Some_Big_Spoon
Sep 26, 02:04 PM
Code optimization & tweaking is always good.. very good, but you'll eventually run up against the limitations of the processor. I've been having that issue for the past two weeks here at work. Disk usage hasn't been the problem, it's just me needing more horsepower than the dual G5 can muster.
a C2D MBP would give you what? Maybe a 20% speed bump. I doubt you'd notice except if you used a stop watch. For photographers and Videographers I doubt C2D would bing even a 20% boost as their main bottleneck is the speed of the disk.
Try this experiment: Bring up Activity Monitor and see if the CPU is as 100% if it is not a faster CPU will do nothing for you. On a Mac the CPU is at 100% mostly when transcoding or redering, those tasks will go faster after the speed bump
My gues is that the code re-work inside Aperture will speed things up MUCH more than a C2D could.
a C2D MBP would give you what? Maybe a 20% speed bump. I doubt you'd notice except if you used a stop watch. For photographers and Videographers I doubt C2D would bing even a 20% boost as their main bottleneck is the speed of the disk.
Try this experiment: Bring up Activity Monitor and see if the CPU is as 100% if it is not a faster CPU will do nothing for you. On a Mac the CPU is at 100% mostly when transcoding or redering, those tasks will go faster after the speed bump
My gues is that the code re-work inside Aperture will speed things up MUCH more than a C2D could.
mrsir2009
Apr 26, 04:30 AM
Woah at the end of that video why was she twitching really violently? She was flipping out, looks freaky :eek:
BlueRevolution
Oct 28, 07:34 PM
I rue the day when Apple has to try and lock down OSX like MS is forced to attempt with Vista!
OS X doesn't even have a serial number in the boxes. Apple's lack of caring of this extends to the point where they haven't even bothered to have the ability to tell the difference between a pirated copy and a legitimate copy of the OS. I don't see tyrannical anti-piracy policy coming anytime soon, and I don't see Apple taking drastic measures to prevent OS X on beige boxes soon either.
Everyone seems to be forgetting the math of piracy. It's not
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated)
it's
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated + sales gained due to piracy)
This will be especially noticeable in Apple's case, where people that might never otherwise have the opportunity or inclination to try out OS X download it onto their PCs, fall in love with it and their next computer is a Mac. Not only has Apple made a software sale, they have also sold a piece of $2k hardware with a 20% profit margin. I personally know people that have done this.
I think that prettymuch alone of large software companies, Apple sees the other side of piracy. It's never a given that you're a pirate OR you buy software/music/movies/games/whatever in stores.
OS X doesn't even have a serial number in the boxes. Apple's lack of caring of this extends to the point where they haven't even bothered to have the ability to tell the difference between a pirated copy and a legitimate copy of the OS. I don't see tyrannical anti-piracy policy coming anytime soon, and I don't see Apple taking drastic measures to prevent OS X on beige boxes soon either.
Everyone seems to be forgetting the math of piracy. It's not
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated)
it's
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated + sales gained due to piracy)
This will be especially noticeable in Apple's case, where people that might never otherwise have the opportunity or inclination to try out OS X download it onto their PCs, fall in love with it and their next computer is a Mac. Not only has Apple made a software sale, they have also sold a piece of $2k hardware with a 20% profit margin. I personally know people that have done this.
I think that prettymuch alone of large software companies, Apple sees the other side of piracy. It's never a given that you're a pirate OR you buy software/music/movies/games/whatever in stores.
mrsir2009
Apr 29, 04:02 PM
Bring back the disappearing scroll bars ya spineless bastards!
more...
AppleScruff1
Apr 23, 09:21 PM
Don't you mean "Oh yay, another rip off of Steam, XBLA store, Impulse, Gamersgate, PSN, WiiWare or [insert any of the other app download stores that existed years before any of Apple's download stores]."
Hmm?
How quickly they forget, or most likely never knew. Some here think that Apple invented the wheel. :D
Back on topic, I hope that Microsoft listens to their users and lets everyone who want to download the beta and give their feedback. It seems to have worked well for W7.
Hmm?
How quickly they forget, or most likely never knew. Some here think that Apple invented the wheel. :D
Back on topic, I hope that Microsoft listens to their users and lets everyone who want to download the beta and give their feedback. It seems to have worked well for W7.
sailortena
Jan 9, 07:59 AM
Realistically, this is want I want:
more...
performing, Talk
Singer Justin Bieber poses at the premiere of the documentary quot;Justin Bieber: Never Say Neverquot; at Nokia theatre in Los Angeles February 8, 2011.
more...
justin bieber nsn dvd bluray
Justin Bieber Singer Justin
more...
However, what Justin Bieber is
justin bieber outfits.
more...
Justin Bieber - Baby ft.
Justin+ieber+personal+
more...
Justin Bieber#39;s Favorite Color
Justin Bieber aka quot;The SUPRA
more...
