z4n3
Mar 24, 04:10 PM
When I first saw OSX I was blown away :D and looking though my geek pics found a screen shot from my G4 Cube in cannot remember if the screenshot from 2001 was 10.0 or 10.1 as that cube came with OS9 and had them both 10 beta and 10.1 installed, anyway though I would share a screenshot of my desktop now and then then :D
p.s.
Can anyone remember the name of the iTunes player in the pic from 2001? it had LOADS of skins and the particular one in the pic! used to sink into the desktop when you clicked the screen or on another program, does anyone know if they brought it back to life? I miss that player SOOOOO MUCHHHHH :(
Funny to see that the Screen icon has not changed!!! since 10 / 10.6 hahha, at-least in 10.7 they have finally changed it to reflect the actual screens on sale.
p.s.
Can anyone remember the name of the iTunes player in the pic from 2001? it had LOADS of skins and the particular one in the pic! used to sink into the desktop when you clicked the screen or on another program, does anyone know if they brought it back to life? I miss that player SOOOOO MUCHHHHH :(
Funny to see that the Screen icon has not changed!!! since 10 / 10.6 hahha, at-least in 10.7 they have finally changed it to reflect the actual screens on sale.
xraytech
May 4, 10:42 AM
I really like the tone of these commercials.
Also, I enjoy that they keep saying magic or magical; only because I know how angry people (trolls, mostly) here get about it.
Ha ha ha!!!
Also, I enjoy that they keep saying magic or magical; only because I know how angry people (trolls, mostly) here get about it.
Ha ha ha!!!
idanchez
Apr 15, 05:21 PM
Good Day Forum,
I work in manufacturing engineering...
Looking at these pictures i think it is possible to produce an iPhone like this using CNC machining...
However i am not sure what to think about dock connecter port :confused: ... The image shows it having 90 deg corners which is quite difficult to achieve using a CNC milling machine... This would require some sort of laser cutting manufacturing proces... which they probably used...
The silent lock switch and the volume button show the corners having a radius of about 0.5mm... this is achieved using a 1mm cutter.
Though this may look like renders... it is still possible to generate a product like this...
If you look closely to all of Apples product... they pay EXTREME :rolleyes: attention to DETAIL... This does not look like something apple would produce.
The "bevel" at the back.... is a No No for apple... they like to make it look smooth and shell like all over...
However i could be wrong... :(
Many Thanks for you time.
:cool: :apple:
I can generate an iPod Touch first generation using CAD and save the file as a 3D file and upload this to photoshop to render and add text and texture...
I work in manufacturing engineering...
Looking at these pictures i think it is possible to produce an iPhone like this using CNC machining...
However i am not sure what to think about dock connecter port :confused: ... The image shows it having 90 deg corners which is quite difficult to achieve using a CNC milling machine... This would require some sort of laser cutting manufacturing proces... which they probably used...
The silent lock switch and the volume button show the corners having a radius of about 0.5mm... this is achieved using a 1mm cutter.
Though this may look like renders... it is still possible to generate a product like this...
If you look closely to all of Apples product... they pay EXTREME :rolleyes: attention to DETAIL... This does not look like something apple would produce.
The "bevel" at the back.... is a No No for apple... they like to make it look smooth and shell like all over...
However i could be wrong... :(
Many Thanks for you time.
:cool: :apple:
I can generate an iPod Touch first generation using CAD and save the file as a 3D file and upload this to photoshop to render and add text and texture...
WeegieMac
Sep 28, 12:24 PM
Nice one, Steve ... he's worked for it.
We're here for a good time, not for a long time.
We're here for a good time, not for a long time.
Moyank24
Apr 15, 10:02 PM
Pffft I'm practically married myself. Live-in gf. Friday nights are a thing of the past.
Lucky girl.
Lucky girl.
drayon
Apr 30, 12:03 AM
Hey knock it off with all the off topic Windows drivel. Winrumors forums would be a better place to dispute these matters.
BlindMellon
Apr 25, 08:34 PM
I don't get the fascination with a marginal bigger screen, if I need a bigger screen I get my iPad.
