dsnort
Aug 1, 03:32 PM
Do not act as stupid ass consumers with no brain. It is your right when you by music to listen to i where ever you want it too.
You payed for it didn't you so now it is yours ....
DRM is ******** and it takes away your rights as a consumers.
Act now stop that ********.
One more thing. At least we have the freedom and our goverment tries too help.
I don't FEEL ignorant and stupid. Maybe that's because I took the time to READ and UNDERSTAND the limitations imposed on me by iTunes/iPod before I BOUGHT in. And maybe because I understand that what I am BUYING is a DIGITAL DATA FILE that must be interpreted by a certain APPLICATION to become music, and that this was EXPLAINED to me before I BOUGHT. That I don't OWN the MUSIC, and that there are LIMITATIONS to what I can do with it. ( And if you think I'm wrong on that last point, let a copyright holder catch you using their music for commmercial gain. Write back to us and describe the world of hurt that descends on you)!
The fact of the matter is that reasonable DRM's protect the artists who are the source of the music. And Apples DRM is one the most reasonable in the industry, both protecting the artist, and allowing fair use by the customer.
You payed for it didn't you so now it is yours ....
DRM is ******** and it takes away your rights as a consumers.
Act now stop that ********.
One more thing. At least we have the freedom and our goverment tries too help.
I don't FEEL ignorant and stupid. Maybe that's because I took the time to READ and UNDERSTAND the limitations imposed on me by iTunes/iPod before I BOUGHT in. And maybe because I understand that what I am BUYING is a DIGITAL DATA FILE that must be interpreted by a certain APPLICATION to become music, and that this was EXPLAINED to me before I BOUGHT. That I don't OWN the MUSIC, and that there are LIMITATIONS to what I can do with it. ( And if you think I'm wrong on that last point, let a copyright holder catch you using their music for commmercial gain. Write back to us and describe the world of hurt that descends on you)!
The fact of the matter is that reasonable DRM's protect the artists who are the source of the music. And Apples DRM is one the most reasonable in the industry, both protecting the artist, and allowing fair use by the customer.
leekohler
Apr 27, 07:58 PM
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.
There are no words I have to say to you. The ignorance is astounding.
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.
There are no words I have to say to you. The ignorance is astounding.
Benjy91
Apr 8, 03:11 PM
+1. Hopefully Lion will be worth the added system requirements.
Anyways, he features I've heard that are to new to Windows 8 so far is:
.jpg "emo love quotes and poems")
emo love quotes and poems
more...
Send that special loved one a love quote today! 3ight LLC Web SiteLove Quotes♥ Support
Send that special loved one a love quote today! 3ight LLC Web SiteLove Quotes♥ Support
more...
romantic love quotes for
love quotes and sayings
more...
Send that special loved one a love quote today! 3ight LLC Web SiteLove Quotes♥ Support
Best Love Quotes 504686
more...
love quotes for him and her.
cute love quotes and sayings
more...
sad love quotes for him from
quotes on family love. quotes
more...
![love quotes and pictures. Rakuten: LOVE QUOTES stall Rabukuotsu [1200MM] [Dynamaite ★ point YDKG-kd] smtb-KD- Shopping Japanese products from Japan](http://image.rakuten.co.jp/sese/cabinet/ac/lovequotes-02.jpg "Rakuten: LOVE QUOTES stall Rabukuotsu [1200MM] [Dynamaite ★ point YDKG-kd] smtb-KD- Shopping Japanese products from Japan")
Rakuten: LOVE QUOTES stall Rabukuotsu [1200MM] [Dynamaite ★ point YDKG-kd] smtb-KD- Shopping Japanese products from Japan
Austen, Aristotle Rilke, and many, many more! Visit us at www.thehappiestcouple.com. Publications Circulation LLC Web SiteDaily Love Quotes Support
more...
Website de Ninja ChemistSuporte para Eat, Pray, Love, Quotes
sad quotes on life and love
sad love quotes for him from
Anyways, he features I've heard that are to new to Windows 8 so far is:
wordoflife
Apr 25, 06:33 PM
http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/full/284725738.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1303773395&Signature=PCxhkNUAUfz2RA%2FbPdbd3vLcc%2Bs%3D
Hmm
Hmm
more...
Ommid
Apr 25, 01:28 PM
I'd say that's pretty plausible.
I agree, you're good!
I agree, you're good!
leekohler
Mar 4, 11:07 AM
Keep talking Veil, 2010 was just the 'coming attractions.'
