Lord Blackadder
Aug 8, 12:43 PM
The problem with the US is out transportation system was never laid out for a good mass transit. We have massive urban sprawl and no real way solve that problem. Add in the fact that rail systems were never designed into the system so retrofitting them is will be very costly and very difficult to do.
We have plenty of rail, and we are building more. The problem is that people don't ride it. Just as we have plenty of fuel efficient cars, and more are coming to market - but people are still buying SUVs. We [rightly] blame oil companies for being grasping and short-sighted. But consumers also bear much of the blame.
As for the mass eletric cars I think you pass over my point about how most of them will be charged at night during off peak hours which means for the most part the grid can take a a huge number of them before we will start having a real issue.
It still would not even begin to handle the strain generated by millions of new electric cars suddenly appearing in driveways across America. Large-scale adoption of electric cars would just make coal and oil get burned faster by power companies. Yes, power plants are more efficient than most cars in producing energy. But we are still burning fossil fuels and polluting. Also, has anyone done a study to compare the true efficiency of the best full electrics vs an efficient, equivalent diesel or gas car? For example, given an identical amount of oil, which vehicle uses it more efficiently? A diesel hatchback or an electric that gets it's juice from a power plant burning oil? I'd be curious to see the results. I'm not trying to sound skeptical - I just don't know what the comparison would reveal.
We need something to replace the use of gas. Hybrids I will say are a great thing to bridge between our combustion engine and what ever is next. Things like the volt I think are the best examples of the bridge because we just need to replace the power generator and that is fairly easy to do compared to having to figure out some other type of engine to move the car. We have electric motors that we can advance for moving.
GM's European arm Opel created a concept diesel series hybrid, the stupidly named Flextreme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel_Flextreme), which promises dramatically improved fuel economy over the Volt. I just feel like any series hybrid that uses a gasoline engine is a foolishly crippled piece of technology when appropriate diesels are available and would deliver far superior fuel economy.
Reducing our usage of fuel I would argue is a dead end tech. All it will do is delay the problem but not solve it. Hybrids bridge us to the solution.
Reducing our fuel consumption is not a solution, but it is the first crucial step in bridging the gap between fossil fuels and whatever alternative we develop. We need time to transition, and if everyone practices conservation we buy more time to transition.
As yet, no hybrids on the market outperform straight diesel engined cars consistently, so the hybrid concept is still very much in its infancy. I have yet to be convinced, especially with the cost and [lack of efficiency] of the battery packs. They may ultimately meet expectations, but they haven't yet.
We have plenty of rail, and we are building more. The problem is that people don't ride it. Just as we have plenty of fuel efficient cars, and more are coming to market - but people are still buying SUVs. We [rightly] blame oil companies for being grasping and short-sighted. But consumers also bear much of the blame.
As for the mass eletric cars I think you pass over my point about how most of them will be charged at night during off peak hours which means for the most part the grid can take a a huge number of them before we will start having a real issue.
It still would not even begin to handle the strain generated by millions of new electric cars suddenly appearing in driveways across America. Large-scale adoption of electric cars would just make coal and oil get burned faster by power companies. Yes, power plants are more efficient than most cars in producing energy. But we are still burning fossil fuels and polluting. Also, has anyone done a study to compare the true efficiency of the best full electrics vs an efficient, equivalent diesel or gas car? For example, given an identical amount of oil, which vehicle uses it more efficiently? A diesel hatchback or an electric that gets it's juice from a power plant burning oil? I'd be curious to see the results. I'm not trying to sound skeptical - I just don't know what the comparison would reveal.
We need something to replace the use of gas. Hybrids I will say are a great thing to bridge between our combustion engine and what ever is next. Things like the volt I think are the best examples of the bridge because we just need to replace the power generator and that is fairly easy to do compared to having to figure out some other type of engine to move the car. We have electric motors that we can advance for moving.
GM's European arm Opel created a concept diesel series hybrid, the stupidly named Flextreme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel_Flextreme), which promises dramatically improved fuel economy over the Volt. I just feel like any series hybrid that uses a gasoline engine is a foolishly crippled piece of technology when appropriate diesels are available and would deliver far superior fuel economy.
Reducing our usage of fuel I would argue is a dead end tech. All it will do is delay the problem but not solve it. Hybrids bridge us to the solution.
