Nekbeth
Apr 25, 03:28 PM
I declared timer as an instance method:
- (IBAction) cancelTime: (id) sender;
- (void) cancelIt:(NSTimer*) timer;
@end
mmm.. I think I see where this comes from. I had a similar method and it was declared in inside the (IBAction) method, like this:
lack and white women female
Posted in Black amp; White,
Black amp; White, Photography
lack and white photography
Black and White Lowrider Arte
Sexy Female Form Photography
lack and white photography
Visit josh hamilton blog for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
- (IBAction) cancelTime: (id) sender;
- (void) cancelIt:(NSTimer*) timer;
@end
mmm.. I think I see where this comes from. I had a similar method and it was declared in inside the (IBAction) method, like this:
Arcus
May 2, 09:35 AM
no thanks.
y u no like bugfixes?
y u no like bugfixes?
maclaptop
Apr 29, 02:50 PM
SUPER iMACHINE - ULTRA TRANSFORMER
Upon closer inspection I noticed my new MBP has a removable display.
Unlocked by Lion it doubles as an Ipad.
Shrink it in the microwave & it's an iPhone!
I just knew there was a reason to marry iOS & OS X.
Apple is so damn brilliant.
Be the envy of every kid on your block !
Upon closer inspection I noticed my new MBP has a removable display.
Unlocked by Lion it doubles as an Ipad.
Shrink it in the microwave & it's an iPhone!
I just knew there was a reason to marry iOS & OS X.
Apple is so damn brilliant.
Be the envy of every kid on your block !
JForestZ34
Mar 17, 04:20 PM
The poor kid simply hit the "cash" button before typing in the total. I used to work at BB (now an attorney), so I feel sorry for the kid. The OP committed retail theft by knowingly leaving the store with a product he didn't pay full value for (differentiated from receiving a computer by mistake because of the intent requirement). If the kid is not fired he will surely be written up and never able to move upward in the company to get things like health insurance and other benefits. What's worse is that this is the time of the year when BB takes on a lot of new hires.
It's sad to see people surprised at "morality police" coming out against the OP. He committed a freaking crime! Worse, he thinks he deserved to do it because he was a good boy and didnt steal the lady's iPhone earlier...
I doubt it will do any good, but I'll do my part and forward this thread to some friends at BB corporate. I'm sure they could track down the receipt and let the kids gm know why his register was off by that amount and that it wasn't internal theft. They'd also give the GM OP's info from his rz card, which could be amusing... :)
Good luck.. But it won't do any good... Nice try though....
James
It's sad to see people surprised at "morality police" coming out against the OP. He committed a freaking crime! Worse, he thinks he deserved to do it because he was a good boy and didnt steal the lady's iPhone earlier...
I doubt it will do any good, but I'll do my part and forward this thread to some friends at BB corporate. I'm sure they could track down the receipt and let the kids gm know why his register was off by that amount and that it wasn't internal theft. They'd also give the GM OP's info from his rz card, which could be amusing... :)
Good luck.. But it won't do any good... Nice try though....
James
Akme
Apr 9, 10:24 AM
Both companies are overly focused on shoehorning their mobile experiences into their desktop operating systems. Both Lion and Windows 8 will see some new features, however, I think (for the most part) they will be releases with a view to long-term unification between mobile and desktop, rather than being focused on an extensive list of features.
While some people are unhappy with some of the steps that Apple have taken in 10.7 toward this, and are judging the new feature list as being somewhat limited, I believe Microsoft will do much of the same for Windows 8.
Windows 7 is to Vista as Snow Leopard is to Leopard. As a result, I believe their next releases will follow a similar trajectory.
While some people are unhappy with some of the steps that Apple have taken in 10.7 toward this, and are judging the new feature list as being somewhat limited, I believe Microsoft will do much of the same for Windows 8.
Windows 7 is to Vista as Snow Leopard is to Leopard. As a result, I believe their next releases will follow a similar trajectory.