No- you keep talking, please. Please, we beg you to keep trying crap like this. It'll all but guarantee the Republicans' demise. Really, you could not self destruct more beautifully. You're not for freedom at all, just freedom for government and corporations to walk all over their workers. And since you never mentioned the anti-gay addition to this bill, I assume you're OK with that too.
No- you keep talking, please. Please, we beg you to keep trying crap like this. It'll all but guarantee the Republicans' demise. Really, you could not self destruct more beautifully. You're not for freedom at all, just freedom for government and corporations to walk all over their workers. And since you never mentioned the anti-gay addition to this bill, I assume you're OK with that too.
more...
CerealKillers
Mar 17, 12:49 AM
Hahah sweet. This happened to me a couple yrs ago with an iPod touch. I put $75 on my credit card and was gonna pay the rest with cash when I was handed a receipt and the iPod Touch.
thenetstud
Jan 10, 06:44 PM
Silent update:
Current wired keyboard now comes in a wireless version.
Current wired keyboard now comes in a wireless version.
more...
erzhik
Mar 15, 03:55 PM
Now you see, OP is a true Apple diehard fan. FYI, Apple didn't and doesn't invent anything new. What they have in their devices is exactly what other devices have and had in them for a while. All Apple does is redesigns as they see it, but YOU pay the premium for that.
Is Macbook pro amazing? Yes
Will I swap my MCPro for anything else? No
Did I pay a hefty premium for it? Hell yes
Can I get the same thing from Dell or Toshiba for less? Absolutely YES
Apple products look unique from the outside, but in reality they are the same devices others have but in different packages.
Is Macbook pro amazing? Yes
Will I swap my MCPro for anything else? No
Did I pay a hefty premium for it? Hell yes
Can I get the same thing from Dell or Toshiba for less? Absolutely YES
Apple products look unique from the outside, but in reality they are the same devices others have but in different packages.
Mackilroy
Mar 21, 01:15 AM
Wow � that's insane. Hope you find it, man.
more...
DaveDaveDave
Apr 29, 03:24 PM
And people kept telling me that OSX and iOS weren't going to merge in any meaningful manner for years ahead, if ever. Yeah right. I'd bet the one after this has them nearly fully merged and I mean towards iOS for the most part. OSX will be dumbed down to the lowest common brain cell and you won't be able to get free/open software anymore. It'll have to come through the App Store or not at all. Wait and see. That is the point I'll be moving on.
There's a huge difference between merging in concepts of the UI, user-friendly software distribution, media access and what you describe.
It is very unlikely that Apple's engineering and marketing would destroy what they've worked to build for so long, IMHO. How are you so certain that they'll be bringing all the bad stuff along with the good stuff? Seriously - do you really think that Apple's talent are as utterly foolish that you make them out to be?
There's a huge difference between merging in concepts of the UI, user-friendly software distribution, media access and what you describe.
It is very unlikely that Apple's engineering and marketing would destroy what they've worked to build for so long, IMHO. How are you so certain that they'll be bringing all the bad stuff along with the good stuff? Seriously - do you really think that Apple's talent are as utterly foolish that you make them out to be?
Chip NoVaMac
Mar 13, 12:15 PM
Niche? Really? So all the iPhones and iPads sold around the world and they're still niche? What's that niche called? the whole market?!
There are 'Droid lovers out there.. with many not liking the closed "eco-system" that Apple imposes for apps; and the selective "censorship" in apps or how a device like the ATV2 won't show Gay&Lesbian genre in the Netflix app on the ATV2.
In the end for the iPhone it seems that it has a 30% market share according to data I found. The iPad is harder to peg down since the numbers can be split between eReaders, tablets, netbooks, and even notebooks.
Once it all shakes out, Apple IMO would be happy with 20-30% across all their platforms. The revenue stream from iTunes will keep them very happy.
I disagree. The click wheel made it easier to use, as it was intuitive (scrolling clockwise down, anticlockwise up), and was also easily used inside a pocket [find the clickwheel and you're go]. The clickwheel has been hailed as a masterstroke for Apple; getting rid of the plethora of buttons on MP3 players and replacing it with a sleek interface. I find it the most annoying part of using my iPhone is that I have to look at the screen to use the controls.
+1
The click wheel in my first iPod won me over... though at least with compatible headsets with in-line buttons we can at least advance to the next track...