They had the perfect opportunity to change the screen size last year. They introducing a higher resolution screen and a new design. They could have designed the phone for a larger screen and talked about how the screen was both larger and sharper. Instead, they kept the same screen size and talked about the 326 PPI retina resolution.
So now you think that they are adding a larger screen with fewer PPI to last years' form-factor which was designed for a 3.5" screen? C'mon... get real.
Why would Apple create a new design with the same screen size if they were planning on using that same design a year later with a larger screen? It doesn't make any sense. If they had plans to use a larger screen, they would have done it with the iPhone 4. If they do it in the future, it will have a different design.
this is true and one of my main gripes: they had the opportunity to enlarge the screen back when they redesigned the whole damn phone. they drew a line in the sand with the 3.5" screen and i doubt they'll change it any time soon. plus, the longer they wait, the more foolish they'll look when they finally do get around to it.
They had the perfect opportunity to change the screen size last year. They introducing a higher resolution screen and a new design. They could have designed the phone for a larger screen and talked about how the screen was both larger and sharper. Instead, they kept the same screen size and talked about the 326 PPI retina resolution.
So now you think that they are adding a larger screen with fewer PPI to last years' form-factor which was designed for a 3.5" screen? C'mon... get real.
Why would Apple create a new design with the same screen size if they were planning on using that same design a year later with a larger screen? It doesn't make any sense. If they had plans to use a larger screen, they would have done it with the iPhone 4. If they do it in the future, it will have a different design.
this is true and one of my main gripes: they had the opportunity to enlarge the screen back when they redesigned the whole damn phone. they drew a line in the sand with the 3.5" screen and i doubt they'll change it any time soon. plus, the longer they wait, the more foolish they'll look when they finally do get around to it.
darkplanets
Apr 24, 03:08 PM
If it does have APPX and a previewer like OSX, I'm interested.
There's always been a few features missing from Windows that dissuade me from using it-- their FS and program structure is one, as well as the non-native support of disk images.
To everyone preaching about copying and stealing ideas... who cares? The only thing that these rumored changes would do is bring Windows right next to OSX in terms of likability (IMO, of course ;))
W8 will probably be BIOS/EFI -- I don't see MS dropping BIOS in one OS revision.
cmd is not something a majority of people need but any higher level IT/programing it is a very good tool that should not go away.
I'm not an IT guy, but terminal is one of the selling points of OSX. I love being able to pop in there and SSH or change whatever I need for my purposes.
There's always been a few features missing from Windows that dissuade me from using it-- their FS and program structure is one, as well as the non-native support of disk images.
To everyone preaching about copying and stealing ideas... who cares? The only thing that these rumored changes would do is bring Windows right next to OSX in terms of likability (IMO, of course ;))
W8 will probably be BIOS/EFI -- I don't see MS dropping BIOS in one OS revision.
cmd is not something a majority of people need but any higher level IT/programing it is a very good tool that should not go away.
I'm not an IT guy, but terminal is one of the selling points of OSX. I love being able to pop in there and SSH or change whatever I need for my purposes.
v66jack
Mar 5, 03:43 PM
Apple don't do all that much innovating themselves. They just buy small companies who innovate then sell it as their own.
It's a bit more complicated than that in reality but generally that's where their stuff comes from.
It's a bit more complicated than that in reality but generally that's where their stuff comes from.
Full of Win
Mar 28, 02:54 PM
It's a hell of a lot easier updating your apps and re-installing applications through the Mac App Store than any previous method. You don't have to check every single app on your machine to see if it's updated, nor do you have to go to the developers website if they don't have an automatic updater or even a manual updater.
I'll give it does have advantages. I don't think I would agree that it is "a hell of a lot easier", as most apps have an automatic updater or some mechanism to make you aware that an update is available.
The Mac App store updating mechanism is flawed, at least in my experience. For example, a few days ago the Mac App Store did not detect that I had the app Awaken 4 on my mac, even thought they host Awaken 5 on the store. I had to go to the developers website and download Awaken 5 and then update it the old fashioned way.
I'll give it does have advantages. I don't think I would agree that it is "a hell of a lot easier", as most apps have an automatic updater or some mechanism to make you aware that an update is available.
