yellow
Jan 4, 07:59 AM
Not mounted, but they are in the toolbox, along with a M2 that someone can operate while standing in the bed. :D
Mah-Duce! :cool:
Wow, a lota rich folks with fancy cars in this thread! :)
Mah-Duce! :cool:
Wow, a lota rich folks with fancy cars in this thread! :)
Rodimus Prime
Apr 20, 07:26 PM
Manuals are cheaper to buy, cheaper to maintain, more reliable, longer lasting, more powerful, more fuel efficient, and offer better driver control. Automatics are for the elderly and the handicapped.
sorry no longer the case for most of that.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry no longer the case for most of that.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
Aeroflux
Mar 28, 09:22 PM
Honestly? My launch day xbox is still going strong with nothing but 2 freeze ups. And my PS2 is still going strong too - i understand some peeps have had some significant problems (60% failure rate on launch 360s).
The crap I had to go through was insane. DHL never found my house. They shipped me 360s that went RRoD right out of the box. One 360 box mysteriously had a LOT of dirt in it. Another was scratched up. I had to fax them my receipt twice just to prove I bought the premium console (pro for customer service). My collection of reference numbers:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v460/Aeroflux/Miscellaneous%20Stuff/refnumbers2.png
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v460/Aeroflux/Miscellaneous%20Stuff/refnumbers1.png
Life cycle in relation to a platform isn't relative at all. As it stood prior to MS going for the 4 year lifecycle with the 360, it was a new platform every 5 years. With the advent of the playstation, there was significant overlap. This is what will happen again with the PS4 - hell, the PS2 has just recently been delisted by NPD - up until then they were still selling. That's the kind of overlap we are talking about - you still have the '10 year cycle' but a new platform will be released about half way through. T
Dude...got it before you said it the first time. By saying "life cycle is relative" I was referring to the whole paragraph I wrote before it, as in how long they last.
Methinks the fact that you don't blink that much would probably exacerbate your issues bud.
Yeah screen tear may be problematic for you, but some people don't even experience it - I do and I'll admit it's irritating, but it's hardly an issue where it will stop the majority. All I'm going to say it must suck to be you.
Try it on a big screen and get back to me...maybe it is just me. Who knows.
It sounds like you are a serious PC gaming fanboy and that's cool. There's plenty of room in the market. Granted, most of the PC devs are switching over as you make more money on the console side, but hey ho, you won't feel sick :rolleyes:
Gaming fanboy. PCs just have the most flexibility. I don't distinguish between hardware when seeking a great gaming experience, but when the hardware isn't up to snuff I don't hold back my criticism.
You are thinking the console market is like the PC market - it isn't I agree, I'd love a new gen console right about now, but they are doing some interesting things with kinect and to a slightly lesser extent, the Wii so I'll at least be amused until the new gen arrives - but that's the thing, you can't release consoles like ipods - there has to be a decent amount of time to gather pace and sales.
Every five years is fine with me. I don't like every year for another iPod either, too damn expensive.
Ask tony hawk? don't make me laugh, that was activision's decision, Tony sold his likeness a long time ago. You are just showing how....little you know. And seriously? you bought one of those pieces of crap?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAnXD1rA32k
I'm sorry, but you are clearly clueless with some of your ideas. Which is fine with me, I at least am getting a laugh.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v460/Aeroflux/Emoticons/file_324.gif
The crap I had to go through was insane. DHL never found my house. They shipped me 360s that went RRoD right out of the box. One 360 box mysteriously had a LOT of dirt in it. Another was scratched up. I had to fax them my receipt twice just to prove I bought the premium console (pro for customer service). My collection of reference numbers:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v460/Aeroflux/Miscellaneous%20Stuff/refnumbers2.png
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v460/Aeroflux/Miscellaneous%20Stuff/refnumbers1.png
Life cycle in relation to a platform isn't relative at all. As it stood prior to MS going for the 4 year lifecycle with the 360, it was a new platform every 5 years. With the advent of the playstation, there was significant overlap. This is what will happen again with the PS4 - hell, the PS2 has just recently been delisted by NPD - up until then they were still selling. That's the kind of overlap we are talking about - you still have the '10 year cycle' but a new platform will be released about half way through. T
Dude...got it before you said it the first time. By saying "life cycle is relative" I was referring to the whole paragraph I wrote before it, as in how long they last.