In case you haven't noticed, they've redefined computing almost overnight. They're now building on that. They've got the competition completely flummoxed. They're pushing the industry forward with their apparent non-innovations.
One has to just look at the MBA, and even the MBP models...
Links to Steve's presentations and nothing else, eh? If computing has changed, then why do we still have laptops and desktops? Even better, why does Apple still sell them?
The links were about three of the four products that changed the tech landscape... the missing one was for the iPod.
The 1st Mac changed how we ALL would look at using a computer for a very long time. The 1st iPhone changed how we look at the smartphone, as did the 1st iPad.
As to your question about why does Apple still sell notebooks and desktops; or why anyone else might still be selling them. Seriously, till Intel and others can give us that power in a portable device - it won't happen. Yet the power that the iPad's offer are capturing the imagination of folks that realize they don't need major power for day-to-day tasks.
What I think we are seeing is an integration of devices that no other single company has yet been able to do. From our music players, to our TV, to our tablets, to our notebooks or desktops. And getting them all to play well with each other.
Goes back to my comments about Apple having a comfortable niche... 20-30% of us that like a seamless environment for our digital life...
Honestly I think Apple got the multitasking almost spot on... the way it manages it is perfect for a device with limited battery/processing power.
In the last 6 months I've "fixed" two phones for people (1x Android, 1 x Symbian) who've installed an app that's running constantly in the background and making the phone unusable to the point they thought it was broken. I used to find it with my own Nokia N95, the multitasking ability was excellent but you had to be careful what you left running or the battery could run down in a few hours.
I think Apple have made an excellent trade-off in that way, it used to bug the hell out of me that I couldn't use sat nav or internet radio apps in the background, but since iOS 4 I've really not found any situation where I need "true" multitasking and the current implementation has little effect on the battery.
+1
We might not like the "limits" gives us... but in the end it helps in the "experience"....
There are 'Droid lovers out there.. with many not liking the closed "eco-system" that Apple imposes for apps; and the selective "censorship" in apps or how a device like the ATV2 won't show Gay&Lesbian genre in the Netflix app on the ATV2.
In the end for the iPhone it seems that it has a 30% market share according to data I found. The iPad is harder to peg down since the numbers can be split between eReaders, tablets, netbooks, and even notebooks.
Once it all shakes out, Apple IMO would be happy with 20-30% across all their platforms. The revenue stream from iTunes will keep them very happy.
I disagree. The click wheel made it easier to use, as it was intuitive (scrolling clockwise down, anticlockwise up), and was also easily used inside a pocket [find the clickwheel and you're go]. The clickwheel has been hailed as a masterstroke for Apple; getting rid of the plethora of buttons on MP3 players and replacing it with a sleek interface. I find it the most annoying part of using my iPhone is that I have to look at the screen to use the controls.
+1
The click wheel in my first iPod won me over... though at least with compatible headsets with in-line buttons we can at least advance to the next track...
In case you haven't noticed, they've redefined computing almost overnight. They're now building on that. They've got the competition completely flummoxed. They're pushing the industry forward with their apparent non-innovations.
One has to just look at the MBA, and even the MBP models...
Links to Steve's presentations and nothing else, eh? If computing has changed, then why do we still have laptops and desktops? Even better, why does Apple still sell them?
The links were about three of the four products that changed the tech landscape... the missing one was for the iPod.
The 1st Mac changed how we ALL would look at using a computer for a very long time. The 1st iPhone changed how we look at the smartphone, as did the 1st iPad.
As to your question about why does Apple still sell notebooks and desktops; or why anyone else might still be selling them. Seriously, till Intel and others can give us that power in a portable device - it won't happen. Yet the power that the iPad's offer are capturing the imagination of folks that realize they don't need major power for day-to-day tasks.
What I think we are seeing is an integration of devices that no other single company has yet been able to do. From our music players, to our TV, to our tablets, to our notebooks or desktops. And getting them all to play well with each other.
Goes back to my comments about Apple having a comfortable niche... 20-30% of us that like a seamless environment for our digital life...
Honestly I think Apple got the multitasking almost spot on... the way it manages it is perfect for a device with limited battery/processing power.
In the last 6 months I've "fixed" two phones for people (1x Android, 1 x Symbian) who've installed an app that's running constantly in the background and making the phone unusable to the point they thought it was broken. I used to find it with my own Nokia N95, the multitasking ability was excellent but you had to be careful what you left running or the battery could run down in a few hours.