Reducing our fuel consumption is not a solution, but it is the first crucial step in bridging the gap between fossil fuels and whatever alternative we develop. We need time to transition, and if everyone practices conservation we buy more time to transition.
As yet, no hybrids on the market outperform straight diesel engined cars consistently, so the hybrid concept is still very much in its infancy. I have yet to be convinced, especially with the cost and [lack of efficiency] of the battery packs. They may ultimately meet expectations, but they haven't yet.
Cleverboy
Jan 13, 10:13 AM
Agreed that it was stupid, and may hurt credibility, but i still love reading gizmodo, and would not wish to see them banned from MW or the next CES. People do stupid things, if they do it again, ban them, but i say let them off the hook for this one.They did not emphatically apologize for poor judgement. Briam Lam himself says that the only thing he didn't approve was doing it during press conferences... but when the error has occurred, you need to apologize for the whole incident, not say, "Sorry, we only wanted to screw around with some people, not others." Vendors PAID MONEY to attend this event. Gizmodo willfully inteferered with press conferences, and hasn't editted the article to include anything resembling a wholesale apology. --Just, "Look at this COOL thing we did! Isn't it hilarious! You can do it too!"
Sorry, they bring anything on themselves to be so childish. I honestly went looking for why people were making more out of this than they should have. I read the CNET article and Brian Lam's casual response.
http://valleywag.com/343531/cnet-editor-proves-theres-no-difference-between-press-and-blogger
BY BRIAN LAM AT 01/10/08 06:04 PM
@OMG! Ponies!: @rafe: Relax. It was a joke. Just because we don't do things the way you do, I don't see why that is stupid. The site has proved its intelligence. Did you see that we got Bill Gates to cop to Vista not being so good today? The point is that if we do things the way you do them at CNet, we're CNet. If you do things the way Giz and Engadget do them, you're actually...Crave. (Which I like, and do not call stupid.) Why is this so emotionally disturbing to you both? Motorola, well that was a mistake, as my explicit orders to my video person were to not interrupt press conferences. But that is for me and Moto to sort out tomorrow.
So... "presentations", fair game, "press conferences"... avoid them... but "whoops" if we did. That's infuriatingly bad.
BAN THEM. My opinion. It would have been different had they owned up, but they're not... which means they're proud of it. No good.
Gizmodo is responsible for this because it vouched for the prankster and obtained a credential for him. Media organizations put their reputations at stake each time they obtain a credential for someone, whether it's to a high school basketball game, a trade show or a political event.Gizmodo WAS the prankster (http://gizmodo.com/343348/confessions-the-meanest-thing-gizmodo-did-at-ces). This wasn't a "rogue" guy. Just read their own description of it.
Confessions: The Meanest Thing Gizmodo Did at CES
CES has no shortage of displays. And when MAKE offered us some TV-B-Gone clickers to bring to the show, we pretty much couldn't help ourselves. We shut off a TV. And then another. And then a wall of TVs. And we just couldn't stop. (And Panasonic, you're so lucky that 150-incher didn't have an active IR port.) It was too much fun, but watching this video, we realize it probably made some people's jobs harder, and I don't agree with that (Especially Motorola). We're sorry. [Thanks to Phil Torrone for the gear, video, editing and mischief by Richard Blakeley]
Cute Love Quotes Him. cute
love quotes for him from her
short love quotes for him in
love quotes for him. love
love quotes for him. happy
in love quotes for him
.jpg "sad love quotes for him from")
sad love quotes for him from
love quotes for him from the
in love quotes for him
love quotes for him long
love quotes for him. cute love
short love quotes for him in
emo love quotes and sayings
in love quotes for him. love
love quotes for him in
love quotes for him and her.
short love quotes for him in
Sorry, they bring anything on themselves to be so childish. I honestly went looking for why people were making more out of this than they should have. I read the CNET article and Brian Lam's casual response.
http://valleywag.com/343531/cnet-editor-proves-theres-no-difference-between-press-and-blogger
BY BRIAN LAM AT 01/10/08 06:04 PM
@OMG! Ponies!: @rafe: Relax. It was a joke. Just because we don't do things the way you do, I don't see why that is stupid. The site has proved its intelligence. Did you see that we got Bill Gates to cop to Vista not being so good today? The point is that if we do things the way you do them at CNet, we're CNet. If you do things the way Giz and Engadget do them, you're actually...Crave. (Which I like, and do not call stupid.) Why is this so emotionally disturbing to you both? Motorola, well that was a mistake, as my explicit orders to my video person were to not interrupt press conferences. But that is for me and Moto to sort out tomorrow.
