hynke
Apr 27, 06:17 AM
As far as I know the "App Store" trademark hasn't been granted to Apple yet, therefore Amazon can use it for now. On the other hand Apple just cannot sit there and do nothing about it, they must deffend the trademark they are trying to register even if it hasn't been registered yet.
I also have to admit that it surely is a very good publicity stunt by Amazon. Their new "Appstore" is now all over the web.
I also have to admit that it surely is a very good publicity stunt by Amazon. Their new "Appstore" is now all over the web.
kretzy
Aug 7, 03:52 AM
Any Aussies staying up? I think i will have to.
I'm still considering my options. I'd like to stay up but it starts around 3am here and I have to be at uni by 10am and Tuesdays are my fullest day. I might try to get to sleep earlier than usual around 12 and then get up for it.
Stupid timezones.
I'm still considering my options. I'd like to stay up but it starts around 3am here and I have to be at uni by 10am and Tuesdays are my fullest day. I might try to get to sleep earlier than usual around 12 and then get up for it.
Stupid timezones.
Multimedia
Sep 7, 11:10 AM
Now that iMac is Core 2 Duo, the Academic $899 17" iMac is a mini killer config.Except that I want to use my 24" monitor...Exactly. And because the 17" iMac Supports External up to 1920 x 1200 24" Second Monitor Spanning you not only can, you gain the benefit of an additional 1440 x 900 desktop space almost for FREE @ $899. It's still only Intel 950 IG, but it's cheap and doable like from the mini & MacBooks only with 3.5" SATA HD inside etc etc. It's a miracle. :eek:
FleurDuMal
Jan 1, 07:09 PM
http://images.apple.com/home/2007/images/welcome2007_20070101.jpg
This year better be good!
It's all gone a bit 1984.
"The first 30 years were just the beginning.............NOW WE TAKE CONTROL!"
*cue troops blocking off all transport routes and closing down all forms of communication as Steve Jobs consolidates power*
The next millenia will belong to the racially pure nerdy 30-something urban professional.
Sorry, I've just read "The Plot Against America" :o
This year better be good!
It's all gone a bit 1984.
"The first 30 years were just the beginning.............NOW WE TAKE CONTROL!"
*cue troops blocking off all transport routes and closing down all forms of communication as Steve Jobs consolidates power*
The next millenia will belong to the racially pure nerdy 30-something urban professional.
Sorry, I've just read "The Plot Against America" :o
vaderhater245
Feb 27, 10:09 PM
Finishing my graphic design degree this May. The large intuos might get replaced by a cintiq very soon.
javaguy
Dec 27, 10:09 PM
An obvious one, but not one that I see mentioned:
justin bieber 2011 haircut
+of+justin+ieber+2011
Justin+ieber+haircut+
To, justin-ieber
justin bieber 2011 new haircut
justin bieber 2011 new haircut
Talk part february , february possible new dating selenajustin bieber grammys In to ellen pm by over a number of lovefeb To ellen charity justin hairstyles
justin bieber haircut 2011
justin bieber haircut 2011
JUSTIN BIEBER HAIRSTYLE 2011
justin bieber pictures 2011
haircut on ellen, Selena
Justin Bieber new hairstyle
andrew.gw
Apr 3, 08:37 PM
I actually hate FS mode. But I dont see much sense in hiding the address bar, an often used feature of a browser.
I personally us shortcuts to interact with the address bar, I don't want a delay in my interaction if it is hidden.
It doesn't matter though, I hate FS mode and I am absurd.
It should be an option, at least. You can hide the toolbar in windowed mode, so you should be able to in fullscreen; I can't see Apple leaving it in its current implementation.
I personally us shortcuts to interact with the address bar, I don't want a delay in my interaction if it is hidden.
It doesn't matter though, I hate FS mode and I am absurd.
It should be an option, at least. You can hide the toolbar in windowed mode, so you should be able to in fullscreen; I can't see Apple leaving it in its current implementation.
