adamfilip
Sep 25, 11:00 AM
the Aperture page on Apples website has been updated to reflect the new version
slh06
Sep 12, 08:04 AM
I think their going to change the name iTunes Music Store to Showtime. Makes sense?:cool:
bigandy
Oct 17, 08:52 AM
I'd rather see Blu Ray win this. It's clearly the better product on paper.
However, as history shows us, this doesn't mean it will win :(
Apple supporting both? I think it's a good option to give the customers - it's us who'll decide... But a hybrid drive will be the best bet.
However, as history shows us, this doesn't mean it will win :(
Apple supporting both? I think it's a good option to give the customers - it's us who'll decide... But a hybrid drive will be the best bet.
SevenInchScrew
Nov 14, 03:00 AM
That's what's driving me mad at the moment.
I forgot one other thing, which is also driving me mad... the foot steps. For some reason, Treyarch decided to take basically all sound of footsteps out of the game. That makes "Ninja" a worthless perk now, as you don't need it to be silent. But, it also makes it much easier to get ridiculously stabbed in the back.
I've heard that foot steps, along with the spawn issues, are a couple of the main things being fixed in the first patch/update. I really hope so. The fact that they made it into the final release like this is mind-boggling, so a fix is the least they can do.
I forgot one other thing, which is also driving me mad... the foot steps. For some reason, Treyarch decided to take basically all sound of footsteps out of the game. That makes "Ninja" a worthless perk now, as you don't need it to be silent. But, it also makes it much easier to get ridiculously stabbed in the back.
I've heard that foot steps, along with the spawn issues, are a couple of the main things being fixed in the first patch/update. I really hope so. The fact that they made it into the final release like this is mind-boggling, so a fix is the least they can do.
AlphaMikeRome0
Apr 16, 11:19 AM
Agreed.
Well thats the end of that one then , also i prefer the current placstic for the iphone
Well thats the end of that one then , also i prefer the current placstic for the iphone
D1G1T4L
Mar 17, 05:14 PM
You mean like posting just to say "I'm laughing at you all?" Welcome to the "holier than thou club, buddy.
Please read my post again. Never did I say I was laughing at "you all" but rather the post "buddy". Hope I didn't touch a nerve.
Also who are you quoting?
Please read my post again. Never did I say I was laughing at "you all" but rather the post "buddy". Hope I didn't touch a nerve.
Also who are you quoting?
SilentPanda
Apr 21, 12:20 PM
I would imagine this thread is getting a lot of -1 votes simply because the feature is new and people want to point at the thread to show that the system will mostly produce negative votes.
Some_Big_Spoon
Oct 11, 12:50 AM
I'm sure I'll get snarkey comments, but here goes: If I can't check my email on it, I'm not interested.
I've got a couple iPods and a shuffle. They play music, and that's great, but I want something that gets MY information to me. When that happens, they've got me sold.
I've got a couple iPods and a shuffle. They play music, and that's great, but I want something that gets MY information to me. When that happens, they've got me sold.
milani
Mar 18, 02:40 AM
A lot of people seem to hate on Apple products just because they're made by Apple.
I don't know of instances of Apple fans signing up on competitors forums, yet that seems to happen with some regularity around here. I'm not saying Apple fans don't antagonize competitors, but from my experience it's usually the other way around, as you point out.
I don't know of instances of Apple fans signing up on competitors forums, yet that seems to happen with some regularity around here. I'm not saying Apple fans don't antagonize competitors, but from my experience it's usually the other way around, as you point out.
twoodcc
Apr 11, 12:44 AM
I know!! Last year they had the Mac Pro out before the cpu's were even announced by Intel!
yeah i know! i don't know what's going on these days. apple is only concerned with iphone and ipad, but developers gotta have systems to build the apps with!
and not just that, apple has a market for mac pros. but it will only continue to get smaller if they ignore it
yeah i know! i don't know what's going on these days. apple is only concerned with iphone and ipad, but developers gotta have systems to build the apps with!
and not just that, apple has a market for mac pros. but it will only continue to get smaller if they ignore it
rdowns
Apr 13, 12:48 PM
I'm going to duck out of this thread but I want to answer this one....
I could sharpen that butter knife to a lethal edge in less that 10 min. They did the right thing.
And I can get a knife or fork at one of dozens of restaurants inside the terminal post security. What's your point?
I could sharpen that butter knife to a lethal edge in less that 10 min. They did the right thing.
And I can get a knife or fork at one of dozens of restaurants inside the terminal post security. What's your point?
wmmk
Aug 14, 11:44 AM
You're telling me they haven't recouped costs for designing the things yet? Or that we should always have to pay..
Of course they've recouped costs for designing products. My point is, if one product has superior design, there is high demand for it. Considering that the global economy is based on supply & demand, well designed products will always cost more than poorly designed products, unless the creator of the product with superior design chooses to discount their product to gain market share and popularity.