So... "presentations", fair game, "press conferences"... avoid them... but "whoops" if we did. That's infuriatingly bad.
BAN THEM. My opinion. It would have been different had they owned up, but they're not... which means they're proud of it. No good.
Gizmodo is responsible for this because it vouched for the prankster and obtained a credential for him. Media organizations put their reputations at stake each time they obtain a credential for someone, whether it's to a high school basketball game, a trade show or a political event.Gizmodo WAS the prankster (http://gizmodo.com/343348/confessions-the-meanest-thing-gizmodo-did-at-ces). This wasn't a "rogue" guy. Just read their own description of it.
Confessions: The Meanest Thing Gizmodo Did at CES
CES has no shortage of displays. And when MAKE offered us some TV-B-Gone clickers to bring to the show, we pretty much couldn't help ourselves. We shut off a TV. And then another. And then a wall of TVs. And we just couldn't stop. (And Panasonic, you're so lucky that 150-incher didn't have an active IR port.) It was too much fun, but watching this video, we realize it probably made some people's jobs harder, and I don't agree with that (Especially Motorola). We're sorry. [Thanks to Phil Torrone for the gear, video, editing and mischief by Richard Blakeley]
adrian.oconnor
Apr 26, 03:35 AM
Why is there multiple vanishing points!?! I believe it is a fake.
The whole image looks wrong to me too. When I saw it my first split-second reaction was 'That's a Badly Photoshopped Image'. I still think it is. The proportions feel wrong and the screen doesn't look natural.
The whole image looks wrong to me too. When I saw it my first split-second reaction was 'That's a Badly Photoshopped Image'. I still think it is. The proportions feel wrong and the screen doesn't look natural.
glitch44
Nov 24, 01:29 PM
well then i'll go back to sleep...
figuring you only save 1 dollar more on a macbook than you would w/ just an educational discount..i'll get it tomorrow...
oh btw..a hint...if you go to an apple store and buy a giftcard for the amount you need online...then you can use the gift card..get free shipping...plus get your 100 bucks off on a macbook w/ educatoinal discount and have no tax...
so you really end up saving 200 bucks....thats what im doing just a heads up
i'm confused... can you explain? using a gift card gets you free shipping and no tax?
figuring you only save 1 dollar more on a macbook than you would w/ just an educational discount..i'll get it tomorrow...
oh btw..a hint...if you go to an apple store and buy a giftcard for the amount you need online...then you can use the gift card..get free shipping...plus get your 100 bucks off on a macbook w/ educatoinal discount and have no tax...
so you really end up saving 200 bucks....thats what im doing just a heads up
i'm confused... can you explain? using a gift card gets you free shipping and no tax?
John Purple
Jan 10, 07:18 AM
iPhone will be release in Australia within the next month (end of Feb by the latest) only on the Telstra network. Unfortunately Telstra has exclusive rights for the iPhone, so the product will be awesome (e.g. being Apple) but the service provider will be crap....
At my work we got a demo of the iPhone from Telstra for development reasons, we will be supplying data for a few of the services for the iPhone in Australia.
Obviously Apple loves bad providers. In Germany they contracted T-Mobile, a Telekom AG company (not because of bad service ... but because of no service at all :eek: - as experienced in the past) That's THE reason why I don't want an iPhone.
At my work we got a demo of the iPhone from Telstra for development reasons, we will be supplying data for a few of the services for the iPhone in Australia.
Obviously Apple loves bad providers. In Germany they contracted T-Mobile, a Telekom AG company (not because of bad service ... but because of no service at all :eek: - as experienced in the past) That's THE reason why I don't want an iPhone.
noodlelegs
Jan 8, 10:47 AM
Interesting that the original post in this thread states that it is indeed an LTE Verizon iPhone. That seems to coincide with the video of the parts that were leaked on youtube a couple days ago, showing a sim card slot on the new phone. I think I read somewhere that LTE phones require a sim card, and also, LTE is capable of simultaneous voice/data. The stars seem to be aligning.