DoFoT9
May 8, 03:22 AM
ive completely forgotten about this.. i wanna do it but i dont want my baby imac over heating :(
QCassidy352
Sep 20, 08:18 PM
Having now had an iphone 4 for a month, I consider this the most overblown problem I've ever come across. Yes, I can lose bars if I don't have a case and hold it a certain way while in a bad coverage area. I can do that on my 3GS and bb curve, too. Yes, I lose more bars with the iphone 4 than those phones. But again, only with no case and holding it a certain way, in a low coverage area. So I move my finger a quarter inch.
Who. freaking. cares.
Honestly, people are so worried about the principle of the matter (I shouldn't have to use a case! I shouldn't have to change how I hold it!) that they've completely missed whether it actually really makes for a worse experience. For me, it absolutely does not.
I also still don't get how CR can give it the highest overall rating and not recommend it.
Who. freaking. cares.
Honestly, people are so worried about the principle of the matter (I shouldn't have to use a case! I shouldn't have to change how I hold it!) that they've completely missed whether it actually really makes for a worse experience. For me, it absolutely does not.
I also still don't get how CR can give it the highest overall rating and not recommend it.
twoodcc
Apr 16, 09:07 PM
congrats to SciFrog for 6 million points! (with MR team)
generik
Sep 6, 05:10 PM
Ah, I misunderstood. Well, it shouldn't be a surprise. At some point even the $599 mini will have a chip faster than yours. That's just the way things go.
There's a good reason apple didn't go Core2 on the mini...it would make it too close to the new minitower they'll be announcing soon!
Good thinking! That's the spirit?
There's a good reason apple didn't go Core2 on the mini...it would make it too close to the new minitower they'll be announcing soon!
Good thinking! That's the spirit?
JFreak
Jul 14, 12:46 AM
Maybe if there was more media available in blue-ray format, I would be more excited.
There will be more media once there are more players, and there will be more players once there is more media. Which goes first? Players, naturally. Apple and the rest of the industry will just have to begin selling the players, and then the content will follow. Very soon I'd guess. The new Blu-Ray media can be sold at premium, so I think there will be a lot of discs to buy once certain threshold of players have been installed.
There will be more media once there are more players, and there will be more players once there is more media. Which goes first? Players, naturally. Apple and the rest of the industry will just have to begin selling the players, and then the content will follow. Very soon I'd guess. The new Blu-Ray media can be sold at premium, so I think there will be a lot of discs to buy once certain threshold of players have been installed.
jav6454
Mar 24, 02:02 PM
But the GPU still has to decode what was sent and put it on the screen, which is why I asked if the TB itself can do the encoding. If it can how much overhead will that add (again as it has to happen over the PCIe side)?
Or can you send graphics information over DP that still needs to be processed, ie raw frames?
The GPU can do that, no need for CPU. The CPU is just there to tell the GPU what to crunch assuming no FLAGS were thrown regarding a particular DRM-protected data.
Thunderbolt is just the transmission protocol, there is no actual decode or encode besides what is hard wired at the ports.
Or can you send graphics information over DP that still needs to be processed, ie raw frames?
The GPU can do that, no need for CPU. The CPU is just there to tell the GPU what to crunch assuming no FLAGS were thrown regarding a particular DRM-protected data.
Thunderbolt is just the transmission protocol, there is no actual decode or encode besides what is hard wired at the ports.
Earendil
Nov 28, 10:32 AM
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs?
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
Rodimus Prime
Apr 20, 10:33 PM
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Umm porsche not exactly a valid argument of a car and that falls in the sports car catigory. Complete different field.
As for the clutchs 300k on a original clutch is pretty far unless you do heavy high way miles there.
Going heavy city lets see I had to replace the clutch in my old car at around 95k. My dad replaced the clutch in is Honda at 110k. Numbers I have been reading off the net about my current car clutches are going at 90-120k range. Now it does depend on driving. You are not going to find mean 300k on a original clutch. 100k is more the norm. Big time with city miles on it.
Also my car manual cost me more about 1000 bucks more but at it is a higher model as the model right below it is auto only. Manuals are being mostly reduced to sporter car lines/models now days leaving autos for everything else.
