it for what it's worth. Also, I think this was before we fixed the IE issue. It should work in IE now.
arn
pondosinatra
Apr 29, 03:12 PM
Can anyone confirm if the stupid Help menu font spacing bug is still present?
Eidorian
May 3, 11:33 PM
With regards to this particular ad, should we presume from your comment that you are not an engineer, a doctor, a business person, a teacher, a student, a parent or a child? All these folks love their iPads.None of the above.
The commercials are cringe worthy when the potential you have is limited to web browsing.
The commercials are cringe worthy when the potential you have is limited to web browsing.
more...
kdarling
Oct 7, 08:44 AM
Surprised this hasn't been noted here yet...
USAToday interviewed (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2009-10-06-verizon-google-android_N.htm)the Verizon Wireless CEO about their new Android partnership, and got an extra comment:
Meantime, (the CEO) says, the carrier is continuing to talk with Apple about bringing the iPhone to Verizon. McAdam says Verizon would love to have the device, anytime Apple is ready. "It's up to them to decide."
Until then, he says, the two companies are having "lots of discussions" about Verizon's network and how it might affect Apple.
Real, or just pushing ATT's buttons so they have to pay Apple more? Who knows.
USAToday interviewed (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2009-10-06-verizon-google-android_N.htm)the Verizon Wireless CEO about their new Android partnership, and got an extra comment:
Meantime, (the CEO) says, the carrier is continuing to talk with Apple about bringing the iPhone to Verizon. McAdam says Verizon would love to have the device, anytime Apple is ready. "It's up to them to decide."
Until then, he says, the two companies are having "lots of discussions" about Verizon's network and how it might affect Apple.
Real, or just pushing ATT's buttons so they have to pay Apple more? Who knows.
Stuipdboy1000
May 2, 10:46 AM
- iPod bug fixes
Hopefully fixes the bug when album artwork doesn't show on the lock screen. It's not a critical bug, just kinda annoying.
Hopefully fixes the bug when album artwork doesn't show on the lock screen. It's not a critical bug, just kinda annoying.
more...
Jimmy James
May 4, 08:56 AM
just getting started...iPad 3!
Exactly. Makes it sound like it's still underdeveloped.
Exactly. Makes it sound like it's still underdeveloped.
whooleytoo
Mar 26, 02:42 PM
Maybe the people are stupid and have the system sitting in plain view and the cops will notice it when they try to question the neighbors.
Well, chances are if it's being used it could well just be sitting there by the living room TV!
Best of luck with this - any kind of theft like this would just drive me nuts.
Incidentally, you asked previously about Connect360's log - I don't know if it creates a separate log file, but you can certainly see log output in the Console, maybe that'll help.
Well, chances are if it's being used it could well just be sitting there by the living room TV!
Best of luck with this - any kind of theft like this would just drive me nuts.
Incidentally, you asked previously about Connect360's log - I don't know if it creates a separate log file, but you can certainly see log output in the Console, maybe that'll help.
more...
rva1
Jul 27, 02:08 PM
Chevrolet announced the Volt will be priced at $41,000 before tax credits. You can choose to lease it for $350/month.
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f70/its-official-chevrolet-volt-41-000-chevrolet-begins-taking-orders-94080/
The Nissan Leaf list for about $25k to $26k and is an ALL electric vehicle. GM better get their head out of the sand.
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f70/its-official-chevrolet-volt-41-000-chevrolet-begins-taking-orders-94080/
The Nissan Leaf list for about $25k to $26k and is an ALL electric vehicle. GM better get their head out of the sand.
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
more...
FoxyKaye
Oct 17, 08:59 AM
Now I'm definitely waiting this battle out, no matter how interesting it becomes.
rdowns
Jan 12, 04:36 AM
is there anything other than the fact there's "200 new patents" (where did you get this anyway?) that you find revolutionary about iPhone?
Here you go.
Here you go.
more...
Cybbe
Jul 22, 06:00 AM
Apple is right now the most disgusting company in the business.
ednamartin36
Mar 25, 01:38 PM
Is there anyway to get free or trial copy of this OS? I have never used this OS. I am using Windows 7. I am happy with the OS but looking for some change. I also heard that it is not compatible with many popular software or applications..hmm...