I think Apple have made an excellent trade-off in that way, it used to bug the hell out of me that I couldn't use sat nav or internet radio apps in the background, but since iOS 4 I've really not found any situation where I need "true" multitasking and the current implementation has little effect on the battery.
+1
We might not like the "limits" gives us... but in the end it helps in the "experience"....
more...
mabaker
Apr 16, 08:26 AM
Aw, I almost feel sorry for Google not trying to compete with Apple with their own ideas but blatantly copying them. Pathetic.
twoodcc
Jul 30, 10:08 PM
too bad osx cant utilise GPUs and whatnot. :( otherwise id let my 4850 have a crack - better then the CPU thats for sure!
yeah i wish they had gpu folding for mac os x. but really, there aren't that many mac video cards
yeah i wish they had gpu folding for mac os x. but really, there aren't that many mac video cards
more...
Cassie
Jan 13, 02:01 PM
Actually he's right! I just tilt my PowerBook screen and can read the white on color #FAFAFA with no problem :-)
I have CRT, so HA! Besides, all you havr to do is highlight it anyway.
I have CRT, so HA! Besides, all you havr to do is highlight it anyway.
*LTD*
Mar 6, 02:18 PM
One problem I see with Apple though is once they have their successful recipe, they tend to stagnate on it. That's when the competition gets the jump, starts innovating themselves and pushes ahead.
No they don't. They just attempt to copy (often badly), then license universally and flood the market with a lot junk that includes a ton of different models at very low price points.
No they don't. They just attempt to copy (often badly), then license universally and flood the market with a lot junk that includes a ton of different models at very low price points.
more...
tny
Oct 29, 11:14 AM
Thats wrong, its not free as is freedom. If that was the case I should be able to do as I please with the code and that is not the case. If I use the free(GPL) software as a baseline for a project I then have to turn around and release all the changes I made for free as well. This may be hundreds of hours of work and I don't know anyone that works for free.
So then you only consider the BSD license to be free?
So then you only consider the BSD license to be free?
Melrose
Mar 9, 08:15 AM
Yes, and you don't have to look too far to find examples of that ;)
...well in that case it sure puts a new perspective on presidential elections w/ mass hysteria.
...well in that case it sure puts a new perspective on presidential elections w/ mass hysteria.
MacRumors
Oct 19, 09:44 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Gartner has released preliminary market share (http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=497290) numbers for 3Q 2006 (calendar, Apple's financial 4Q) which show Apple seeing substantial industry growth at 1.5%. Apple now ships 6.1% of all U.S. "PCs", 4th in the industry behind Gateway (6.4%), HP (23%), and Dell (32.1%). Apple did not place in the top-5 in worldwide PC shipments, so that data was not available.
Gartner notes that the overall U.S. PC market actually experienced a 2% decline year-over-year, so that coupled with Apple's announcment of a 30% growth in Mac shipments last quarter (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061018172455.shtml) helps explain the dramatic growth.
"Two factors that contributed to the poor performance in the U.S. market were continued weakness in the professional desk-based market, and the carry-over effect from strong sales in the second quarter. Strong sales to the home market, fueled by solid back to school sales and mobile PCs could not offset the decline in other areas." -- Mikako Kitagawa, principal analyst for Gartner Dataquest’s Client Computing Markets Group.
Apple indicated yesterday that while reaction to the Mac Pro has been positive, the professional community may be holding off until an Intel-native Creative Suite ships (expected spring 2007 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060918153507.shtml)). On the flip side, a recent article in a Princeton University newspaper (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061014120137.shtml) indicates that Apple is indeed doing very well in the growing education market.
Recent research (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061017115015.shtml) has indicated that Apple is poised to grab even more "switchers" this holiday season, which promises to translate into even more market share.
Of interest, Dell has consistently been losing market share to rival HP in both U.S. and Worldwide markets, and HP took the #1 spot on the Worldwide market with 16.3% compared to Dell's 16.1%.
Gartner has released preliminary market share (http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=497290) numbers for 3Q 2006 (calendar, Apple's financial 4Q) which show Apple seeing substantial industry growth at 1.5%. Apple now ships 6.1% of all U.S. "PCs", 4th in the industry behind Gateway (6.4%), HP (23%), and Dell (32.1%). Apple did not place in the top-5 in worldwide PC shipments, so that data was not available.
