mstrze
May 4, 09:39 AM
thx god not every one has this attitude ... people were bitching about paying extra for tethering here and NO ONE even argued "but its in the contract BS" and boom, few months later it got changed. just bc something is in a obvs greedy network contract doesnt mean it shouldnt be changed or makes it right.
this "i won't complain cuz i as one can't do anything about it anyway" approach makes me sick
But by not signing you ARE doing something about it: Hitting the provider's bottom line and that, possibly more than anything else, will lead them to make changes.
this "i won't complain cuz i as one can't do anything about it anyway" approach makes me sick
But by not signing you ARE doing something about it: Hitting the provider's bottom line and that, possibly more than anything else, will lead them to make changes.
amols
Sep 25, 02:36 PM
Really a great update for a great product. And now even Mac Mini Solo has a supported configuration. I can't believe Apple has improved so many things for no update price. I also can't believe so many negative ratings. Those waiting for new MBPs, check out next MS event or E3 or Oscars...you never know :D .
I love my MBP more than ever now :D :D
I love my MBP more than ever now :D :D
OdduWon
Oct 11, 05:07 AM
a nice iPod Video with NEF/RAW reading capability for us photographers, I'm a waiting customer. And yes, a smaller MacBook with 10 hour battery life, non-reflective screen and a graphics card to use it with Aperture/RAW would be sooo nice... :)
the macpod pro could be a notepad device that has the ability to interface with ext hard drives adn icoul be like a wireless ouch screen 3/4 in thin
the macpod pro could be a notepad device that has the ability to interface with ext hard drives adn icoul be like a wireless ouch screen 3/4 in thin
macaddict3
May 4, 03:05 AM
love the ad, truly a great device. a year ago everyone joke about the name but now people see the true side of the device what it could actually do.
more...
schwell
Oct 8, 09:56 PM
About 2 months ago I paid an early termination fee and gave up my iPhone because of the dropped calls. I have a Blackberry on Verizon, and consume about 800 minutes a month (peak times, not nights and weekends) and close to 200MB of bandwidth.
I have not had a single dropped call. I can also finally browse the web without Safari crashing all the time.
I would not call looking at the web on a blackberry surfing. It is more like wading in a kiddie pool.
I have not had a single dropped call. I can also finally browse the web without Safari crashing all the time.
I would not call looking at the web on a blackberry surfing. It is more like wading in a kiddie pool.
ABG
Apr 8, 08:03 AM
Applaud the choice! Type or specs?
Thanks. Its just a standard Audi TT Roadster 2.0TFSI Black Edition.
Bose sound system and 19" Anthracite alloys are the main extras over the S-Line.
Thanks. Its just a standard Audi TT Roadster 2.0TFSI Black Edition.
Bose sound system and 19" Anthracite alloys are the main extras over the S-Line.
more...
aaronazevedo
Apr 15, 11:52 PM
Real what? Real fakes? Yes they are real fakes.
Real photos of real items, sitting on real tables in China. For real.
If the unit is aluminum, and if it passes testing who knows. I'm someone has made a bogus prototype to stir up this discussion, who knows.
I'm just commenting on the real vs. rendering. I voted real.
Real photos of real items, sitting on real tables in China. For real.
If the unit is aluminum, and if it passes testing who knows. I'm someone has made a bogus prototype to stir up this discussion, who knows.
I'm just commenting on the real vs. rendering. I voted real.
Iroganai
Oct 28, 03:03 PM
Well, I only have the free online ADC account, but I can still access the source of the kernel. How can it be called as 'pulling' the code ?
In the end, anyone interested can still see the code, without paying even a dime.
In the end, anyone interested can still see the code, without paying even a dime.
more...
dethmaShine
May 2, 02:19 PM
They don't need to track you any more, they got Osama Bin Laden already.
Image (http://cynic.me/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/iPhoneTrackingWorks.jpg)
lolol
That's the best post I have seen all day.
Image (http://cynic.me/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/iPhoneTrackingWorks.jpg)
lolol
That's the best post I have seen all day.