ChazUK
Apr 5, 03:53 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRI40) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
As a showcase of ads it can't be bad can it? I bet it'll be useful to some out there and is good advertising for the iAd service.
This app isn't hurting anyone.
As a showcase of ads it can't be bad can it? I bet it'll be useful to some out there and is good advertising for the iAd service.
This app isn't hurting anyone.
Platform
Sep 26, 07:36 AM
Great news, now put the update up on the server...I want it :D
Fredstar
Sep 8, 09:22 AM
Love Kanye, good performance, wrong crowd.
Portrait of Young Woman
lack and white photography
Black and White Lowrider Arte
Black and White Photography
Black amp; White, Photography
lack and white photography
lack and white photography
Black And White Photography
stock photo : Woman with nose
lack and white pictures of
Black and White Headshot of
Source URL: http://joshhamiltonblog.blogspot.com/2011/05/black-and-white-photography-women.htmllukenorris
Jan 11, 11:53 PM
I wonder if this device turns off movie projectors?
LUKE
LUKE
CanadaRAM
Jan 12, 12:44 AM
Wow, I just watched the keynote and my god this guy is hard to stand....
i totally agree with you. "aint that just cool?" "probably the best photo management program in the world" he's was pretty hard to stand.
But you watched. Again.
Q.E.D.
i totally agree with you. "aint that just cool?" "probably the best photo management program in the world" he's was pretty hard to stand.
But you watched. Again.
Q.E.D.
tingly
Nov 24, 02:59 AM
for next year's googlers:
Macs
Starting at $1,099. Save $101. MacBook
Starting at $999. Save $101. iMac
iPods
Starting at $149. Save up to $31 plus free laser engraving. iPod nano
Starting at $249. Save up to $31 plus free laser engraving. iPod
Software
$358, save $41.95, Office 2004 for Mac Standard Edition
$68, save $31.95, .Mac
$68, save $11.95, Parallels Desktop for Mac
$68, save $21.95, Adobe Photoshop Elements 4.0
$38, save $11.95, The Sims 2
$38, save $11.95, Call of Duty 2
$38, save $11.95, Sid Meier's Civilization IV
Extras
$238, save $61.95, Sonic Impact VIDEO-55
$128, save $21.95, Canon PIXMA mini260 Photo Printer
$88, save $41.00, AirPort Express Base Station
$58, save $11.00, Apple wireless Mighty Mouse
$48, save $21.95, Belkin TuneTalk Stereo
$38, save $11.00, iPod Radio Remote
$24, save $5.00, Nike + iPod Sport Kit
Speakers
$298, save $51.00, iPod Hi-Fi
$98, save $31.95, Logitech AudioStation Express
Audio
$78, save $21.95, M-Audio Keystation 49e USB Midi Keyboard
$58, save $21.95, JBL Creature II Speakers
$18, save $6.95, Sony Personal Speakers SRS-P11Q
Car Audio
$58, save $21.95, Kensington Digital FM Transmitter/Auto Charger
$58, save $21.95, Kensington RDS FM Transmitter/Car Charger for iPod
$14, save $5.95, Sony CPA-9C Car Cassette Adapter (Bought it from apple.com a week ago. d'oh!)