Jschultz
Oct 17, 11:15 AM
Yes, I have the Samsung 46" LN-S4696D (http://www.samsung.com/Products/TV/LCDTV/LNS4696DXXAA.asp?page=Specifications), connected to both a Samsung BD player and a Core 2 Duo Media Center Edition mini-tower with a Quadro FX graphics card and HD tuners.
It does 1080p native, as well as native 1920x1080 on the PC.
Some of the Blu-ray Discs are simply amazing (House of Flying Daggers is superb), although others just make the shortcomings of the original production more apparent. (Kind of like a CD of an old live concert, where the CD perfectly reproduces the hiss and noise in the master tape.)
If you get the chance, watch either ultraviolet, or Underworld 2 on your BD player. It looks so good, it's rediculous!
It does 1080p native, as well as native 1920x1080 on the PC.
Some of the Blu-ray Discs are simply amazing (House of Flying Daggers is superb), although others just make the shortcomings of the original production more apparent. (Kind of like a CD of an old live concert, where the CD perfectly reproduces the hiss and noise in the master tape.)
If you get the chance, watch either ultraviolet, or Underworld 2 on your BD player. It looks so good, it's rediculous!
arn
Apr 21, 10:32 PM
I agree. And there should be some kind of count of "thanks" for each member. And it can give us different "levels" based on our thankfulness. Kind of like how we achieve different statices based on our post count.
"Thanks" might work in a pure support form. But for news discussion, it makes little sense.
arn
"Thanks" might work in a pure support form. But for news discussion, it makes little sense.
arn
.jpg "sad love quotes for him from")
pete0302
Jan 15, 02:02 PM
I am a Powerbook G4 user, and ready for a new computer. I was hoping that they would update the MacBook Pro, because I would definately buy one, but that doesn't look like thats going to happen anytime soon... ::mad:
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 26, 10:58 AM
What box? Not seeing one here (Firefox 4 on Windows Vista at work)
sorry for shoddy editing
Edit: and the worst thing is how they appear when a page is loading. Which on my slow connection here at work definitely is an issue...
sorry for shoddy editing
Edit: and the worst thing is how they appear when a page is loading. Which on my slow connection here at work definitely is an issue...
balamw
Oct 2, 06:17 PM
Besides... the more I think about it, the more I don't see why iTunes wouldn't play the compatible Fairplay songs. Apple can't make any major changes to the existing DRM in files to break compatible Fairplay files.... since they would have then have to reencode all of those files sitting on people's hard drives.
The "key" to unlocking the FairPlay DRM is your iTMS account.
One factor that DVD Jon already uncovered once before is that the actual encoding of the DRM to your account is done locally by the iTunes client. This might help in their current effort. Previously the transmitted file was unenencrypted, while now it appears to be given some common form of encryption. Perhaps the easiest way they could make it work would be to see if they can fool iTunes into encrypting the file for them.
Since the files are already decrypted and encrypted locally in faster that real time, it doesn't seem too farfetched that Apple could decide to "upgrade" the DRM on the files locally whenever you access them, or in one swell foop as they did to detect gapless tracks.
Even if iTunes did the encrypting Apple could still break this by releasing a new iTunes client and mandating its use as they have done before. Most probably they would not want to deal with the hassle of dealing with support calls from folks who lost their protected files since they didn't have a backup but didn't buy the files from ITMS in the first place....
I personally don't see the net positive for Apple, but DVD Jon has surprised me in the past.
B
The "key" to unlocking the FairPlay DRM is your iTMS account.
One factor that DVD Jon already uncovered once before is that the actual encoding of the DRM to your account is done locally by the iTunes client. This might help in their current effort. Previously the transmitted file was unenencrypted, while now it appears to be given some common form of encryption. Perhaps the easiest way they could make it work would be to see if they can fool iTunes into encrypting the file for them.
Since the files are already decrypted and encrypted locally in faster that real time, it doesn't seem too farfetched that Apple could decide to "upgrade" the DRM on the files locally whenever you access them, or in one swell foop as they did to detect gapless tracks.