JayMysterio
Dec 8, 06:24 PM
The multiple games give you choices...but this game alone gives you no choice but to run and gun. If i wanted to Run and Gun and waste my life i'd go join the taliban and pray to Allah.
This game gives you very little choice and in that makes the game terrible.
And you said it yourself. Treyarch ruined the game for all the snipers. Great job!
Treyarch = morons and dip*****. Bring back Infinity War. Black Ops Blows.
Have you decided what type of game you want to play? Cause if you don't want to run & gun, go play some hardcore. I promise you, you and 7 others will sit & camp for 20 or 30 minutes and you should be in heaven. As far as the taliban thing, it's a free country knock yourself out.
There are four frikkin' gametypes, each with match types of their own. If you can't find a game you like, it's because you don't want to. Play hardcore, play pure without the killstreaks, play only with players who've prestiged. But really, there's only one way to play the game? There's a word called creativity, give it a try. You may change up your game style. Not everyone runs & guns, some camp, some die. Just grasp the idea you can't sit up in a clock tower all day and NOT expect to get shot back at.
The game gives you every choice in the world, the question is if it's the right choice. Some maps will allow you to camp and slow the game down, other maps won't have it. The game is far more fluid than others, because of it's unpredictability. Sometimes that works for you and it's great, other times it won't. It's a trade off. Will you have all day to camp as you seem to want to? Probably not, once a 'spawn flip' occurs and you find someone behind your camp site. Personally I like the non static spawn points, while the spawning often works against me, I don't hear to much about spawn camping. I personally like the rarer spawn camping.
No, I said Treyarch 'nerfed' sniping. Now if you want to snipe, it actually takes something called 'skill'. You want a one hit kill, it better be dead on in the forehead or back of skull. No more auto assist towards an expanded hit box. There are one hit kills, as you've probably done a headshot or two, but now they are truly difficult. Not the old Rainbow Six shots with the Barrett that grazed your boot and were instant deaths. Now when I play it's often that a sniper tries a few times. Near misses are just that now, near misses, not the instant kills because a bullet was in the same township of your guy.
As I said, Black Ops is an alternative, a choice. If you don't care for it, I'm pretty sure you can take it out of your xbox, and go play something else. I believe they make a new Cabela's hunting game where camping is an important part, very little running & gunning I assume. Otherwise more than enough people are playing MW1 & 2, and they will welcome you. There are also more than enough enjoying Black Ops, don't join them, ...they haven't missed you.
This game gives you very little choice and in that makes the game terrible.
And you said it yourself. Treyarch ruined the game for all the snipers. Great job!
Treyarch = morons and dip*****. Bring back Infinity War. Black Ops Blows.
Have you decided what type of game you want to play? Cause if you don't want to run & gun, go play some hardcore. I promise you, you and 7 others will sit & camp for 20 or 30 minutes and you should be in heaven. As far as the taliban thing, it's a free country knock yourself out.
There are four frikkin' gametypes, each with match types of their own. If you can't find a game you like, it's because you don't want to. Play hardcore, play pure without the killstreaks, play only with players who've prestiged. But really, there's only one way to play the game? There's a word called creativity, give it a try. You may change up your game style. Not everyone runs & guns, some camp, some die. Just grasp the idea you can't sit up in a clock tower all day and NOT expect to get shot back at.
The game gives you every choice in the world, the question is if it's the right choice. Some maps will allow you to camp and slow the game down, other maps won't have it. The game is far more fluid than others, because of it's unpredictability. Sometimes that works for you and it's great, other times it won't. It's a trade off. Will you have all day to camp as you seem to want to? Probably not, once a 'spawn flip' occurs and you find someone behind your camp site. Personally I like the non static spawn points, while the spawning often works against me, I don't hear to much about spawn camping. I personally like the rarer spawn camping.
No, I said Treyarch 'nerfed' sniping. Now if you want to snipe, it actually takes something called 'skill'. You want a one hit kill, it better be dead on in the forehead or back of skull. No more auto assist towards an expanded hit box. There are one hit kills, as you've probably done a headshot or two, but now they are truly difficult. Not the old Rainbow Six shots with the Barrett that grazed your boot and were instant deaths. Now when I play it's often that a sniper tries a few times. Near misses are just that now, near misses, not the instant kills because a bullet was in the same township of your guy.