Headphones
$398, save $101.95, Shure E500PTH Sound Isolating Earphone
$398, save $101.95, Shure E5C Sound Isolating Earphones
$238, save $61.95, Shure E4C Sound Isolating Earphones
$138, save $41.95, Shure E3C Sound Isolating Earphones
$78, save $21.95, Shure E2C Sound Isolating Earphones
$48, save $11.95, Sennheiser PX100 Headphones
$24, save $5.00, Apple iPod Earphones
Bags
$58, save $41.95, Incase Ripstop Backpack
$48, save $21.95, Brenthaven Metro Bag
$28, save $11.95, STM Alley 13" Shoulder Bag
$24, save $5.95, Incase Neoprene Sleeve
Cases
$24, save $5.00, Apple iPod nano Armband
$24, save $10.95, iSkin eVo3 Case for 30GB iPod
$24, save $10.95, iSkin eVo3 Case for 60GB & 80GB iPod
$18, save $11.00, Nike + Sport Armband
$18, save $11.95, Incase Sports Case with Armband for iPod nano
$18, save $11.95, XtremeMac SportWrap for iPod
$18, save $6.95, Agent 18 VideoShield for 30GB iPod
$18, save $6.95, Agent 18 VideoShield for 60GB & 80GB iPod
Macs
Starting at $1,099. Save $101. MacBook
Starting at $999. Save $101. iMac
iPods
Starting at $149. Save up to $31 plus free laser engraving. iPod nano
Starting at $249. Save up to $31 plus free laser engraving. iPod
Software
$358, save $41.95, Office 2004 for Mac Standard Edition
$68, save $31.95, .Mac
$68, save $11.95, Parallels Desktop for Mac
$68, save $21.95, Adobe Photoshop Elements 4.0
$38, save $11.95, The Sims 2
$38, save $11.95, Call of Duty 2
$38, save $11.95, Sid Meier's Civilization IV
Extras
$238, save $61.95, Sonic Impact VIDEO-55
$128, save $21.95, Canon PIXMA mini260 Photo Printer
$88, save $41.00, AirPort Express Base Station
$58, save $11.00, Apple wireless Mighty Mouse
$48, save $21.95, Belkin TuneTalk Stereo
$38, save $11.00, iPod Radio Remote
$24, save $5.00, Nike + iPod Sport Kit
Speakers
$298, save $51.00, iPod Hi-Fi
$98, save $31.95, Logitech AudioStation Express
Audio
$78, save $21.95, M-Audio Keystation 49e USB Midi Keyboard
$58, save $21.95, JBL Creature II Speakers
$18, save $6.95, Sony Personal Speakers SRS-P11Q
Car Audio
$58, save $21.95, Kensington Digital FM Transmitter/Auto Charger
$58, save $21.95, Kensington RDS FM Transmitter/Car Charger for iPod
$14, save $5.95, Sony CPA-9C Car Cassette Adapter (Bought it from apple.com a week ago. d'oh!)
Headphones
$398, save $101.95, Shure E500PTH Sound Isolating Earphone
$398, save $101.95, Shure E5C Sound Isolating Earphones
$238, save $61.95, Shure E4C Sound Isolating Earphones
$138, save $41.95, Shure E3C Sound Isolating Earphones
$78, save $21.95, Shure E2C Sound Isolating Earphones
$48, save $11.95, Sennheiser PX100 Headphones
$24, save $5.00, Apple iPod Earphones
Bags
$58, save $41.95, Incase Ripstop Backpack
$48, save $21.95, Brenthaven Metro Bag
$28, save $11.95, STM Alley 13" Shoulder Bag
$24, save $5.95, Incase Neoprene Sleeve
Cases
$24, save $5.00, Apple iPod nano Armband
$24, save $10.95, iSkin eVo3 Case for 30GB iPod
$24, save $10.95, iSkin eVo3 Case for 60GB & 80GB iPod
$18, save $11.00, Nike + Sport Armband
$18, save $11.95, Incase Sports Case with Armband for iPod nano
$18, save $11.95, XtremeMac SportWrap for iPod
$18, save $6.95, Agent 18 VideoShield for 30GB iPod
$18, save $6.95, Agent 18 VideoShield for 60GB & 80GB iPod
Consultant
Dec 23, 01:59 AM
4G is a lie. (Even CNN confirmed it).
About iPhone to verizon, maybe, maybe not.
Quote of the day. Fanned!!
Oh, sorry we can't fan here. .....
You can friend someone but it takes a few steps.
About iPhone to verizon, maybe, maybe not.