Gartner notes that the overall U.S. PC market actually experienced a 2% decline year-over-year, so that coupled with Apple's announcment of a 30% growth in Mac shipments last quarter (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061018172455.shtml) helps explain the dramatic growth.
"Two factors that contributed to the poor performance in the U.S. market were continued weakness in the professional desk-based market, and the carry-over effect from strong sales in the second quarter. Strong sales to the home market, fueled by solid back to school sales and mobile PCs could not offset the decline in other areas." -- Mikako Kitagawa, principal analyst for Gartner Dataquest’s Client Computing Markets Group.
Apple indicated yesterday that while reaction to the Mac Pro has been positive, the professional community may be holding off until an Intel-native Creative Suite ships (expected spring 2007 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060918153507.shtml)). On the flip side, a recent article in a Princeton University newspaper (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061014120137.shtml) indicates that Apple is indeed doing very well in the growing education market.
Recent research (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/10/20061017115015.shtml) has indicated that Apple is poised to grab even more "switchers" this holiday season, which promises to translate into even more market share.
Of interest, Dell has consistently been losing market share to rival HP in both U.S. and Worldwide markets, and HP took the #1 spot on the Worldwide market with 16.3% compared to Dell's 16.1%.
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.
mrkgoo
Jan 12, 04:21 PM
C'mon...this is the CEO of Apple presenting at Macworld. He was hardly going to be subdued, not with a bunch of fanboys and shareholders present.
Anyway, I saw most of the iPhone stuff as excitement rather than arrogance. It's a reason I believe the ApplTV was 'previewed' last year, so all focus could be on the iPhone. I think Steve was genuinely excited to present it to us.
However, I do think that the pie charts explainingthe market share of Zune is a bit underhanded. If Microsft did the same thing with market share for OS, it'd be the same. 2% market share is pretty damned good for Zune, considering competition in the market - any other mp3 player would love to get that kind of market share. I'd prefer it if Apple focused more on selling theri own products in this regard, than downplaying others.
Anyway, I saw most of the iPhone stuff as excitement rather than arrogance. It's a reason I believe the ApplTV was 'previewed' last year, so all focus could be on the iPhone. I think Steve was genuinely excited to present it to us.
However, I do think that the pie charts explainingthe market share of Zune is a bit underhanded. If Microsft did the same thing with market share for OS, it'd be the same. 2% market share is pretty damned good for Zune, considering competition in the market - any other mp3 player would love to get that kind of market share. I'd prefer it if Apple focused more on selling theri own products in this regard, than downplaying others.
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.
bming1
Jan 13, 09:36 AM
I can name one big thing - visual voicemail. I think this is an amazing feature. Instead of waiting for the voicemail system to respond to your button inputs to skip messages so you can finally get to the one you want, you just touch the screen once. Please show me another cell phone that can do this.
As someone else has already pointed out, there are over 200 patents in the phone. While I'm certain that many are related to human factors elements and software, it's likely that there are some hardware patents involved. Only an Apple hardware engineer who was intimately involved in the design of the iPhone would be able to help you out here.
who are you kidding? what part of iphone is not previously existed in technology? yay it has a nice UI, like all other apple products, but the hardware?
remind me, again, what's revolutionary about iPhone?
As someone else has already pointed out, there are over 200 patents in the phone. While I'm certain that many are related to human factors elements and software, it's likely that there are some hardware patents involved. Only an Apple hardware engineer who was intimately involved in the design of the iPhone would be able to help you out here.
who are you kidding? what part of iphone is not previously existed in technology? yay it has a nice UI, like all other apple products, but the hardware?
remind me, again, what's revolutionary about iPhone?
dejo
Apr 25, 03:39 PM
I declared timer as an instance method:
- (IBAction) cancelTime: (id) sender;
- (void) cancelIt:(NSTimer*) timer;
@end
No, you didn't. You declared cancelTime: and cancelIt: as instance methods, one of which happens to have a timer parameter.
As such, I'm not sure you have a proper grasp of the fundamental concepts of Objective-C programming so I would suggest you step away from the real coding and go (re)learn those before you come back to this issue.
- (IBAction) cancelTime: (id) sender;
- (void) cancelIt:(NSTimer*) timer;
@end
No, you didn't. You declared cancelTime: and cancelIt: as instance methods, one of which happens to have a timer parameter.
As such, I'm not sure you have a proper grasp of the fundamental concepts of Objective-C programming so I would suggest you step away from the real coding and go (re)learn those before you come back to this issue.
0 comments:
Post a Comment