As I said, Black Ops is an alternative, a choice. If you don't care for it, I'm pretty sure you can take it out of your xbox, and go play something else. I believe they make a new Cabela's hunting game where camping is an important part, very little running & gunning I assume. Otherwise more than enough people are playing MW1 & 2, and they will welcome you. There are also more than enough enjoying Black Ops, don't join them, ...they haven't missed you.
more...
rnelan7
Apr 10, 02:39 PM
Samsung PN50C8000 x3.
Continuing to build my ultimate theater room - just need to paint the in wall speakers that were installed.
Just curious, why three televisions instead of just one big projector?
Continuing to build my ultimate theater room - just need to paint the in wall speakers that were installed.
Just curious, why three televisions instead of just one big projector?
FriarNurgle
Apr 8, 01:24 PM
Bet they are lowering the price and want to avoid refunding money to so many people.
more...
Aperture
Jan 8, 09:35 PM
Just to up the neurosis of this spoiler free page, I wonder if any leaks could be given on our visions periphery by the advertising?
Thought of this.. but you shouldn't see a change in advertising within maybe 24 hours. Could be wrong but just a good guess.
Thought of this.. but you shouldn't see a change in advertising within maybe 24 hours. Could be wrong but just a good guess.
eawmp1
May 5, 02:32 PM
"Do you have the household cleaners in the house, and are they locked up and out of reach of your child?"
"Do you have the guns in the house, and are do they have trigger locks and/or are they locked up and out of reach of your child?"
That one elicits a defensive, paranoid response while the other doesn't says more about the parent than the doctor.
The NRA has so brainwashed their members that the boogeyman is gonna confiscate their guns that there has to be some hidden agenda in questions about firearms. The doctor are not turning you into some database, I promise. We just care about the safety of your child/
"Do you have the guns in the house, and are do they have trigger locks and/or are they locked up and out of reach of your child?"
That one elicits a defensive, paranoid response while the other doesn't says more about the parent than the doctor.
The NRA has so brainwashed their members that the boogeyman is gonna confiscate their guns that there has to be some hidden agenda in questions about firearms. The doctor are not turning you into some database, I promise. We just care about the safety of your child/
more...
IJ Reilly
Oct 23, 10:27 AM
I would love for apple to use 10 billion to innovate fantastically, enter new markets, go green, and more. I don't think it's going to happen- the purpose of 10 billion in the bank for apple is having 10 billion in the bank. Apple's expertise is in taking big risks (at least large for a compnay of their size), a good number of which pay off very, very well. But people- investors, CEOs, are risk adverse, and a huge pile of cash to operate on, so big they can operate and continue to invest in risky and exciting products, mitigates their risks. For apple, a pile of money might actually be worth more than investing that money at a high rate of return.
Huge cash hordes are only good for three things, in order of desirability: reinvesting in future growth (which is why it's called capitalism); returning to the stockholders in the form of dividends; or holding for a rainy day. The last reason, which you seem to think is the best one, should be seen by investors as a signal that the company lacks confidence in the future.
Actually, there's a fourth use of excess cash: a stock buy-back. Apple isn't doing this with the money currently, either.
I agree, the huge stockpile of cash is an issue. That's money that should be working for Apple, and IMHO that should be in the form of purchasing other companies that will strengthen Apple in key areas, like music distribution and/or audio/video/graphics production.
And I also agree with you on the dividend issue. A small investment of that money into dividends may have the exact effect as you describe. On the other hand, putting that money into new products/enhancing existing products, may do more for Apple's long-term health vs. providing a dividend to improve the 'optics' of the company in shareholders' eyes.
New investments in technologies and products would be by far the best use of the money. With Apple's cash, they could set up a research arm similar to Xerox PARC or the old Bell Labs and place themselves in the forefront of new technology for a long time. Instead, they seem to be notably stingy with their R&D dollars. Purchasing technologies by buying out smaller companies could also be advantageous, and Apple does do some of this, but not much -- not enough to make even a dent in their cash hoard.