Quote of the day. Fanned!!
Oh, sorry we can't fan here. .....
You can friend someone but it takes a few steps.
Geckotek
Jan 1, 02:22 AM
My understanding is that AT&T is pretty far along in its upgrade from HPSA (3G) network to HPSA+ (faster 3G). They're doing this to maximize their existing investment in their infrastructure, and they should be able to employ LTE a little faster than Verizon has been, since LTE is a more streamlined upgrade from HPSA+. They claim that this is best for customers long-term, because when LTE (4G) coverage gives out, users can fall back on widespread HPSA+ coverage with similar performance. Whereas with Verizon, when you move out of an area with 4G coverage, you notice a HUGE drop in speed going to their ancient EV-DO technology.
Unless AT&T finally starts to upgrade their 2G network to HSPA or HSPA+, you're wrong. And Verizon's EV-DO network is still pretty speedy. It may be somewhat slower than AT&T's HSPA, but not as bad as people describe it in this forum.
Also, there is no difference what so ever in AT&T's deployment of LTE and Verizon's. LTE may have come from the same group that developed past GSM tech, but it is an entirely new tech and still requires new switches for both AT&T and Verizon. So no, AT&T will not be able to get LTE up faster than Verizon (except for the fact that AT&T will only cover part of their network if they continue their current pattern.)
Oh, and how is EV-DO ancient exactly? The current version is only about 2 years older than AT&T's WCDMA network.
FYI, I was getting about 500Kbps earlier today on my iPhone 4 here in Dallas. Not exactly lightning fast. Best I've ever seen is 3.12 Mbps and that was in a single test and wouldn't run that high consistently.
Unless AT&T finally starts to upgrade their 2G network to HSPA or HSPA+, you're wrong. And Verizon's EV-DO network is still pretty speedy. It may be somewhat slower than AT&T's HSPA, but not as bad as people describe it in this forum.
Also, there is no difference what so ever in AT&T's deployment of LTE and Verizon's. LTE may have come from the same group that developed past GSM tech, but it is an entirely new tech and still requires new switches for both AT&T and Verizon. So no, AT&T will not be able to get LTE up faster than Verizon (except for the fact that AT&T will only cover part of their network if they continue their current pattern.)
Oh, and how is EV-DO ancient exactly? The current version is only about 2 years older than AT&T's WCDMA network.
FYI, I was getting about 500Kbps earlier today on my iPhone 4 here in Dallas. Not exactly lightning fast. Best I've ever seen is 3.12 Mbps and that was in a single test and wouldn't run that high consistently.
-SD-
Apr 6, 01:08 PM
Just got it!
I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on it once you've had a chance to get comfortable with it.
:apple:
I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on it once you've had a chance to get comfortable with it.
:apple:
JoeG4
Mar 18, 07:49 PM
Hrm where do I go with this one.
The iPhone is a nice phone! It turned out that if I had the $285 necessary to buy an iPhone ($200 + $50 tax + 35 activation), I could get it on a monthly plan similar to what I just got my free G2 for.
I don't work, I'm a student.. and while that means I could probably live without a smartphone it was a $15/mo difference. I'm using a G5 I bought for $50, and my internet service costs me $15 a month (it's DSL too!).. heck even my tv service is rather cheap.
If I could've gotten an iPhone at the time, I would've. Right now? If Steve Jobs offered me a free iPhone in exchange for my G2? Hahah sure :D
I do have my beefs, I think iOS is kinda boring and iTunes is clunky as all get out, but i love the docks and the hardware is really nice.