Methinks the fact that you don't blink that much would probably exacerbate your issues bud.
Yeah screen tear may be problematic for you, but some people don't even experience it - I do and I'll admit it's irritating, but it's hardly an issue where it will stop the majority. All I'm going to say it must suck to be you.
Try it on a big screen and get back to me...maybe it is just me. Who knows.
It sounds like you are a serious PC gaming fanboy and that's cool. There's plenty of room in the market. Granted, most of the PC devs are switching over as you make more money on the console side, but hey ho, you won't feel sick :rolleyes:
Gaming fanboy. PCs just have the most flexibility. I don't distinguish between hardware when seeking a great gaming experience, but when the hardware isn't up to snuff I don't hold back my criticism.
You are thinking the console market is like the PC market - it isn't I agree, I'd love a new gen console right about now, but they are doing some interesting things with kinect and to a slightly lesser extent, the Wii so I'll at least be amused until the new gen arrives - but that's the thing, you can't release consoles like ipods - there has to be a decent amount of time to gather pace and sales.
Every five years is fine with me. I don't like every year for another iPod either, too damn expensive.
Ask tony hawk? don't make me laugh, that was activision's decision, Tony sold his likeness a long time ago. You are just showing how....little you know. And seriously? you bought one of those pieces of crap?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAnXD1rA32k
I'm sorry, but you are clearly clueless with some of your ideas. Which is fine with me, I at least am getting a laugh.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v460/Aeroflux/Emoticons/file_324.gif
macgeek18
Feb 18, 12:37 AM
Nice setup! It has a little bit of everything in it!
Thank you! I like it a lot and it's about 2 years in progress for everything so far.
Thank you! I like it a lot and it's about 2 years in progress for everything so far.
Multimedia
Sep 6, 12:39 PM
Look, they discontinued the $50 BTO superdrive option on the lower end model. Are they purposely trying to drive me to Velocity Micro?The SAVE refurb page has what you want for $649. If you really want that model, pull the trigger.
ILL Robinson
Jan 12, 12:44 PM
*deleted*
rock6079
Nov 29, 03:28 PM
im sure theyve got something secret up their sleeve for the itv, just cant wait to see what hte final product is like
Postal
Jan 12, 12:07 PM
are you kidding me?
Macbook Air?
WORST NAME EVER
There's no way Apple would ever call something that.
You've pretty much guaranteed that MacBook air is the name.
Any time someone says "there's no way Apple would ever call it <insert widely rumored name here>," Apple promptly named it as such.
It goes by a variant on the same rule which guarantees anything suggested by MOSR will never come true.
Macbook Air?
WORST NAME EVER
There's no way Apple would ever call something that.
You've pretty much guaranteed that MacBook air is the name.
Any time someone says "there's no way Apple would ever call it <insert widely rumored name here>," Apple promptly named it as such.
It goes by a variant on the same rule which guarantees anything suggested by MOSR will never come true.
UberMac
Jan 1, 07:18 PM
To tell you the truth, unless some better sourced rumors surface I think it may very well be a disappointing keynote.:(
I hope I'm wrong.
So just because there are no rumors makes the Keynote a failure by default?! :eek: :p If you ask me, it makes it all the more exciting - we won't actually know what is coming for once!
Uber
I hope I'm wrong.
So just because there are no rumors makes the Keynote a failure by default?! :eek: :p If you ask me, it makes it all the more exciting - we won't actually know what is coming for once!
Uber
ipadder
Oct 24, 01:08 PM
hello everyone..i have bought a new ipod touch and i want a case to cover it and to provide protection from scratches.please can anyone suggest me.
How much do you want to spend?
How much do you want to spend?
ipadder
Oct 15, 10:20 PM
heres a couple of pics of the ebay case i bought for 5 bucks from the USA:
http://imgur.com/kA5eM.jpg
http://imgur.com/Mu3FK.jpg
lots of other colors too, got blue as well.
i didn't have my ipod w me at the time but i can confirm it fits as good as my other 15+ dollar cases
http://imgur.com/kA5eM.jpg
http://imgur.com/Mu3FK.jpg
lots of other colors too, got blue as well.
i didn't have my ipod w me at the time but i can confirm it fits as good as my other 15+ dollar cases
Cygnus311
Apr 2, 07:42 PM
I'll "believe" when they fix the currently unresolved and widespread quality control issues...light bleed on virtually every unit and blemishes, dents and scratches on units straight out of the box.