Even if iTunes did the encrypting Apple could still break this by releasing a new iTunes client and mandating its use as they have done before. Most probably they would not want to deal with the hassle of dealing with support calls from folks who lost their protected files since they didn't have a backup but didn't buy the files from ITMS in the first place....
I personally don't see the net positive for Apple, but DVD Jon has surprised me in the past.
B
mif
Apr 11, 10:18 PM
Tinchy Stryder - Catch 22
dalvin200
Sep 12, 07:57 AM
Yeah. I am off to bed for 4 hours. iTunes will just be frustrating given its not going to be for us I think. Maybe there will be some juciy hardware in 4 hours or so.
u know u won;t get a seconds sleep.. cos you'll be thinking and thinking.. iPods, movie store, thinking.. and you'll be back on macrumors within 2 mins :P
u know u won;t get a seconds sleep.. cos you'll be thinking and thinking.. iPods, movie store, thinking.. and you'll be back on macrumors within 2 mins :P
MongoTheGeek
Nov 16, 12:58 PM
The Register called shenanigans on this. I would have sent it to Arn to post but the whole thing seems absurd. I'd wager Apple's contract stipulates going all the way to Intel and probably a certain duration as well at least a year of selling all computers with Intel chips.
AMD somehow got behind Intel in terms of power and I've seen no signs of catch up. Not to say that in a year or two they won't be ahead, but not any time soon.
Apple won't introduce a AMD based machine until late 2008 at the earliest. I would almost expect a return to PPC first.
AMD somehow got behind Intel in terms of power and I've seen no signs of catch up. Not to say that in a year or two they won't be ahead, but not any time soon.
Apple won't introduce a AMD based machine until late 2008 at the earliest. I would almost expect a return to PPC first.
jeanlain
Apr 29, 04:03 PM
Too bad, I was looking forward to the scroll bars similar to iOS
Where do people get the idea that scrollbars have changed? :confused:
They're just like they were before the update.
Where do people get the idea that scrollbars have changed? :confused:
They're just like they were before the update.
Full of Win
May 3, 03:34 PM
This is a major setback IMHO...
I know it is illegal but carriers make tons of cash with their inflated prices... Who protects us from that?
I guess you mean legal? We protect ourselves by not signing on the dotted line. Nothing says that access to data how we want it is a human right. It's a luxury. I'm not a fan of the carriers, but I was the one who went to them; I was neither forced or fooled into forming a contract with them.
I know it is illegal but carriers make tons of cash with their inflated prices... Who protects us from that?
I guess you mean legal? We protect ourselves by not signing on the dotted line. Nothing says that access to data how we want it is a human right. It's a luxury. I'm not a fan of the carriers, but I was the one who went to them; I was neither forced or fooled into forming a contract with them.
*LTD*
Mar 6, 11:59 AM
Why is Apple the only tech company that makes unique products? All the other big ones seem to just drop in behind Apple after they invent something... Examples:
�Phones that are designed to simply compete with the iPhone.
�
This is proven. Others react to Apple, change (or attempt to) in response to Apple, sometimes even to the point of having to admit it (i.e., Nokia and Samsung.) Some even design their entire strategy around competing against Apple. That's really saying something. And it is also puts paid the notion that Apple's leadership in this industry is without equal and that there's a good reason their value will surpass that of Exxon Mobil's faster than we think.
�Phones that are designed to simply compete with the iPhone.
�
This is proven. Others react to Apple, change (or attempt to) in response to Apple, sometimes even to the point of having to admit it (i.e., Nokia and Samsung.) Some even design their entire strategy around competing against Apple. That's really saying something. And it is also puts paid the notion that Apple's leadership in this industry is without equal and that there's a good reason their value will surpass that of Exxon Mobil's faster than we think.
MagnusVonMagnum
May 2, 04:02 PM
Actually 10 comes after 9.
You obviously missed the irony of it all (and yes, OSX is around 10 years old now). Windows was never called "1, 2, 3" etc. so there's more irony for OSX which did takes 10 years to get where it is now (i.e that's how long they've been working on OSX; OS9 has NOTHING to do with the length of time they've spent on the current OS, which has little or nothing to do with OS9 technologically other than the similarity in GUI interface (save the overlap in Carbon libraries). OSX is based on NeXTStep, itself based on Unix. It's not based on Mac Classic OS 1-9. But then my ;) should have clued you in. But then Windows haters rarely get such humor, IMO.