Manny Pacquiao and Freddie
Justin Bieber Gallery
Justin Bieber paid $25000 for
more...
steadysignal
Apr 27, 09:39 AM
3.7" ain't going to cut it, sorry
how is that battery life going to be on that larger screen you want?
how is that battery life going to be on that larger screen you want?
callme
May 2, 09:57 AM
I find it hilarious that Steve Jobs claimed Apple was not tracking users, but now all of a sudden we find Location tracking being completely removed from this version of iOS, that is honestly something that annoyes me..
I find it hilarious that you don't understand what is being done here!
I find it hilarious that you don't understand what is being done here!
more...
ctdonath
Oct 1, 02:06 PM
I live in one of fairly many Grade II Listed (http://www.heritage.co.uk/apavilions/glstb.html) buildings in the United Kingdom, much older but not quite as large as old Steve's, and there is no surprise when purchasing such a building that you are significantly restricted in what you can do to it.
England has a very long history of common people being subject to the will & whim of the rich & powerful & connected.
The USA exists precisely because some of those common people got tired of such treatment and made it clear they would do with their land what they saw fit.
What is it about the past that you don't like, Jobs?
How it gets in the way of the present & future.
When people stop shelling out good money, time & resources of their own (not confiscated-at-gunpoint taxpayer funds) for old things, maybe it's time to stop preserving what people don't actually want and start replacing it. Remember, Apple does not maintain a "museum of past Apple products" because those products no longer sold are, by current standards, failures - they may have been great then, but nobody wants to put up their own money for them today.
Yes, there is a valid argument and sociopolitical expenditure to preserve things which may not be of sustained current value. Question is where to draw the line. AFAIK, nobody actually wanted that house, and few are truly enamored by Spanish Revival architecture to a degree worth the substantial cost of preservation of such an example, and fewer still are truly enamored by the decedent who built it. The argument, IMHO, centers more around those wanting to either criticize Jobs at any opportunity, or whose relevance hinges on ability to find old homes they can spin as "historic".
Suitable acreage is costly in that region. The cost of preserving the "interesting creation" far exceeds the cost of replacing it with another interesting creation; as none are interested in putting up the money to preserve the former, those interested in putting up the money to create the latter win.
And yes, the old gives way to the new. Physical things are not important of themselves. It's not about wanton destruction for sake of destruction, it's about moving forward and removing obstacles thereto.
England has a very long history of common people being subject to the will & whim of the rich & powerful & connected.
The USA exists precisely because some of those common people got tired of such treatment and made it clear they would do with their land what they saw fit.
What is it about the past that you don't like, Jobs?
How it gets in the way of the present & future.
When people stop shelling out good money, time & resources of their own (not confiscated-at-gunpoint taxpayer funds) for old things, maybe it's time to stop preserving what people don't actually want and start replacing it. Remember, Apple does not maintain a "museum of past Apple products" because those products no longer sold are, by current standards, failures - they may have been great then, but nobody wants to put up their own money for them today.
Yes, there is a valid argument and sociopolitical expenditure to preserve things which may not be of sustained current value. Question is where to draw the line. AFAIK, nobody actually wanted that house, and few are truly enamored by Spanish Revival architecture to a degree worth the substantial cost of preservation of such an example, and fewer still are truly enamored by the decedent who built it. The argument, IMHO, centers more around those wanting to either criticize Jobs at any opportunity, or whose relevance hinges on ability to find old homes they can spin as "historic".
Suitable acreage is costly in that region. The cost of preserving the "interesting creation" far exceeds the cost of replacing it with another interesting creation; as none are interested in putting up the money to preserve the former, those interested in putting up the money to create the latter win.
And yes, the old gives way to the new. Physical things are not important of themselves. It's not about wanton destruction for sake of destruction, it's about moving forward and removing obstacles thereto.
Prom1
Mar 27, 10:05 AM
Yeah, installing an OS straight from the Internet ? Never heard of that before. :rolleyes:
Not everyone is stuck on dial-up, and it would be nice for Apple to finally provide an option that has been the norm in many other OS installers for the last 15 years.
However, I doubt we won't see optical discs. For one, they are much cheaper and faster to duplicate than Flash memory devices. It would make no sense for Apple to go the costly route of Flash only distribution just yet since most of their line-up still have DVD drives.
Not to mention the cool-storage shelf life for optical storage as a final backup. I'm willing to bet out of ALL the users on these boards (myself included) clamoring for no more optical in a MBP/MB that we still have TONS of optical discs with important data lying around and not solely limited to DVD movies.
Not everyone is stuck on dial-up, and it would be nice for Apple to finally provide an option that has been the norm in many other OS installers for the last 15 years.
However, I doubt we won't see optical discs. For one, they are much cheaper and faster to duplicate than Flash memory devices. It would make no sense for Apple to go the costly route of Flash only distribution just yet since most of their line-up still have DVD drives.
Not to mention the cool-storage shelf life for optical storage as a final backup. I'm willing to bet out of ALL the users on these boards (myself included) clamoring for no more optical in a MBP/MB that we still have TONS of optical discs with important data lying around and not solely limited to DVD movies.
more...