The Mac App store updating mechanism is flawed, at least in my experience. For example, a few days ago the Mac App Store did not detect that I had the app Awaken 4 on my mac, even thought they host Awaken 5 on the store. I had to go to the developers website and download Awaken 5 and then update it the old fashioned way.
mrgreen4242
Sep 12, 09:12 AM
Is that true of the MacBook and the 15.4" MacBook Pro? I thought they didn't have DL.
Hey, I just looked at you're right! That's pretty f'n chinsy of Apple! They advertise them as READING DL discs, which is what confused me... deceptive marketing bastards. Seriously, I can see (I guess) not putting it in the MB Pro if it meant they couldnt get it as thin as they wanted, but the MB really is under know such constraint - people aren't buying it for being uber slim and sexy. It's a good looking, functional, somewhat low priced portable. It only lacks the DL 'cuz the Pro does... the mini gets a DL drive!
Hey, I just looked at you're right! That's pretty f'n chinsy of Apple! They advertise them as READING DL discs, which is what confused me... deceptive marketing bastards. Seriously, I can see (I guess) not putting it in the MB Pro if it meant they couldnt get it as thin as they wanted, but the MB really is under know such constraint - people aren't buying it for being uber slim and sexy. It's a good looking, functional, somewhat low priced portable. It only lacks the DL 'cuz the Pro does... the mini gets a DL drive!
airforce1
May 2, 12:23 PM
Exactly.
If the people claiming this is a non issue are serious then they should all email Steve and tell him to stop addressing it.
I think the problem here is that many on this board cannot distinguish between trolls blindly trying to stir stuff up on an Apple forum and non-trolls discussing a legitimate issue. People need to learn how to separate the two and ignore the trolls if they try to pile onto an unfavorable discussion of Apple on a particular issue.
yes and many of these trolls spend most of their time on apple forums with pro apple views, even bias, as Jobbs said the Tech community failed to educate everyone on what he failed to provide evidence for to show they DID NOT violate privacy laws.
Im sure apple knew they have to pay a fine, now they will just pretend with so called tech trolls on forums that they fixed this, its not over you see, when congress demands a standard on collecting data and to what extent and who then we will see all the data sheets apple is hiding from me and you, until then you and i both could be called trolls for just posting anything here, thats a opinion and propaganda (lie) though
If the people claiming this is a non issue are serious then they should all email Steve and tell him to stop addressing it.
I think the problem here is that many on this board cannot distinguish between trolls blindly trying to stir stuff up on an Apple forum and non-trolls discussing a legitimate issue. People need to learn how to separate the two and ignore the trolls if they try to pile onto an unfavorable discussion of Apple on a particular issue.
yes and many of these trolls spend most of their time on apple forums with pro apple views, even bias, as Jobbs said the Tech community failed to educate everyone on what he failed to provide evidence for to show they DID NOT violate privacy laws.
Im sure apple knew they have to pay a fine, now they will just pretend with so called tech trolls on forums that they fixed this, its not over you see, when congress demands a standard on collecting data and to what extent and who then we will see all the data sheets apple is hiding from me and you, until then you and i both could be called trolls for just posting anything here, thats a opinion and propaganda (lie) though
BBEmployee
Apr 8, 06:29 PM
You do know that BBY is their ticker symbol, right? Same reason the "stock holders" here say AAPL instead of Apple. Its not exactly top secret info.
Sure, but the point had more to do with use of internal acronyms outside of internal Best Buy world. I found it amusing that he suggested that there was no way I could be a Best Buy employee because I wrote BB instead of BBY which is indeed used quite often internally. I don't generally associate it firsthand with the stock, and I don't expect people to have knowledge of Best Buys stock ticker generally, even on an Apple forum. You say BBY to 1000 people and the few that will recognize it will either be former/current Best Buy employees and/or tech-stock enthusiasts.