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
Of the 4 in my family, none of these issues exists. Try again?
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
Of the 4 in my family, none of these issues exists. Try again?
TuffLuffJimmy
Feb 22, 07:09 PM
Why do Americans harbor hate for diesel? I'm not very familiar with the differences between the fuels, other than gasoline is more refined.
milo
Nov 16, 10:45 AM
31% is a little disappointing for 2x the number of cores.
But you're missing the fact that the 8 cores are at a slower clock speed. If you compare 4 versus 8 at the same clock, you're looking at a respectable 47% improvement.
I almost NEVER use handbrake from an optical DVD. That makes no sense to me. Why would you do that? :confused:
To rip DVD's. Why add additional, unnecessary steps?
Apple REALLY needs to get apps like quicktime and iTunes to run on any number of cores. Even if they don't use multiple cores on a single file, it should be a piece of cake to get them to process multiple files at once. If I want to convert eight files, it should just run each conversion at once on a separate core - it's the equivalent of running eight copies of the app (which shouldn't be necessary).
I'd love to see them run Logic Pro - it supports four cores finally, and I'd like to know if they just upped it to four or if it goes beyond that.
But you're missing the fact that the 8 cores are at a slower clock speed. If you compare 4 versus 8 at the same clock, you're looking at a respectable 47% improvement.
I almost NEVER use handbrake from an optical DVD. That makes no sense to me. Why would you do that? :confused:
To rip DVD's. Why add additional, unnecessary steps?
Apple REALLY needs to get apps like quicktime and iTunes to run on any number of cores. Even if they don't use multiple cores on a single file, it should be a piece of cake to get them to process multiple files at once. If I want to convert eight files, it should just run each conversion at once on a separate core - it's the equivalent of running eight copies of the app (which shouldn't be necessary).
I'd love to see them run Logic Pro - it supports four cores finally, and I'd like to know if they just upped it to four or if it goes beyond that.
jakemikey
Aug 25, 11:51 AM
just a thought. I'd like to see at least one mini stay as cheap as possible. cheap minis are condusive to the "non desktop" or "inivisible" situations we all love them for.
creative things like
Home automation,
Home theater
automotive fun
art installations
internet radio.
cash registers
security systems
advertising kiosks(shoot me)
rhumba?
Every single one of those (except perhaps home theater) would be much better suited with a cheaper VIA mini-ITX system running Linux. The only reason you should ever choose Mac OS X over Linux is in *visible* setups, not *invisible* setups.
creative things like
Home automation,
Home theater
automotive fun
art installations
internet radio.
cash registers
security systems
advertising kiosks(shoot me)
rhumba?
Every single one of those (except perhaps home theater) would be much better suited with a cheaper VIA mini-ITX system running Linux. The only reason you should ever choose Mac OS X over Linux is in *visible* setups, not *invisible* setups.
BeefUK
Aug 24, 06:13 PM
I hope this means they'll update the Macbooks too, mac mini with Core 2 Duo and not in the macbook would be strange!!!
I can understand the macbook pro being updated on it's own but the mini???
I can understand the macbook pro being updated on it's own but the mini???
skunk
Mar 28, 11:43 AM
All I'm saying is that behind the scenes when you look at the facts, there's a different story and you can't take everything at face value...and you should know that about politicians too. I think some of you are "glad" that it's finally not purely lead by the US and this is like some "dream team" thing. But I'm just afraid that you are just in denial. :cool:What exactly are you trying to say? Iraq was a US war of choice, and Bush was fortunate to have an equally vainglorious partner-in-crime in Blair or he'd never have been able politically to do it. Afghanistan was also a US thing. Why would anybody else take a lead in those? Libya was a UN thing, and on Europe's border, so naturally the impetus came from Europe, and Europe is taking proportionately much more of the load.
Next you'll be saying that the US won WW1 and WW2.