That said, I really never thought I'd like having a hardware keyboard so much until I had one o_O Oh well. Everyone I know has an iPhone, bar 2 or 3 people. Most of them also have MacBook Pros :P
Yea so at the end of the day it sucks but I'll live with it. When I become an engineer I'll be able to afford all the shiny Apple stuff I want :D AND I don't feel like I'm having to "live with it".. shoot I've got like the 3rd nicest smartphone on the market and it didn't cost me a dime. Woot! (Well, it did cost $15 more a month!.. actually the iPhone would've also cost about $15-20 more a month, and that $285)
It's been an awesome phone though, no lag anywhere, it plays angry birds great, works great with music and internet, and I get 2 days of battery life solid. :)
The iPhone is a nice phone! It turned out that if I had the $285 necessary to buy an iPhone ($200 + $50 tax + 35 activation), I could get it on a monthly plan similar to what I just got my free G2 for.
I don't work, I'm a student.. and while that means I could probably live without a smartphone it was a $15/mo difference. I'm using a G5 I bought for $50, and my internet service costs me $15 a month (it's DSL too!).. heck even my tv service is rather cheap.
If I could've gotten an iPhone at the time, I would've. Right now? If Steve Jobs offered me a free iPhone in exchange for my G2? Hahah sure :D
I do have my beefs, I think iOS is kinda boring and iTunes is clunky as all get out, but i love the docks and the hardware is really nice.
That said, I really never thought I'd like having a hardware keyboard so much until I had one o_O Oh well. Everyone I know has an iPhone, bar 2 or 3 people. Most of them also have MacBook Pros :P
Yea so at the end of the day it sucks but I'll live with it. When I become an engineer I'll be able to afford all the shiny Apple stuff I want :D AND I don't feel like I'm having to "live with it".. shoot I've got like the 3rd nicest smartphone on the market and it didn't cost me a dime. Woot! (Well, it did cost $15 more a month!.. actually the iPhone would've also cost about $15-20 more a month, and that $285)
It's been an awesome phone though, no lag anywhere, it plays angry birds great, works great with music and internet, and I get 2 days of battery life solid. :)
EricNau
Apr 22, 02:51 AM
"Thanks" might work in a pure support form. But for news discussion, it makes little sense.
arn
Perhaps a "Relevant" button then.
Essentially just like Facebook's "Like" feature, then? People seem to like it on Facebook; would it be useful here?
arn
Perhaps a "Relevant" button then.
Essentially just like Facebook's "Like" feature, then? People seem to like it on Facebook; would it be useful here?
batitombo
Mar 25, 01:10 AM
Hmm, Happy B-day OS X
Quick shout out to NeXTSTEP the very father of OS X
Quick shout out to NeXTSTEP the very father of OS X
MorphingDragon
Apr 29, 07:58 PM
Context. Is. Everything.
Context is Legion.
All these months, and again you try to argue with me over what I meant. New Zealanders really have a problem with the concept of "I know better what I meant that you do and it was clearly posted had you followed the context".
I thought regulars long ago learned to stop taking me seriously? All I've been doing is borderline trolling since 2010. How is "So KDE4 is a bad 90s Linux Window Manager?" not an obvious troll comment? Of course its not, its an average modern window manager.
God you canadians are so serious about everything. ;):rolleyes:
Context is Legion.
All these months, and again you try to argue with me over what I meant. New Zealanders really have a problem with the concept of "I know better what I meant that you do and it was clearly posted had you followed the context".
I thought regulars long ago learned to stop taking me seriously? All I've been doing is borderline trolling since 2010. How is "So KDE4 is a bad 90s Linux Window Manager?" not an obvious troll comment? Of course its not, its an average modern window manager.
God you canadians are so serious about everything. ;):rolleyes:
charlituna
Dec 25, 02:56 PM
I don't buy the flash argument. Thats actually a pretty complicated subject...
Well yes, there's the whole "Adobe doesn't make Flash for the Mac, they make it for Windows and lazily port it" stuff. But that's actually part of the point. Apple values the user experience more than following the herd. So they leave out some crap port of Flash rather than include it because 'all other phones have Flash so we have to also, even if it sucks'
Now, can anyone please explain what the difference between 'true 4G' and LTE?