Sure, but the point had more to do with use of internal acronyms outside of internal Best Buy world. I found it amusing that he suggested that there was no way I could be a Best Buy employee because I wrote BB instead of BBY which is indeed used quite often internally. I don't generally associate it firsthand with the stock, and I don't expect people to have knowledge of Best Buys stock ticker generally, even on an Apple forum. You say BBY to 1000 people and the few that will recognize it will either be former/current Best Buy employees and/or tech-stock enthusiasts.
Much Ado
Jan 9, 01:30 PM
I accidentally just went on BBC News... spoilt one surprise for myself :(
Yeah, i don't think the internet is a safe place until after weve seen the QT vid ourselves.
Meanwhile, the whole world is going nuts about a 300Gb iPod with built in Sat-Nav and Intel Quad-Core processors and we're sitting here nervously going at the alcohol, refusing to be tempted.
I love every minute :D
MA.
Oh, and in reply to the guy who is going to give up at 8, please don't put spoilers on here if you do take a look. That would not make me happy after all this waiting! :)
Yeah, i don't think the internet is a safe place until after weve seen the QT vid ourselves.
Meanwhile, the whole world is going nuts about a 300Gb iPod with built in Sat-Nav and Intel Quad-Core processors and we're sitting here nervously going at the alcohol, refusing to be tempted.
I love every minute :D
MA.
Oh, and in reply to the guy who is going to give up at 8, please don't put spoilers on here if you do take a look. That would not make me happy after all this waiting! :)
snickelfritz
Jan 11, 08:31 AM
New displays with integrated cams.
iPhone/iPodTouch that also functions as a Bluetooth Multitouch Mouse.
Leopard update.
30" iMac.
At least one new application.
iPhone/iPodTouch that also functions as a Bluetooth Multitouch Mouse.
Leopard update.
30" iMac.
At least one new application.
dsnort
Aug 1, 10:58 AM
On a more serious note, I wonder how all this drama surrounding Apples DRM will impact the ODF argument? I mean, if you have the right to open a recording you PURCHASED on whatever type of player you wish, shouldn't you also have the right to open a document YOU CREATE, on any type of app that handles that type of data, without losing any functionality? I mean, shouldn't a Pages doc open on word without losing the formatting? Shouldn't an excel file open on Lotus? Did Steve Jobs forsee this? Is it all part of some masterplot???:eek:
monaarts
Mar 17, 12:04 PM
And I'm also a Microsoft Fanboy!!! Haaaaaaa Long live the Microsoft Zune the ultimate iPod Killer!!!
I thought you are "going back to the real world, while the debate in this thread continues."???
On a side note, what do you do for a living? Seriously, not where you work but what do you do?
- Joe
I thought you are "going back to the real world, while the debate in this thread continues."???
On a side note, what do you do for a living? Seriously, not where you work but what do you do?
- Joe
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 2, 06:53 AM
Loosing Denmark, or Norway or both, doesn't matter one bit. It is a courtesy that Apple even allowed these small and meaningless countries to join in on the fun.
Since you claim you work in Denmark, you should know Denmark, as well as Sweden, is a part of European Union (EU). If you had done your homework, you should also know that EU implies that all non-nation specific laws should be idential for all countries in EU (very much the same as in US). That is, if the French and the scandinavians find that Apples DRM violates consumer rights, it has a very good chance to become accepted all over EU. Furthermore, since EU has about 460 million people whereas US only have 296 milion people, it should according to your argumentation about minor markets imply that Apple rather should dump the US market than the european market. :rolleyes:
You should know by now that a company sole purpose is to make money for the shareholders, and nothing else. I very much doubt that board of Apple or its partners even would consider dumping a close to half a billion potential customers.
Since you claim you work in Denmark, you should know Denmark, as well as Sweden, is a part of European Union (EU). If you had done your homework, you should also know that EU implies that all non-nation specific laws should be idential for all countries in EU (very much the same as in US). That is, if the French and the scandinavians find that Apples DRM violates consumer rights, it has a very good chance to become accepted all over EU. Furthermore, since EU has about 460 million people whereas US only have 296 milion people, it should according to your argumentation about minor markets imply that Apple rather should dump the US market than the european market. :rolleyes:
You should know by now that a company sole purpose is to make money for the shareholders, and nothing else. I very much doubt that board of Apple or its partners even would consider dumping a close to half a billion potential customers.