Next you'll be saying that the US won WW1 and WW2.
twoodcc
Feb 17, 10:15 PM
That is too bad, I am trying to get ssh to work on one of my ubuntu boxes from wich I hope to be able to administer the other systems.
It's called Murphy's law - whatever can go wrong will go wrong... especially when you can't do anything about it.
Thanks. maybe I'll be 10 mil by the end of the month :D
thanks. i really can't figure out what happened.
good for you :)
hey, what ppd are you averaging for you mac pro and i7?
It's called Murphy's law - whatever can go wrong will go wrong... especially when you can't do anything about it.
Thanks. maybe I'll be 10 mil by the end of the month :D
thanks. i really can't figure out what happened.
good for you :)
hey, what ppd are you averaging for you mac pro and i7?
fall3n
Sep 1, 11:52 AM
I'm wondering if Apple would kill off the 17" if they did introduce a 23". I'm pretty sure now that the manufacturing cost difference between 17" and 20" is quite small.
I highly doubt they would killl it off. I think they'd drop the price on it which would make it even more desirable for standard consumers with a budget. Sort of a, why get the mini when I could just pay a bit more for the iMac 17" kind of thing.
I highly doubt they would killl it off. I think they'd drop the price on it which would make it even more desirable for standard consumers with a budget. Sort of a, why get the mini when I could just pay a bit more for the iMac 17" kind of thing.
SchneiderMan
Nov 24, 04:02 AM
I rented The Expendables. It's a pretty hard core, kick ass movie!
iJohnHenry
Mar 21, 06:24 PM
Chinese naval vessel in the Med,to apparently to extract Chinese workers from Libya (I thought they got them all out before the western nations)?
This is interesting, more for what it represents.
The Chinese have naval vessels available, around the World?
Some American's might be somewhat surprised at this revelation.
This is interesting, more for what it represents.
The Chinese have naval vessels available, around the World?
Some American's might be somewhat surprised at this revelation.
Rocketman
Nov 15, 09:46 AM
From what I am reading so far, the real benefit of 8 cores in the real world of a minority of applications being truly well threaded, is the ability to run 2-4 large complicated programs simultaneously, multiple instances of programs (some have talked about running 4 copies of handbrake), and multiple OS's simultaneously.
All those things also require vast amounts of memory as well, so a MacPro or X-serve is the only way to go now to addres 16GB+.
Apple has always had memory crippled computers on the low end. If they could do ONE thing in the coming 64 bit world, I would ask them to make the motherboards at least be able to address FUTURE RAM options as the cost always drops rapidly and the requirements always seem to be predominantly ram based.
Rocketman
All those things also require vast amounts of memory as well, so a MacPro or X-serve is the only way to go now to addres 16GB+.
Apple has always had memory crippled computers on the low end. If they could do ONE thing in the coming 64 bit world, I would ask them to make the motherboards at least be able to address FUTURE RAM options as the cost always drops rapidly and the requirements always seem to be predominantly ram based.
Rocketman
CalBoy
Mar 20, 02:15 PM
For the sake of consistency with the App Store and its censorship policies, it should be removed for containing offensive, disgusting content.
I don't think it should be removed, and I don't think many other apps that have been removed should be removed. I just think Apple should censor consistently or not censor at all.
I agree.
I think that if the App Store wasn't regulated, this app would clearly have standing to be in there, as would an app that was misogynistic, anti-semitic, or pro-flatulence.
However, Apple (and Steve Jobs in particular) has said that the App Store is meant to "protect" people from certain things (namely porn). Since Apple has the right to determine what goes into its store, I think it's fair to ask that an app that is more offensive than porn (most people disagree with this type of "therapy" and approve of homosexuality compared to the level of disagreement there is with porn) should be similarly removed from the App Store.
I think there's also a Pandora's Box in that if this App delves into trying to "cure" people of some non-existent psychosis, could Apple be guilty of aiding and abetting the practice of medicine/psychology without a license? I'm not saying there's an answer to this, but it certainly does leave the door open to more problems.
I don't think it should be removed, and I don't think many other apps that have been removed should be removed. I just think Apple should censor consistently or not censor at all.
I agree.