Huge cash hordes are only good for three things, in order of desirability: reinvesting in future growth (which is why it's called capitalism); returning to the stockholders in the form of dividends; or holding for a rainy day. The last reason, which you seem to think is the best one, should be seen by investors as a signal that the company lacks confidence in the future.
Actually, there's a fourth use of excess cash: a stock buy-back. Apple isn't doing this with the money currently, either.
I agree, the huge stockpile of cash is an issue. That's money that should be working for Apple, and IMHO that should be in the form of purchasing other companies that will strengthen Apple in key areas, like music distribution and/or audio/video/graphics production.
And I also agree with you on the dividend issue. A small investment of that money into dividends may have the exact effect as you describe. On the other hand, putting that money into new products/enhancing existing products, may do more for Apple's long-term health vs. providing a dividend to improve the 'optics' of the company in shareholders' eyes.
New investments in technologies and products would be by far the best use of the money. With Apple's cash, they could set up a research arm similar to Xerox PARC or the old Bell Labs and place themselves in the forefront of new technology for a long time. Instead, they seem to be notably stingy with their R&D dollars. Purchasing technologies by buying out smaller companies could also be advantageous, and Apple does do some of this, but not much -- not enough to make even a dent in their cash hoard.
Wizard of Woz
Jan 15, 08:32 PM
Ahahaha. While some of you have some true criticisms, (and correct IMO) of the keynote, some of you are acting like spoilt little children.
Personally I enjoyed the keynote, except for the $20 iPod touch upgrade, which is a bit of a slap in the face.
The MBA is a complimentary machine to me. I have a C2D 20' iMac on my desk, but need something ultra-portable and light to carry at school. Something that could fit in a tiny little satchel - even a MB is too big - therefore the MBA is perfect for me. It's a machine to take notes, write reports etc on. I'd simply transfer work off using my 2GB Flash drive.
I would like to see an app that could use the touch gestures to draw diagrams - that would be great for Science, Maths etc.
Personally I enjoyed the keynote, except for the $20 iPod touch upgrade, which is a bit of a slap in the face.
The MBA is a complimentary machine to me. I have a C2D 20' iMac on my desk, but need something ultra-portable and light to carry at school. Something that could fit in a tiny little satchel - even a MB is too big - therefore the MBA is perfect for me. It's a machine to take notes, write reports etc on. I'd simply transfer work off using my 2GB Flash drive.
I would like to see an app that could use the touch gestures to draw diagrams - that would be great for Science, Maths etc.
more...
longofest
Oct 17, 09:06 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.
Bluray is clearly better, and TDK (I think) is definitely doing an incredible job of pushing disk capacities through the 200 GB roof (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/28/tdk_200gb_blu-ray_disc/) (with multiple layers, and increasing the single-layer capacity to 33 GB). But I heard in this forum that the content creators are still using MPEG-2, which while H.264 and WM9 is fully supported in both Bluray and HD-DVD, only HD-DVD is using the advanced codecs. So, the end result is the studios aren't using Bluray to its full capacity.
If true, I'd like to see studios stop being stupid and start using the better technology. But another BIG problem I see with bluray right now is that it is so darn expensive. There is a 2:1, and sometimes a 3:1 price difference between them and HD-DVD. I don't have over a grand to spend on a Bluray player, and I don't want to wait a decade to get one either...
No they won't.
If (I said IF) everyone can end up buying a player that plays both formats, why would they have to release both formats?
Maybe all Sony movies are on Blu-Ray and all Warner Brother's movies are on HDVD. Everyone can buy either and play them in their dual-player.
That's it. Easy.
I have lots of doubts that it will work out this way, but hey...that WOULD be best, wouldn't it?
Warner looks like they will put movies out on the hybrid disks, so if you have a blu-ray player, you can play it, and if you have an HD-DVD player you can play it. Same end game. The problem comes when you have a studio like Universal that only puts out stuff on HD-DVD or Fox that just puts out on Blu-ray. Then you need the universal player.
NEC has developed a chip that can decode both, as you have hinted at. The optical technology is coming along (I saw something on Digg a little bit ago that noted some progress in that arena), but still not there yet.
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.