Of course they've recouped costs for designing products. My point is, if one product has superior design, there is high demand for it. Considering that the global economy is based on supply & demand, well designed products will always cost more than poorly designed products, unless the creator of the product with superior design chooses to discount their product to gain market share and popularity.
wmmk
Nov 16, 04:49 PM
I will never buy an AMD computer again, especially in a laptop. AMDs are very hot processors and they require big fans(I learn that from my bro's Compaq), which make them thick and heavy.
It would be best for me if we could of kept PowerPC, developed a lower powerconsuming but stil powerful G5, or Xenon(chip in XBOX 360). But intel is still got...PPC for LIFE
i have to find it funny that you are among the ppc faithful and your username is imacintel.
The vast majority of everyday computer users don't know the difference between AMD and Intel, anyway.
I'd have to disagree with that.
AMD is more than capable of meeting Apple demand, by the way, considering that if Apple were to include an AMD option, that option would likely only represent a portion of an already small market share.. and more than likely in a low end 'budget' machine.
Apple has a low OS marketshare, but in terms of harware, they are one of the world's biggest manufacturers. AMD could not supply enough chips for a Mini Mac Mini type machine.
i think it would be a great idea for apple to merge with AMD
merge? you mean a partnership, or a full-fledged merge?
Perhaps we can choose between AMD and Intel? more options on the table.
That would mean we'd have to pay more for intel machines. intel is giving apple big discounts for not using AMD at all.
Apple just switched to Intel. Why would they go to AMD already?
because their users want the best. intel is great at the moment, but won't always be.
And one more thing....
Introducing the Macbook mini AMD edition!
AMD 4x4 processors at 2.6ghz
Nvidia 4x4 compatible chipset
AMD x1950 graphics w/ 512 memory
12in sxga screen
Superdrive
2 gigs memory standard
Liquid Nitrogen not included...
:p
that sucks, man! I want 16GB RAM in my lappy!
Maybe the AMD laptops are coming today :eek:
The store is currently down...
http://images.apple.com/r/store/backsoon/title_backsoon1.gif
it's up for me! (with nothing new)
It would be best for me if we could of kept PowerPC, developed a lower powerconsuming but stil powerful G5, or Xenon(chip in XBOX 360). But intel is still got...PPC for LIFE
i have to find it funny that you are among the ppc faithful and your username is imacintel.
The vast majority of everyday computer users don't know the difference between AMD and Intel, anyway.
I'd have to disagree with that.
AMD is more than capable of meeting Apple demand, by the way, considering that if Apple were to include an AMD option, that option would likely only represent a portion of an already small market share.. and more than likely in a low end 'budget' machine.
Apple has a low OS marketshare, but in terms of harware, they are one of the world's biggest manufacturers. AMD could not supply enough chips for a Mini Mac Mini type machine.
i think it would be a great idea for apple to merge with AMD
merge? you mean a partnership, or a full-fledged merge?
Perhaps we can choose between AMD and Intel? more options on the table.
That would mean we'd have to pay more for intel machines. intel is giving apple big discounts for not using AMD at all.
Apple just switched to Intel. Why would they go to AMD already?
because their users want the best. intel is great at the moment, but won't always be.
And one more thing....
Introducing the Macbook mini AMD edition!
AMD 4x4 processors at 2.6ghz
Nvidia 4x4 compatible chipset
AMD x1950 graphics w/ 512 memory
12in sxga screen
Superdrive
2 gigs memory standard
Liquid Nitrogen not included...
:p
that sucks, man! I want 16GB RAM in my lappy!
Maybe the AMD laptops are coming today :eek:
The store is currently down...
http://images.apple.com/r/store/backsoon/title_backsoon1.gif
it's up for me! (with nothing new)
ChazUK
Apr 15, 05:07 PM
Why are record labels so against cloud based storage and access of music?
Until someone has a decent cloud offering in the uk, I can see myself sticking with Audiogalaxy for my own personal streaming needs.
Amazon may have jumped the gun a bit but I admire what they did either way.
I can't really agree with this. The last thing I want is a bunch of different places to buy music.
IF and only if the same same content was offered on both stores would this be a good thing in my opinion, otherwise its kind of like the Blu Ray vs HD DVD thing.
How is this comparable? Blu-ray and HD-DVD were completely incompatible with each other whereas the various online stores undoubtedly sell their music in an pod friendly format or face cutting off the biggest market for portable music players.
The main problem we used to have was drm incompatibilities but that is pretty much dead. What is the benefit of having a singular source controling the music market?
Until someone has a decent cloud offering in the uk, I can see myself sticking with Audiogalaxy for my own personal streaming needs.