You obviously missed the irony of it all (and yes, OSX is around 10 years old now). Windows was never called "1, 2, 3" etc. so there's more irony for OSX which did takes 10 years to get where it is now (i.e that's how long they've been working on OSX; OS9 has NOTHING to do with the length of time they've spent on the current OS, which has little or nothing to do with OS9 technologically other than the similarity in GUI interface (save the overlap in Carbon libraries). OSX is based on NeXTStep, itself based on Unix. It's not based on Mac Classic OS 1-9. But then my ;) should have clued you in. But then Windows haters rarely get such humor, IMO.
dont24
Nov 24, 11:50 AM
if i buy .mac today, will the 360 days start now or when my brother actually inserts the disk and creates a name etc
It starts whenever your bro activates it. Not from the date of purshase.
It starts whenever your bro activates it. Not from the date of purshase.
AndroidfoLife
Apr 16, 03:15 AM
Next up, Google gives away songs for free. Inserts targeted ads every 30 seconds of music. Fandroids flood the Web to tell us all how awesome Android and "free" Google music are and what a greedy jerk Steve Jobs is for selling songs.
You know it's coming.
I just want to sync my music. **** itunes **** what ever. I love bit torrent. I refuse to pay for music or movies.
You know it's coming.
I just want to sync my music. **** itunes **** what ever. I love bit torrent. I refuse to pay for music or movies.
Badandy
Jan 10, 12:25 AM
iphone with a better camera. that 2 megapixel camera is outdated.
Who cares?
Who cares?
york2600
Oct 28, 07:49 PM
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
A) It's not the OSS community that's trying to crack Apple's DRM. Lets get that straight. These people have nothing to do with that community. These guys are just pirates using the source that is out there.
B) If anyone is trying to get software without paying anyone for it, that would be corporate America. Do you really think Apple could have created OS X on their own. Let us remember the HUGE amount of code in OS X that isn't Apple's and the open standards the have leveraged. Right off the bat we have the Mach kernel project, Apache, and Samba and Webkit (KHTML). Apple's gotten tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of free programming hours from top programmers. They've packaged it together with an amazing API and a slick GUI and made it easy. That's something the OSS community still can't get close to. In return Apple has given a limited amount back. They release source in their own license (as they have a right to), which limits the ability of other projects to incorporate that code. In the end for all this free work they have to deal with a few crackers out there, but really, that's worth it when you look at what they got.
A) It's not the OSS community that's trying to crack Apple's DRM. Lets get that straight. These people have nothing to do with that community. These guys are just pirates using the source that is out there.
B) If anyone is trying to get software without paying anyone for it, that would be corporate America. Do you really think Apple could have created OS X on their own. Let us remember the HUGE amount of code in OS X that isn't Apple's and the open standards the have leveraged. Right off the bat we have the Mach kernel project, Apache, and Samba and Webkit (KHTML). Apple's gotten tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of free programming hours from top programmers. They've packaged it together with an amazing API and a slick GUI and made it easy. That's something the OSS community still can't get close to. In return Apple has given a limited amount back. They release source in their own license (as they have a right to), which limits the ability of other projects to incorporate that code. In the end for all this free work they have to deal with a few crackers out there, but really, that's worth it when you look at what they got.
bearbo
Jan 12, 02:19 AM
but because it is such a big leap in technology.
who are you kidding? what part of iphone is not previously existed in technology? yay it has a nice UI, like all other apple products, but the hardware?
as revolutionary as the iPhone
remind me, again, what's revolutionary about iPhone?
who are you kidding? what part of iphone is not previously existed in technology? yay it has a nice UI, like all other apple products, but the hardware?
as revolutionary as the iPhone
remind me, again, what's revolutionary about iPhone?
JohnMacnMiami
Jan 15, 01:23 PM
Apparently the market was not excited about it.
Down $30+ a share since early Jan.
Oh well, 6 years until I retire, I'll hope to see it bounce back (heh heh)
Down $30+ a share since early Jan.
Oh well, 6 years until I retire, I'll hope to see it bounce back (heh heh)