Bluray is clearly better, and TDK (I think) is definitely doing an incredible job of pushing disk capacities through the 200 GB roof (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/28/tdk_200gb_blu-ray_disc/) (with multiple layers, and increasing the single-layer capacity to 33 GB). But I heard in this forum that the content creators are still using MPEG-2, which while H.264 and WM9 is fully supported in both Bluray and HD-DVD, only HD-DVD is using the advanced codecs. So, the end result is the studios aren't using Bluray to its full capacity.
If true, I'd like to see studios stop being stupid and start using the better technology. But another BIG problem I see with bluray right now is that it is so darn expensive. There is a 2:1, and sometimes a 3:1 price difference between them and HD-DVD. I don't have over a grand to spend on a Bluray player, and I don't want to wait a decade to get one either...
No they won't.
If (I said IF) everyone can end up buying a player that plays both formats, why would they have to release both formats?
Maybe all Sony movies are on Blu-Ray and all Warner Brother's movies are on HDVD. Everyone can buy either and play them in their dual-player.
That's it. Easy.
I have lots of doubts that it will work out this way, but hey...that WOULD be best, wouldn't it?
Warner looks like they will put movies out on the hybrid disks, so if you have a blu-ray player, you can play it, and if you have an HD-DVD player you can play it. Same end game. The problem comes when you have a studio like Universal that only puts out stuff on HD-DVD or Fox that just puts out on Blu-ray. Then you need the universal player.
NEC has developed a chip that can decode both, as you have hinted at. The optical technology is coming along (I saw something on Digg a little bit ago that noted some progress in that arena), but still not there yet.
todd2000
Oct 2, 03:06 PM
So Apple will figure out a way to block it, and just Sue him
hulugu
Mar 3, 10:45 PM
...
BTW, there is no 'RIGHT' to collective bargaining....
Collective bargaining is a legislative privilege granted by friendly law makers in some localities which can be quickly and abruptly eliminated (as you've all just observed.)[/QUOTE]
It's interesting, AFAICT, the courts have mainly avoided creating a 'right' to collective bargaining and have remaindered this structure to legislative acts like the NLRB.
Public unions are idiotic. Imagine a private sector union where the union members themselves were able to contribute to the election and vote for the individual whom they'd be bargaining against. BRILLIANT! It's a conflict of interest - straight up.
A conflict of interest? I disagree, this is akin to being on the hiring committee for your boss�a common corporate and university structure. Extend the logic of this and you're effectively arguing that no public employee, from police officer to NHS doctor should be able to vote.
What's important about the conflict in a conflict of interest is whether or not the union's interest runs counter to the government's, which is at the very least arguable.
Lee, my wife is a teacher. I'm quite aware of how much they make. For the record, they aren't required to have masters degrees (where do you get this stuff?). Most importantly, without thuggish unions, good teachers like my wife would make far more money than they do today, while the bad ones would make less or be fired.
How? Without the union, bad teachers would presumably be fired, but how would this raise wages directly or indirectly?
Have you seen the movie 'Waiting for Superman' by chance, Lee?
Many have argued that this is a piece of agitprop and is not a fair documentary.
Bill Gates accurately pointed out the failure of allowing the unionization of public employees and the incredible damage it's causing our state budgets. Thankfully, people like him are willing to look at the facts and report honestly on the situation instead of pretending like the government can produce miracles out of thin air or that money grows on trees.
I'm not so sure you should declare the genius of Gates on a Mac forum. ;)
Are you aware of the number of school districts that have unions and those that do not and what the test scores for ACT/SAT are? I'm wondering if there's at least a correlative connection between the two. Adding in the variable of education spending might also be useful.
Might have to go to mass media complete.
BTW, there is no 'RIGHT' to collective bargaining....
Collective bargaining is a legislative privilege granted by friendly law makers in some localities which can be quickly and abruptly eliminated (as you've all just observed.)[/QUOTE]
It's interesting, AFAICT, the courts have mainly avoided creating a 'right' to collective bargaining and have remaindered this structure to legislative acts like the NLRB.
Public unions are idiotic. Imagine a private sector union where the union members themselves were able to contribute to the election and vote for the individual whom they'd be bargaining against. BRILLIANT! It's a conflict of interest - straight up.