Yes they have different gear ratios comparing the 2 but for MPG sorry Manuals are losing out. They can not compete with CVS, computer controlled shifting and now adding in extra gears. Those factors are just adding up against Manuals and they can not keep up. Manuals are limited to human timing which losses to computer timing. And the shifting timing is not the speed the shift is done but at what RPM are at the given load. Computers can adjust to getting best MPG at a given load demand far better than a human which means they have better MPG.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Umm porsche not exactly a valid argument of a car and that falls in the sports car catigory. Complete different field.
As for the clutchs 300k on a original clutch is pretty far unless you do heavy high way miles there.
Going heavy city lets see I had to replace the clutch in my old car at around 95k. My dad replaced the clutch in is Honda at 110k. Numbers I have been reading off the net about my current car clutches are going at 90-120k range. Now it does depend on driving. You are not going to find mean 300k on a original clutch. 100k is more the norm. Big time with city miles on it.
Also my car manual cost me more about 1000 bucks more but at it is a higher model as the model right below it is auto only. Manuals are being mostly reduced to sporter car lines/models now days leaving autos for everything else.
Yes they have different gear ratios comparing the 2 but for MPG sorry Manuals are losing out. They can not compete with CVS, computer controlled shifting and now adding in extra gears. Those factors are just adding up against Manuals and they can not keep up. Manuals are limited to human timing which losses to computer timing. And the shifting timing is not the speed the shift is done but at what RPM are at the given load. Computers can adjust to getting best MPG at a given load demand far better than a human which means they have better MPG.
Lord Blackadder
Feb 23, 12:44 PM
It's funny because neither GM nor Ford in Europe use their own Diesel engines, instead GM use Fiat engines and Ford use a Peugeot-Citroen engine.
Wonder if this will be the case in this? Chevy in Europe is a very cheap and nasty brand of car, much like Kia (they are re-branded Daewoo's).
The current Cruze is a "world car", but if you plow through the marketing jibberish it appears that the car was engineered mostly by Daewoo with help from Opel. It's being built in Russia, China, South Korea and the USA (Ohio).
The diesel is an Italian (VM Motori) design, and on paper the numbers are pretty good: 150hp and 240 ft-lbs from a 2.0L I4. It's a common rail direct injection turbosiesel.
IMO European manufacturers have had much longer to perfect the technology (i.e. Common Rail Injected Diesel) so GM are up against it here.
The beauty of this move for GM is that the car is already being built in this configuration everywhere except in the US, so minimal design work needs to be done - all that is required is to get the diesel federalized (made US emissions-legal), and that will probably only involve a few small modifications.
So when will automakers sell a compact pickup with a 2 liter diesel in the US? I want a diesel pick up. But I don't want a behemoth that requires a ladder to enter and hogs 2/3 of a 2 car garage.:p
I prefer diesel in a work truck for three reasons: torque, torque and torque.
We almost got such a truck (http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2009/08/taj-mahauler-we-drive-the-mahindra-diesel-pik-up.html), but the whole project fizzled (http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/10/report-mahindra-diesel-pickup-truck-launch-in-us-indefinitely-delayed.html).
I don't see any similar vehicle coming to the US soon. For now, if you want a small diesel pickup you either have to buy an old 1970s-1980s Japanese pickup (a few were made as diesels) or do-it-yourself (http://vpizza.org/~jmeehan/toyotadiesel/).
Wonder if this will be the case in this? Chevy in Europe is a very cheap and nasty brand of car, much like Kia (they are re-branded Daewoo's).
The current Cruze is a "world car", but if you plow through the marketing jibberish it appears that the car was engineered mostly by Daewoo with help from Opel. It's being built in Russia, China, South Korea and the USA (Ohio).
The diesel is an Italian (VM Motori) design, and on paper the numbers are pretty good: 150hp and 240 ft-lbs from a 2.0L I4. It's a common rail direct injection turbosiesel.
IMO European manufacturers have had much longer to perfect the technology (i.e. Common Rail Injected Diesel) so GM are up against it here.