I think that if the App Store wasn't regulated, this app would clearly have standing to be in there, as would an app that was misogynistic, anti-semitic, or pro-flatulence.
However, Apple (and Steve Jobs in particular) has said that the App Store is meant to "protect" people from certain things (namely porn). Since Apple has the right to determine what goes into its store, I think it's fair to ask that an app that is more offensive than porn (most people disagree with this type of "therapy" and approve of homosexuality compared to the level of disagreement there is with porn) should be similarly removed from the App Store.
I think there's also a Pandora's Box in that if this App delves into trying to "cure" people of some non-existent psychosis, could Apple be guilty of aiding and abetting the practice of medicine/psychology without a license? I'm not saying there's an answer to this, but it certainly does leave the door open to more problems.
jxyama
Mar 19, 05:17 PM
jxyama, I think you have something there... last nite my wife (who is computer ignorant) asks whether I have a MAC or a PC. Turns out her best friend (newbie PC user for about 1 year) has convinced her that MACs aren't as good. My wife or her friend have never even used one but they 'KNOW' they are inferior to MACs. Now if either of them were to have to make a buying decision it's not hard to imagine what they'll walk out the store with.
How could any new user have a different opinion unless they happen to know a MAC user. Only 2% use MACs so they're unlikely to be exposed to one, PC users (98%) will bad mouth a MAC, and Apples advertising, while award winning does very little to enlighten people about the product.
i agree with you.
the problem with the current computer market is that it's dominated by two kind of uses, neither of which apple excels at: enterprise and gaming.
for enterprise users, innovation and usability (beyond certain degree) are secondary. what they need is computers to get the job done for as cheap as possible - because computer is purely a commodity tool. as far as corporations are concerned, there is no reason to step away from windows because it has been getting the job done and it is the cheapest options available. now, this is changing slightly recently because of the onslaught of malicious windows virus. some corporations are starting to realize that the cost of hiring windows admin and lost productivity due to these virus are starting to make windows more expensive. because they have absolutely no brand attachment, corporations that deem Macs to be more cost effective overall than windows PCs will have absolutely no problem switching. (however, they will have no problem pursuing other options if something better than Macs come out too.)
because many people work for corporations, them and their families will be most familiar with windows PCs. Macs are seen as some abnormality, and expensive. ("there's only so much a computer can do and windows does it fine, so why bother paying more for Macs?")
what they fail to see (IMO) is that Macs can do a lot more, far more easily. but it will take time for those people to be convinced that computers can really do more than what they've seen windows PCs do and it really is worth more $$$.
gaming - this is tough for apple. in this segment, user base is everything. because it's so technologically driven, R&D money is much better spent on improving the technology rather than adapting them to work on Macs...
How could any new user have a different opinion unless they happen to know a MAC user. Only 2% use MACs so they're unlikely to be exposed to one, PC users (98%) will bad mouth a MAC, and Apples advertising, while award winning does very little to enlighten people about the product.
i agree with you.
the problem with the current computer market is that it's dominated by two kind of uses, neither of which apple excels at: enterprise and gaming.
for enterprise users, innovation and usability (beyond certain degree) are secondary. what they need is computers to get the job done for as cheap as possible - because computer is purely a commodity tool. as far as corporations are concerned, there is no reason to step away from windows because it has been getting the job done and it is the cheapest options available. now, this is changing slightly recently because of the onslaught of malicious windows virus. some corporations are starting to realize that the cost of hiring windows admin and lost productivity due to these virus are starting to make windows more expensive. because they have absolutely no brand attachment, corporations that deem Macs to be more cost effective overall than windows PCs will have absolutely no problem switching. (however, they will have no problem pursuing other options if something better than Macs come out too.)
because many people work for corporations, them and their families will be most familiar with windows PCs. Macs are seen as some abnormality, and expensive. ("there's only so much a computer can do and windows does it fine, so why bother paying more for Macs?")
what they fail to see (IMO) is that Macs can do a lot more, far more easily. but it will take time for those people to be convinced that computers can really do more than what they've seen windows PCs do and it really is worth more $$$.
gaming - this is tough for apple. in this segment, user base is everything. because it's so technologically driven, R&D money is much better spent on improving the technology rather than adapting them to work on Macs...
No comments:
Post a Comment