Vontrump.com
Vontrump.com
more...
faketom
Aug 9, 04:43 PM
Just ordered a 30" with my Mac Pro. Stuck with the stock graphics card however. It was a huge decision of whether to go for the single 30" or the two 23" displays - which is actually cheaper. Did I make the right choice?
Anybody who has a 30" have anything good or bad:( to say about them?
Anybody who has a 30" have anything good or bad:( to say about them?
imperium
Sep 26, 11:21 AM
so true.
This forum is mostly visited by whiners.
So many people wanted the MPB at a photography event. what a joke. they did not get it and now all the crying.
Basically you have just to ignore these folks if you want to have a nice experience at Macrumors.
Ignore me if you wish, but I'm pretty sad about not getting the machine promised by the rumour mill. I'm happy for y'all with your updated photo software, but wouldn't you have liked it to be true that we'd get a nice new C2D MBP to use it on?
This forum is mostly visited by whiners.
So many people wanted the MPB at a photography event. what a joke. they did not get it and now all the crying.
Basically you have just to ignore these folks if you want to have a nice experience at Macrumors.
Ignore me if you wish, but I'm pretty sad about not getting the machine promised by the rumour mill. I'm happy for y'all with your updated photo software, but wouldn't you have liked it to be true that we'd get a nice new C2D MBP to use it on?
more...
ciTiger
May 2, 10:02 AM
I hope performance in gps accuracy isn t affected by it...
dime21
May 5, 11:15 AM
Why are you using fear as part of your argument? I shouldn't have to have a gun on me to feel safe in my community. It's not saying I feel immune to crime, but fear of crime shouldn't drive a person.
Not fear of crime, but rather, the desire for self-preservation. Is someone else providing that safety for you? Or are you providing it for yourself? It sounds like you're taking option 3, and not providing it at all. FYI- the supreme court ruled that the police have no legal obligation to provide for your safety. Their job is only to catch the criminals during/after a crime - not to prevent it, and not to "keep you safe". Do you also choose not to wear your seat belt in your car, because that's for people who always fear collisions, and fear of an automotive collision shouldn't drive a person?
Yes, I own a few guns and I carry a hand gun on my person anytime I leave the house. To run errands, to pick the kids up from school, you name it, I'm carrying. I look it at the same way as the fire extinguisher I have sitting in the corner of my kitchen. I really really don't want an occasion to use it. Ever. But should that occasion arise, I absolutely want to have immediate access to it. Without that fire extinguisher, all I could do is stand in the front yard and watch my home burn to the ground waiting for the fire department to arrive. Carrying a hand gun is no different that that fire extinguisher in my kitchen or the airbags in my car. I don't ever want to use them, but having them can mean the difference between life and death. It doesn't mean I'm being driven by fear of kitchen fires or vehicle collisions.
Violent criminals frequently use guns to kill people. That is a fact, and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change that. Nothing. All you can do is arm yourself to level the playing field.
Given the choice, I'd much rather have the robber hold me up with a knife, than a gun.
Yes, because violent criminals give you a choice. lol. Next time you're in that situation, be sure to voice your opinion to your assailant. Please sir, if you are determined to rob me, please kindly exchange your hand gun for a knife. lmao. Oh wait, you may not even have the chance to ask, because now you're dead. He shot you because he felt like it, and there was nothing you could do to stop him.
Not fear of crime, but rather, the desire for self-preservation. Is someone else providing that safety for you? Or are you providing it for yourself? It sounds like you're taking option 3, and not providing it at all. FYI- the supreme court ruled that the police have no legal obligation to provide for your safety. Their job is only to catch the criminals during/after a crime - not to prevent it, and not to "keep you safe". Do you also choose not to wear your seat belt in your car, because that's for people who always fear collisions, and fear of an automotive collision shouldn't drive a person?
Yes, I own a few guns and I carry a hand gun on my person anytime I leave the house. To run errands, to pick the kids up from school, you name it, I'm carrying. I look it at the same way as the fire extinguisher I have sitting in the corner of my kitchen. I really really don't want an occasion to use it. Ever. But should that occasion arise, I absolutely want to have immediate access to it. Without that fire extinguisher, all I could do is stand in the front yard and watch my home burn to the ground waiting for the fire department to arrive. Carrying a hand gun is no different that that fire extinguisher in my kitchen or the airbags in my car. I don't ever want to use them, but having them can mean the difference between life and death. It doesn't mean I'm being driven by fear of kitchen fires or vehicle collisions.