The beauty of this move for GM is that the car is already being built in this configuration everywhere except in the US, so minimal design work needs to be done - all that is required is to get the diesel federalized (made US emissions-legal), and that will probably only involve a few small modifications.
So when will automakers sell a compact pickup with a 2 liter diesel in the US? I want a diesel pick up. But I don't want a behemoth that requires a ladder to enter and hogs 2/3 of a 2 car garage.:p
I prefer diesel in a work truck for three reasons: torque, torque and torque.
We almost got such a truck (http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2009/08/taj-mahauler-we-drive-the-mahindra-diesel-pik-up.html), but the whole project fizzled (http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/10/report-mahindra-diesel-pickup-truck-launch-in-us-indefinitely-delayed.html).
I don't see any similar vehicle coming to the US soon. For now, if you want a small diesel pickup you either have to buy an old 1970s-1980s Japanese pickup (a few were made as diesels) or do-it-yourself (http://vpizza.org/~jmeehan/toyotadiesel/).
Benguitar
Nov 25, 11:18 PM
^^^^^Could I recommend a case for that?
:D
/facepalm
He's pretty tough on stuff, That's why I didn't get him a nano because it has a screen.
I wish I could find a pelican for a shuffle.. :p
Seriously though, Stop, I don't wanna get banned for spamming this thread.
:D
/facepalm
He's pretty tough on stuff, That's why I didn't get him a nano because it has a screen.
I wish I could find a pelican for a shuffle.. :p
Seriously though, Stop, I don't wanna get banned for spamming this thread.
sineplex
Sep 28, 01:41 AM
My dermashot case came in on Friday.. been using it since.
My initial thoughts - this case looks cheap and has a loose feel.
My thoughts now - the case has a nice style and even though it is not as snug as it should be, it fits fine. It has not fallen off at all and has a real nice feel too. However, the included screen protector was junk. Had way too many bubbles. Even after applying many times, that didn't help. I now like the grip of the case. I also like how the case comes up around the menu button.
Overall, I'm very satisfied with it. For $20 with free shipping, it was a decent deal. The case also comes with a little stand that holds the iPod horizontally (not vertically at all), so you can watch movies and not have to hold it. It's a nice little added feature.
Hope this helps others who are on the fence.. ;)
Bill
Thanks for that Bill, I'm waiting for my incipio case to be delivered. I guess I'll get the SGP screen protector instead.
My initial thoughts - this case looks cheap and has a loose feel.
My thoughts now - the case has a nice style and even though it is not as snug as it should be, it fits fine. It has not fallen off at all and has a real nice feel too. However, the included screen protector was junk. Had way too many bubbles. Even after applying many times, that didn't help. I now like the grip of the case. I also like how the case comes up around the menu button.
Overall, I'm very satisfied with it. For $20 with free shipping, it was a decent deal. The case also comes with a little stand that holds the iPod horizontally (not vertically at all), so you can watch movies and not have to hold it. It's a nice little added feature.
Hope this helps others who are on the fence.. ;)
Bill
Thanks for that Bill, I'm waiting for my incipio case to be delivered. I guess I'll get the SGP screen protector instead.
EHUnlucky7x9@ao
Apr 21, 11:32 AM
So...this guy Levinson...he spends all his time breaking down all the data and info in iOS...and then writes a book about all the locations of these files and how to manipulate them?....and he complains how people may easily get hacked?
Hmm... I'm missing something here...
How many everyday people will stop and dissect the software to create destruction and havoc? 99% of people in the world are too busy being self-absorbed and being on the move.
Hmm... I'm missing something here...
How many everyday people will stop and dissect the software to create destruction and havoc? 99% of people in the world are too busy being self-absorbed and being on the move.
thejazzman10
Mar 19, 07:20 PM
im not really a big fan of that kind of TV-box stuff, seems kinda pointless :rolleyes:
Small White Car
Apr 12, 09:14 PM
Ok, so the text update says the screenshot is 'sexy.'
Well, I'm sold!