Lacero
Sep 8, 08:22 AM
It was funny to see Kanye dropping F-bombs and seeing self-righteous journalists and media types sitting there soaking it up. Hilarious. I don't think Kanye gave a f#@$.
RipTide1024
Sep 30, 08:29 AM
In the architectural drawing, above the kitchen and below the bedrooms (using the top of the image as up and the bottom of the image as down) there is a rectangular room with an arch inside it. It's not labeled like the rest is. Any ideas what that is?
Initially I thought large pantry due to its location from the kitchen, but the pantry is labeled to the right of that area.
Perhaps a library with round desk / seating? Sitting room with a circular hearth in the middle? Breakfast nook?
Initially I thought large pantry due to its location from the kitchen, but the pantry is labeled to the right of that area.
Perhaps a library with round desk / seating? Sitting room with a circular hearth in the middle? Breakfast nook?
more...
Chundles
Sep 12, 03:06 AM
well, I can see that it wouldn't be fast enough for unbuffered video, but if the receiving piece of hardware could decode h.264, then it would be fast enough, right? I can stream h.264 from apples website wirelessly.
Yeah, but that's buffered on your computer, it loads a bit into memory before playing so that the rest of it comes in while your watching. Streaming means it's coming straight in - no buffer.
Yeah, but that's buffered on your computer, it loads a bit into memory before playing so that the rest of it comes in while your watching. Streaming means it's coming straight in - no buffer.
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...
hookedonmac
Nov 23, 09:45 PM
Great! Only 15 minutes to go and I can sleep in in the morning.
Thanks again.
:)
Duh, PST. I was so excited I didn't see that PST. Oh well guess I'll be gtting up early after all.
Thanks again.
:)
Duh, PST. I was so excited I didn't see that PST. Oh well guess I'll be gtting up early after all.
DoFoT9
Sep 13, 05:47 PM
damn twoodc that sucks :( buy some solar panels
Yep. I feel lonely here on MacRumors regarding distributed computing...
Seti is down since a couple of days...
I am now with Milkyway. Anyone else ?
i stopped doing SETI a while back. i got over it. i have stopped doing F@H of late :( damn power bills.
Yep. I feel lonely here on MacRumors regarding distributed computing...
Seti is down since a couple of days...
I am now with Milkyway. Anyone else ?
i stopped doing SETI a while back. i got over it. i have stopped doing F@H of late :( damn power bills.
more...
janstett
Oct 18, 11:37 AM
NEC has developed a chip that can decode both, as you have hinted at. The optical technology is coming along (I saw something on Digg a little bit ago that noted some progress in that arena), but still not there yet.
I'm curious to see how that plays out. Samsung at first wanted to put out a hybrid player, as well as another company whose identity I forget; but apparently Sony's Blu-Ray licensing explicitly forbids combo players. So I don't understand, is NEC's chip a clean-room solution or did they find some other solution?
I'm curious to see how that plays out. Samsung at first wanted to put out a hybrid player, as well as another company whose identity I forget; but apparently Sony's Blu-Ray licensing explicitly forbids combo players. So I don't understand, is NEC's chip a clean-room solution or did they find some other solution?
jared1988
Apr 13, 10:05 PM
all iron man mighty muggs and copped once again. now stop making them hasbro
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5147/5618136550_3d7f9281aa_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5147/5618136550_3d7f9281aa_z.jpg
seanf
Apr 4, 01:48 PM
Now that just doesn't work for me either. It's saying I'm in Oxford. :confused:It's not your location, but the location of the device that gave you your IP address.
Sean :)
Sean :)
chrisd1974
Apr 5, 04:32 PM
OMG I JSUT FOUND THE GRAETEST TV CHANNEL IN THE UNIVERSE WHERE YOU CAN WATCH ADS 24HUORS A DAY!111 IT"S CALLED HSN (Home Shopping Network)!!11
:D
Awesome. Do they have an app?
:D
Awesome. Do they have an app?
Roessnakhan
Jan 16, 11:24 AM
The keynote had what I expected (talk of iPhone, iTunes, and MBP.) However, I didn't know about Time Capsule, which I must say is a cool little product if you don't currently own a router. Also really loved the updates to the :apple:tv.
Underwhelming keynote? Possibly, but one cannot say it did not at least deliver some interesting stuff.
Underwhelming keynote? Possibly, but one cannot say it did not at least deliver some interesting stuff.
brsboarder
Nov 24, 06:56 PM
apple store US site is down, are they just rolling back the prices?
Surely
Apr 12, 01:13 PM
Wait......do you guys have a little obsession with cupcakes, or an obsession with little cupcakes?
I just want to be clear, that's all. ;)
I just want to be clear, that's all. ;)
kainjow
Apr 22, 10:22 AM
I was initially opposed to having only an up-vote button, but it might not be a bad idea. Say a single "+1" button, and only display the count if it's >= 1. Might be worth trying.
No comments:
Post a Comment