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.
dethmaShine
Apr 16, 10:35 AM
already exists - Amazon Cloud/Music Player
What's go good about it?
It's like dropbox but free for 5GB. :rolleyes:
What's go good about it?
It's like dropbox but free for 5GB. :rolleyes:
BC2009
Apr 25, 12:00 PM
Doesn't look too bad but on the other hand, the screen doesn't even look that noticeably bigger either (to the point of, "What is the point?"). And if even resizing it like that would make developers have to re-do their apps (I don't know how that works but I've heard people say with how iOS works, re-sizing would mean having to re-program apps), I'd say it's not worth it.
(I'm one of the ones who don't want a bigger screen due to the fact I don't want a bigger phone and I don't think they could squeeze a bigger one in without sacrificing usability and/or aesthetics. Bezels are useful for giving you some area to grip. This one doesn't look too bad for my concerns but honestly, it doesn't seem to give you a noticeable increase in screen size).
Resizing only means having to rewrite apps if the screen resolution changes -- especially if it changes by something other than a whole-number multiple (e.g. 1.5x versus 2x). All rumors indicate a 3.7-inch screen iPhone would have the same Retina-Display resolution (still maintaining over 300dpi).
Technically their "Retina-Display" stuff is based also on typical viewing distance as well -- so a "Retina Display" iPad, iMac, or MacBook (assuming those are in the works) may not go as high as 300dpi. However, a Retina-Display iPad would like require the same pixel-doubling (2x) that was done for apps not optimized for the Retina Display until updates came that included higher-resolution graphics.
(I'm one of the ones who don't want a bigger screen due to the fact I don't want a bigger phone and I don't think they could squeeze a bigger one in without sacrificing usability and/or aesthetics. Bezels are useful for giving you some area to grip. This one doesn't look too bad for my concerns but honestly, it doesn't seem to give you a noticeable increase in screen size).
Resizing only means having to rewrite apps if the screen resolution changes -- especially if it changes by something other than a whole-number multiple (e.g. 1.5x versus 2x). All rumors indicate a 3.7-inch screen iPhone would have the same Retina-Display resolution (still maintaining over 300dpi).
Technically their "Retina-Display" stuff is based also on typical viewing distance as well -- so a "Retina Display" iPad, iMac, or MacBook (assuming those are in the works) may not go as high as 300dpi. However, a Retina-Display iPad would like require the same pixel-doubling (2x) that was done for apps not optimized for the Retina Display until updates came that included higher-resolution graphics.
iJohnHenry
Apr 26, 08:20 AM
Seizure.
<cynical> Acting for the video? </cynical>
Seriously, at indicated above with the drive-through mugging, look no further than your nearest lawyer, for this American phenomena of people sitting on their hands when there is trouble.
<cynical> Acting for the video? </cynical>
Seriously, at indicated above with the drive-through mugging, look no further than your nearest lawyer, for this American phenomena of people sitting on their hands when there is trouble.
vixapphire
Jan 15, 05:08 PM
for a single phone to sell 4million, i think thats amazing!
rim only has 20% more smartphone holding and think of all the versions that it has and how many years has the blackberry been around? atleast 5, problaby way more then that.
yes, 5 million were expected, so without saying it outright, steve admits the iphone has not performed as expected.
note also his omission of the two biggest iphone news items: the price drop shortly after release, and the big "F.U." and subsequent backtrack concerning unlocking the phones.
of course, he's within his right to try and accentuate the positive...:apple:
rim only has 20% more smartphone holding and think of all the versions that it has and how many years has the blackberry been around? atleast 5, problaby way more then that.
yes, 5 million were expected, so without saying it outright, steve admits the iphone has not performed as expected.
note also his omission of the two biggest iphone news items: the price drop shortly after release, and the big "F.U." and subsequent backtrack concerning unlocking the phones.
of course, he's within his right to try and accentuate the positive...:apple:
jonnysods
Mar 28, 03:36 PM
This is kind of rough. Shame it's heading this way.
No comments:
Post a Comment