A conflict of interest? I disagree, this is akin to being on the hiring committee for your boss�a common corporate and university structure. Extend the logic of this and you're effectively arguing that no public employee, from police officer to NHS doctor should be able to vote.
What's important about the conflict in a conflict of interest is whether or not the union's interest runs counter to the government's, which is at the very least arguable.
Lee, my wife is a teacher. I'm quite aware of how much they make. For the record, they aren't required to have masters degrees (where do you get this stuff?). Most importantly, without thuggish unions, good teachers like my wife would make far more money than they do today, while the bad ones would make less or be fired.
How? Without the union, bad teachers would presumably be fired, but how would this raise wages directly or indirectly?
Have you seen the movie 'Waiting for Superman' by chance, Lee?
Many have argued that this is a piece of agitprop and is not a fair documentary.
Bill Gates accurately pointed out the failure of allowing the unionization of public employees and the incredible damage it's causing our state budgets. Thankfully, people like him are willing to look at the facts and report honestly on the situation instead of pretending like the government can produce miracles out of thin air or that money grows on trees.
I'm not so sure you should declare the genius of Gates on a Mac forum. ;)
Are you aware of the number of school districts that have unions and those that do not and what the test scores for ACT/SAT are? I'm wondering if there's at least a correlative connection between the two. Adding in the variable of education spending might also be useful.
Might have to go to mass media complete.
macaddict23
Aug 8, 04:35 AM
A $500 reduction on the Apple 30" is great, but what else does this mean? Apple wants to remain competitive? Is it to clear out inventory for new displays? I've been wanting to buy one of these 30" monitors ever since they came out. My friend, who works for Apple here in Elk Grove, CA can use his discount to buy to buy the monitor for $1499 (before taxes). That's a heck of a deal! But at the same time, I can wait 1–2 months if I know that Apple will come out with a new design.
chrmjenkins
Dec 13, 07:51 PM
And if you're wrong and it's announced in January? ;)
I don't see that happening. It's just not how Apple works.
I don't see that happening. It's just not how Apple works.
LarryC
Apr 29, 04:29 PM
Well, that's a good thing. I am glad that they are listening to what the customers want. I was beginning to think that the old maxim of "the customer is always right" had died.
RipTide1024
Sep 30, 08:29 AM
In the architectural drawing, above the kitchen and below the bedrooms (using the top of the image as up and the bottom of the image as down) there is a rectangular room with an arch inside it. It's not labeled like the rest is. Any ideas what that is?
Initially I thought large pantry due to its location from the kitchen, but the pantry is labeled to the right of that area.
Perhaps a library with round desk / seating? Sitting room with a circular hearth in the middle? Breakfast nook?
Initially I thought large pantry due to its location from the kitchen, but the pantry is labeled to the right of that area.
Perhaps a library with round desk / seating? Sitting room with a circular hearth in the middle? Breakfast nook?
Lord Blackadder
Aug 9, 06:39 PM
Couple points...
1) The problem with MPG on something like the volt is that it doesn't make any sense to measure it this way
- MPG is simply the wrong standard to use when you're talking about what is primarily an electric car
- Regarding it "only getting 50mpg", I don't believe that's been settled, but if true, then that's still 8MPG than the best highway mileage VW is able to currently offer in the US
It is true that measuring the Volt's efficiency is problematic if you are trying to speak in terms of "mpg". However, we can't simply ignore where the extra electricity is coming from - especially when that electricity was probably produced by burning coal or oil.
And that's what's so sinister about the electrics. Because it is hard to track just how efficient (or inefficient) the electricity from the grid is (created from fossil fuels, suffering from parasitic loss through the lines and then being stored in a battery before being used), people tend to ignore that whole side of the equation. But it is just as important.
In terms of using its onboard generator, the Volt is very efficient. But most people that use one will probably drive it as an electric most of the time, so the efficiency of the power coming off the grid becomes the primary concern. And figuring that out is much harder than looking at mpg numbers. How many pounds of coal/gallons of oil are burned at the power plant to get your Volt a mile down the road (I assume it works out to be fairly efficent, but I don't know any numbers)? More importantly, would a proliferation in plug-ins result in regular rolling blackouts because power plants can't keep up with rising demand?