Is LTE something else entirely? Something that bridges the CDMA and GSM technologies, allowing CDMA phones to use chips, and chip-based phones to be compatible with CDMA networks?
My understanding is that LTE is a whole new language, totally different from both CDMA and GSM. So phones would be, for a time, dual chips.
As for the 'real 4g' and 'fake 4g' I've been told that it is not unlike the HD video issue that has cropped up thanks to folks like itunes and Amazon. They use 720p video which is high def when compared to standard def, but purists say that HD is 1080p/i or higher.
In the same way there is 4g in the sense of 4th generation which is an improvement over the 3rd generation. and 4g which is 4th generation AND a particular minimum level of speed etc. And so say the naysayers, many folks saying '4g' mean the former and not the latter.
Well yes, there's the whole "Adobe doesn't make Flash for the Mac, they make it for Windows and lazily port it" stuff. But that's actually part of the point. Apple values the user experience more than following the herd. So they leave out some crap port of Flash rather than include it because 'all other phones have Flash so we have to also, even if it sucks'
Now, can anyone please explain what the difference between 'true 4G' and LTE?
Is LTE something else entirely? Something that bridges the CDMA and GSM technologies, allowing CDMA phones to use chips, and chip-based phones to be compatible with CDMA networks?
My understanding is that LTE is a whole new language, totally different from both CDMA and GSM. So phones would be, for a time, dual chips.
As for the 'real 4g' and 'fake 4g' I've been told that it is not unlike the HD video issue that has cropped up thanks to folks like itunes and Amazon. They use 720p video which is high def when compared to standard def, but purists say that HD is 1080p/i or higher.
In the same way there is 4g in the sense of 4th generation which is an improvement over the 3rd generation. and 4g which is 4th generation AND a particular minimum level of speed etc. And so say the naysayers, many folks saying '4g' mean the former and not the latter.
Lord Blackadder
Jul 28, 12:54 PM
Series-Hybrids have no need for transmissions at all, the wheels are driven by electric motors only.
This is a new type, therefore high price until economies of scale kick in.
True on the economies of scale bit - although the batteries are always going to be pricey.
I keep hammering the same point here, but the Volt would see a quite significant fuel economy boost by switching to a diesel engine to charge the batteries and run the motors. Sort it out, US car companies...it's not like we don't sell diesel here.
This is a new type, therefore high price until economies of scale kick in.
True on the economies of scale bit - although the batteries are always going to be pricey.
I keep hammering the same point here, but the Volt would see a quite significant fuel economy boost by switching to a diesel engine to charge the batteries and run the motors. Sort it out, US car companies...it's not like we don't sell diesel here.
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
copykris
Apr 7, 04:57 AM
Vintage poster - it will look great in my media room!
love it
love it
dgree03
May 3, 04:00 PM
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
Are you seriously defending charging for tethering!? What do you mean MORE bandwidth?
I am paying for a 25 dollar 2gb plan for my phone. 2gb, is 2gb, is 2gb. If I tether it DOES NOT MATTER MY BANDWIDTH, once i use up 2gb i pay overages. It is that simple... I dont have to tether to use 2gb.
Your cable example is weak. On cable you are paying for the content on that line. On your data plan there is no content to pay for.. it is just straight internet.
A better cable example would be a cable company charging you monthly to extend your cable to each seperate room.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
Are you seriously defending charging for tethering!? What do you mean MORE bandwidth?
I am paying for a 25 dollar 2gb plan for my phone. 2gb, is 2gb, is 2gb. If I tether it DOES NOT MATTER MY BANDWIDTH, once i use up 2gb i pay overages. It is that simple... I dont have to tether to use 2gb.
Your cable example is weak. On cable you are paying for the content on that line. On your data plan there is no content to pay for.. it is just straight internet.
A better cable example would be a cable company charging you monthly to extend your cable to each seperate room.
seedster2
Apr 9, 03:26 PM
280513
Visit josh hamilton blog for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