Amazon may have jumped the gun a bit but I admire what they did either way.
I can't really agree with this. The last thing I want is a bunch of different places to buy music.
IF and only if the same same content was offered on both stores would this be a good thing in my opinion, otherwise its kind of like the Blu Ray vs HD DVD thing.
How is this comparable? Blu-ray and HD-DVD were completely incompatible with each other whereas the various online stores undoubtedly sell their music in an pod friendly format or face cutting off the biggest market for portable music players.
The main problem we used to have was drm incompatibilities but that is pretty much dead. What is the benefit of having a singular source controling the music market?
kalisphoenix
Nov 16, 06:52 PM
*********.
Much Ado
Jan 9, 01:39 PM
You think I'd be that harsh?! I'm almost offended :P
Forgive me, i'm getting paranoid :)
Forgive me, i'm getting paranoid :)
Nicolasdec
Jan 9, 05:08 PM
mine just says connecting
Stella
Mar 28, 06:09 PM
Respectfully, I think you're missing the point. In its totality, installing an app is more like:
1) Google or otherwise search for an app. Make sure its the Mac version, compatible with your OS version, processor, etc. There probably won't be any reviews, more like select quotes from people who liked it.
2) IF you trust that website, fill out your credit card information, PayPal account, etc.
3) Download it and do the process you described for installing.
4) If you need to re-install the app, buy a new computer, etc. hope that the company allows you to re-download it.
5) If you have a good/bad experience, good luck reviewing it or rating it.
I'm a pretty tech-savvy guy and I still appreciate the ease of the Mac App Store.
Hyperbole.. dear lord - over exaggeration.
* use your favourite mac listing website of your choice - you only need to find a few, and they don't take long to find. Only need to do this once.
* Pretty much all companies allow you to re-download, so no need to worry there.
* a lot of software listing sites allow reviews, for example, mac update, versiontracker
* most software companies use reputable payment processors, larger companies often use their own - and can be trusted.
* UNLIKE, the mac appstore, you can very often download TRIAL versions so you can TRY BEFORE you BUY!
Sure, the mac app store is convenient, but shouldn't be relied upon as the only source of software due to its limitations and limited software listings.
If someone never ventures out side the appstore then they'll miss out on gems such as 1Password, Launchbar, bettertouchtool... and many others.
1) Google or otherwise search for an app. Make sure its the Mac version, compatible with your OS version, processor, etc. There probably won't be any reviews, more like select quotes from people who liked it.
2) IF you trust that website, fill out your credit card information, PayPal account, etc.
3) Download it and do the process you described for installing.
4) If you need to re-install the app, buy a new computer, etc. hope that the company allows you to re-download it.
5) If you have a good/bad experience, good luck reviewing it or rating it.
I'm a pretty tech-savvy guy and I still appreciate the ease of the Mac App Store.
Hyperbole.. dear lord - over exaggeration.
* use your favourite mac listing website of your choice - you only need to find a few, and they don't take long to find. Only need to do this once.
* Pretty much all companies allow you to re-download, so no need to worry there.
* a lot of software listing sites allow reviews, for example, mac update, versiontracker
* most software companies use reputable payment processors, larger companies often use their own - and can be trusted.
* UNLIKE, the mac appstore, you can very often download TRIAL versions so you can TRY BEFORE you BUY!
Sure, the mac app store is convenient, but shouldn't be relied upon as the only source of software due to its limitations and limited software listings.
If someone never ventures out side the appstore then they'll miss out on gems such as 1Password, Launchbar, bettertouchtool... and many others.
janstett
Oct 18, 12:21 PM
[merged posts]
blackburn
Apr 29, 01:21 PM
Looking forward to the new version of file vault. Let's hope that we don't need any wierd hack to enable 64 bits (on macbooks) or to enable trim on 3rd party ssds.
iJohnHenry
Apr 25, 05:08 PM
Called the cops and at most say something to the ladies but not get involved physicaly.
And lock the bitches in (judgemental), 'till the cops get there.
Let them sort it out.
And lock the bitches in (judgemental), 'till the cops get there.
Let them sort it out.
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.
varcos
Jan 9, 03:25 PM
OK, i dont know if this is a problem, but the URL of the keynote itself happens to contain a spoiler. Could be an issue.
Actually someone at Apple took the spoiler off the keynote URL page:
So, it's not here anymore:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf07/
But it is everywhere else on the site.
Very nice of them.
Actually someone at Apple took the spoiler off the keynote URL page:
So, it's not here anymore:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf07/
But it is everywhere else on the site.
Very nice of them.
JayMysterio
Dec 8, 07:29 PM
- You see it as that...i see it as don't play a team game if you don't want to be a team player. If you want to run around like a headless chicken do it in free-for-all.
No comments:
Post a Comment