2) Diesels don't get 50-60mpg in the US for two reasons
a) The MPG numbers for a Euro engine are measured in imperial gallons, which are 20% bigger than US gallons and thus inflate the MPG by 20%. Furthermore, these MPG standards are measured using completely different testing methods between the US and Europe, so you can't directly compare them.
b) None of those super-fuel-efficient Euro engines have been able to pass US emissions laws yet.
Would I drop 41K on one (or 33K after rebates)?
Probably not, but I'm sure they'll sell every one that they can make and I'm sure that price will come down over time.
Imperial gallons are easily converted on Google, I was accounting for that. The biggest thing Americans have trouble with is adjusting to smaller cars. The cars we drive are, on average, unneccesarily big - and anyone who says otherwise is thought to be a Communist. If you want better mielage, drive a smaller car. 90% of truck and SUV owners use their vehicles to their full capacity a tiny percentage of the time. Most of them could do with a much smaller vehicle. Lifestyle changes (buying a smaller car, driving less) are the only way to really reduce fuel consumption on a national or global scale in the near to medium future. We can't wait for technology alone to pick up the slack.
The emissions legislation differences are a farce. The US, EU and Japan should standardize a set of emissions & safety legislation so that any car made in those countries could be exported to any of the others. There's no good reason not to - but a lot of stupid political reasons why it will never happen.
1) The problem with MPG on something like the volt is that it doesn't make any sense to measure it this way
- MPG is simply the wrong standard to use when you're talking about what is primarily an electric car
- Regarding it "only getting 50mpg", I don't believe that's been settled, but if true, then that's still 8MPG than the best highway mileage VW is able to currently offer in the US
It is true that measuring the Volt's efficiency is problematic if you are trying to speak in terms of "mpg". However, we can't simply ignore where the extra electricity is coming from - especially when that electricity was probably produced by burning coal or oil.
And that's what's so sinister about the electrics. Because it is hard to track just how efficient (or inefficient) the electricity from the grid is (created from fossil fuels, suffering from parasitic loss through the lines and then being stored in a battery before being used), people tend to ignore that whole side of the equation. But it is just as important.
In terms of using its onboard generator, the Volt is very efficient. But most people that use one will probably drive it as an electric most of the time, so the efficiency of the power coming off the grid becomes the primary concern. And figuring that out is much harder than looking at mpg numbers. How many pounds of coal/gallons of oil are burned at the power plant to get your Volt a mile down the road (I assume it works out to be fairly efficent, but I don't know any numbers)? More importantly, would a proliferation in plug-ins result in regular rolling blackouts because power plants can't keep up with rising demand?
2) Diesels don't get 50-60mpg in the US for two reasons
a) The MPG numbers for a Euro engine are measured in imperial gallons, which are 20% bigger than US gallons and thus inflate the MPG by 20%. Furthermore, these MPG standards are measured using completely different testing methods between the US and Europe, so you can't directly compare them.
b) None of those super-fuel-efficient Euro engines have been able to pass US emissions laws yet.
Would I drop 41K on one (or 33K after rebates)?
Probably not, but I'm sure they'll sell every one that they can make and I'm sure that price will come down over time.
Imperial gallons are easily converted on Google, I was accounting for that. The biggest thing Americans have trouble with is adjusting to smaller cars. The cars we drive are, on average, unneccesarily big - and anyone who says otherwise is thought to be a Communist. If you want better mielage, drive a smaller car. 90% of truck and SUV owners use their vehicles to their full capacity a tiny percentage of the time. Most of them could do with a much smaller vehicle. Lifestyle changes (buying a smaller car, driving less) are the only way to really reduce fuel consumption on a national or global scale in the near to medium future. We can't wait for technology alone to pick up the slack.
The emissions legislation differences are a farce. The US, EU and Japan should standardize a set of emissions & safety legislation so that any car made in those countries could be exported to any of the others. There's no good reason not to - but a lot of stupid political reasons why it will never happen.