Violent criminals frequently use guns to kill people. That is a fact, and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change that. Nothing. All you can do is arm yourself to level the playing field.
Given the choice, I'd much rather have the robber hold me up with a knife, than a gun.
Yes, because violent criminals give you a choice. lol. Next time you're in that situation, be sure to voice your opinion to your assailant. Please sir, if you are determined to rob me, please kindly exchange your hand gun for a knife. lmao. Oh wait, you may not even have the chance to ask, because now you're dead. He shot you because he felt like it, and there was nothing you could do to stop him.
arn
Apr 21, 10:44 PM
Perhaps a "Relevant" button then.
I guess leaving it as a +1 button is pretty much the same thing without using a word.
*shrug*
I just think it may be more troublesome than helpful to have a -1 button. If someone disagrees with a post, they usually respond with an argument. If they agree, unless they have something to add, hitting the +1 button would work, and it would clear up the "Agreed" and "+1" posts.
Well, some places limit the ability to downvote for higher level accounts. Like those who have been around or gained a certain amount of reputation. While others have no downvote ability at all.
arn
I guess leaving it as a +1 button is pretty much the same thing without using a word.
*shrug*
I just think it may be more troublesome than helpful to have a -1 button. If someone disagrees with a post, they usually respond with an argument. If they agree, unless they have something to add, hitting the +1 button would work, and it would clear up the "Agreed" and "+1" posts.
Well, some places limit the ability to downvote for higher level accounts. Like those who have been around or gained a certain amount of reputation. While others have no downvote ability at all.
arn
Chundles
Sep 12, 07:42 AM
yeah, but there is a link in your itunes software (client) which has "Music Store" - u know.. down the left side where your playlists are..
Wouldn't they need to change that to a generic "Store" or something..
They'll release iTunes 7.0 with "iTunes Store" in it's place and it will all come back online after the event.
Wouldn't they need to change that to a generic "Store" or something..
They'll release iTunes 7.0 with "iTunes Store" in it's place and it will all come back online after the event.
JRoDDz
Mar 17, 08:53 AM
Bull. I had a girlfriend in high school get fired from OfficeMax for being $100 off where she had been working for almost a year. Unfortunately some guy came in that day, paid for two computers and a printer with $100 bills (total was something like $2500, as this was the late 90's). She counted it twice, but apparently one was missed. Corporate policy stated that she could only be off by less than $5 at the end of her shift.
She didn't pocket the money and her manager knew that she didn't, but she still lost her job. Company policy.
Would I like to get an iPad for half price? Absolutely, but ONLY if it was because the company was selling it for half price. I pay what I am supposed to pay.
It's ok. The original poster isn't worried about his fellow man. He's just happy that he got a discounted iPad. This is the reason this country is going down the crapper. Nobody cares about anyone else. Stick it to the man. yeah so what if this kid got fired. It's all about me me me. :(
She didn't pocket the money and her manager knew that she didn't, but she still lost her job. Company policy.
Would I like to get an iPad for half price? Absolutely, but ONLY if it was because the company was selling it for half price. I pay what I am supposed to pay.
It's ok. The original poster isn't worried about his fellow man. He's just happy that he got a discounted iPad. This is the reason this country is going down the crapper. Nobody cares about anyone else. Stick it to the man. yeah so what if this kid got fired. It's all about me me me. :(
JackAxe
Mar 24, 06:11 PM
Happy birthday to Apple's 'ONLY' good OS! :)
sherlockholmes
May 3, 11:54 PM
None of the above.
The commercials are cringe worthy when the potential you have is limited to web browsing.
The potential is limited only by you imagination.
The commercials are cringe worthy when the potential you have is limited to web browsing.
The potential is limited only by you imagination.
emulator
May 4, 12:02 PM
I want that voice-over guy to read me bedtime stories.
And in the morning, you would buy everything you come across. ;)
And in the morning, you would buy everything you come across. ;)
0 comments:
Post a Comment