Well, I'm sold!
RayLancer
Sep 30, 03:29 PM
what do u mean watermarks? do u have a pic?
i was also considering buying from the ebay seller ashophone
the clear gel cases
anyone seen any cases like the grip vue solid colors on ebay?
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/ashopone/Ipod-touch4-Soft-8x1.jpg
I got the clear one. I don't know if the inside was was matte or not. Took 2 days off an ebay seller.
i was also considering buying from the ebay seller ashophone
the clear gel cases
anyone seen any cases like the grip vue solid colors on ebay?
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/ashopone/Ipod-touch4-Soft-8x1.jpg
I got the clear one. I don't know if the inside was was matte or not. Took 2 days off an ebay seller.
Multimedia
Aug 31, 08:19 PM
Let's hope that those specs aren't the final ones. That they're just to clear inventory.
I'm hoping for Merom based mac minis.. Merom costs the same so why not ?LIMITED SUPPLY of Merom for the first few months. mini will be the last to get C2D probably in November. But you've gotta give kudos to Apple for adopting the Merom Spec Yonahs into the mini right away. This way the switch to Merom in mini can be almost silent with no disruption to the flow of minis to the market.
I'm hoping for Merom based mac minis.. Merom costs the same so why not ?LIMITED SUPPLY of Merom for the first few months. mini will be the last to get C2D probably in November. But you've gotta give kudos to Apple for adopting the Merom Spec Yonahs into the mini right away. This way the switch to Merom in mini can be almost silent with no disruption to the flow of minis to the market.
Macnoviz
Jul 18, 06:02 AM
I was trying to avoid the whining, but now that you bring it up... when is apple going to bring the video content to other coutries?
In Belgium, we were promised video downloads in 2006
Yeah, if it's $9.99 to rent, it's going to fail. $1.99, might be worth it. I'm sure a lot of people will be happy, then a lot of people will complain. Both with have good points, but the rest of us won't care.
Yeah, $2 seems right for a movie (in twisted Apple calculations this is 2,49 euros) I normally watch movies only once, so rental would be better, especially with a modest hard drive
We can always hope that they also want to make business outside US.
Amen
Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.
The only way it can work is if iTunes waits until after all the channels have aired it first. In the UK you'd find 24 showing up on something like E4, then Channel 4, then some of the scrubbers like Channel 5 or Bravo would likely have a deal, then it could show up on iTunes. By then the show is so old that there's no point. Hence, I imagine, why we don't get iTunes TV Shows here.
The shows would probably be different in the international stores, like here in Belgium we will have to split, one for Flanders (Dutch subtitles, although a lot of people also know English, like me) and one for Wallon (French dubbing/subtitles)
And there would probably be an offer of Belgian TV shows, along with international ones that have already aired here. I do hope we will have the chance to buy some more shows that, won't come out in Belgium, at least not on DVD.
In Belgium, we were promised video downloads in 2006
Yeah, if it's $9.99 to rent, it's going to fail. $1.99, might be worth it. I'm sure a lot of people will be happy, then a lot of people will complain. Both with have good points, but the rest of us won't care.
Yeah, $2 seems right for a movie (in twisted Apple calculations this is 2,49 euros) I normally watch movies only once, so rental would be better, especially with a modest hard drive
We can always hope that they also want to make business outside US.
Amen
Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.
The only way it can work is if iTunes waits until after all the channels have aired it first. In the UK you'd find 24 showing up on something like E4, then Channel 4, then some of the scrubbers like Channel 5 or Bravo would likely have a deal, then it could show up on iTunes. By then the show is so old that there's no point. Hence, I imagine, why we don't get iTunes TV Shows here.
The shows would probably be different in the international stores, like here in Belgium we will have to split, one for Flanders (Dutch subtitles, although a lot of people also know English, like me) and one for Wallon (French dubbing/subtitles)
And there would probably be an offer of Belgian TV shows, along with international ones that have already aired here. I do hope we will have the chance to buy some more shows that, won't come out in Belgium, at least not on DVD.
No comments:
Post a Comment