Slashdot Mirror

And when it was rumored that Chrysler was introducing another brand in the early 2010s, we "knew" that Plymouth was coming back. It didn't. RAM was split from Dodge instead.

Wow, news to me. Seriously, I am not being sarcastic. I just went to dodge.com and RAM Truck was an option: but it took me to a different site with a warning that I was leaving dodge.com. I was not aware of this until this evening.

Yes, because Microsoft is the only company in the history of the world to craft a product after someone else created the market for it.

Not news. Chrysler does this in most new cars: uconnect

This has been available for a year and a half or so on Dodge vehicles as an option: http://www.dodge.com/en/2009/ram_1500/innovations/uconnect/

Fair enough, why would you put a crappy dodge Postgres backend on a Ferrari like MySQL?

Well, that's not what I'd meant, but I suppose that still works for certain values of "Dodge" and "Ferrari".

What I want to see is somebody come on the air and actually explain what these 3 different OSes really are. Someone who can actually explain that the three OSes are somewhat comparable, but that they are different tools. Maybe someone can pull out an automotive example.

• Windows Vista: 2005 Grand Caravan (available in Sports/Ultimate Edition :)
• Mac OS X: 2008 Dodge Viper (shiny)
• Linux: 2002 Heavy Duty Chassis Cab (with 400k in the last two years :)

YMMV on these analogies, they're not perfect, but you get the point.

Now take a look at the pictures and the specs and the options. I mean, they all go from point A to point B and they all support CD players and they can all carry some type of load. However they are completely different vehicles with completely different purposes.

I don't know about your non-computer-literate friends, but given this type of example, my friends/family can understand that "comparing" the three is very apples/oranges and relatively pointless.

So there's really no point in starting a shouting match. DINKs don't argue with their friends about buying a van to shuttle their kids around; and the family of 6 doesn't argue about the DINKs driving their viper (with no extra passenger space!).

We inherently understand these differences, so let's learn to be equally accepting of our computer differences.

What I want to see is somebody come on the air and actually explain what these 3 different OSes really are. Someone who can actually explain that the three OSes are somewhat comparable, but that they are different tools. Maybe someone can pull out an automotive example.

• Windows Vista: 2005 Grand Caravan (available in Sports/Ultimate Edition :)
• Mac OS X: 2008 Dodge Viper (shiny)
• Linux: 2002 Heavy Duty Chassis Cab (with 400k in the last two years :)

YMMV on these analogies, they're not perfect, but you get the point.

Now take a look at the pictures and the specs and the options. I mean, they all go from point A to point B and they all support CD players and they can all carry some type of load. However they are completely different vehicles with completely different purposes.

I don't know about your non-computer-literate friends, but given this type of example, my friends/family can understand that "comparing" the three is very apples/oranges and relatively pointless.

So there's really no point in starting a shouting match. DINKs don't argue with their friends about buying a van to shuttle their kids around; and the family of 6 doesn't argue about the DINKs driving their viper (with no extra passenger space!).

We inherently understand these differences, so let's learn to be equally accepting of our computer differences.

What I want to see is somebody come on the air and actually explain what these 3 different OSes really are. Someone who can actually explain that the three OSes are somewhat comparable, but that they are different tools. Maybe someone can pull out an automotive example.

• Windows Vista: 2005 Grand Caravan (available in Sports/Ultimate Edition :)
• Mac OS X: 2008 Dodge Viper (shiny)
• Linux: 2002 Heavy Duty Chassis Cab (with 400k in the last two years :)

YMMV on these analogies, they're not perfect, but you get the point.

Now take a look at the pictures and the specs and the options. I mean, they all go from point A to point B and they all support CD players and they can all carry some type of load. However they are completely different vehicles with completely different purposes.

I don't know about your non-computer-literate friends, but given this type of example, my friends/family can understand that "comparing" the three is very apples/oranges and relatively pointless.

So there's really no point in starting a shouting match. DINKs don't argue with their friends about buying a van to shuttle their kids around; and the family of 6 doesn't argue about the DINKs driving their viper (with no extra passenger space!).

We inherently understand these differences, so let's learn to be equally accepting of our computer differences.

the only charger you need

Why would you want to spend $50k-100k on something that uses more energy than it produces?

Just for the sheer fun of it?

That is nice and all; I still think this is way cooler.

Looks like a new and novel application of the word 'dodge'. Let's take it for a spin:

Tsk. One thing you didn't dodge was the trademark infringement on our use of the word 'Dodge'. Our lawyers will be contacting your lawyers.

Surely if the use is initial liftoff the important statistic is thrust to weight ratio. The question of efficiency -- which is what specific impulse measures -- seems rather secondary, unless I'm missing something. An ion engine, for example, would have a far greater specific impulse than either chemical engine, but since its thrust is so pathetic it couldn't get itself off the ground.

To put it in plebian terms, if you need to outrun the cops (i.e. achieve escape velocity), surely it's better to be driving this instead of this.

"And I have again observed, my dear friend, in this trifling affair, that misunderstandings and neglect occasion more mischief in the world than even malice and wickedness. At all events, the two latter are of less frequent occurrence." -Goethe

And don't forget, automotive as in the trademark of one of the largest corporations in the world... Dodge.
http://www.dodge.com/ram_truck/ram_truck_flash.htm l
Hard to believe Diamler Chrysler couldn't get it in the top ten of a Google search for Ram.
http://www.google.com/search?q=RAM&sourceid=mozill a-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client= firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official
One must wonder, now that computers are a home appliance for the masses, if the majority of Americans searching for Ram are looking for a truck....

And the worse is that they don't make station-wagons anymore

Well, there's the Malibu Maxx, but they call that a "5-Door Extended Sedan", and I don't know whether it'd qualify as a station wagon or not.

There's also the Dodge Magnum, but if by "they" you're referring to US companies, that doesn't really count. (If you're not referring to US companies, the same corporation that makes the Dodge Magnum also makes other wagons. Here's another wagon from a non-US company, but those aren't sold in North America, except perhaps through the gray market.)

Add in this new concept motorcycle by Dodge (which, incidently, not only looks a lot like a lightcycle, but has a 8.3L V10 engine, so would probably go about as fast);

http://www.dodge.com/tomahawk/flash.html

They're easy to drive, have lots of electronic/electrical geegaws, and are a supremely appropriate solution to the problem.

My wife and I have zero kids. We don't fit the typical demographic of the minivan buyer. Nevertheless, we bought a Dodge Grand Caravan AWD in 2001 because it was the best solution for the needs we had. I get together with friends often after work. This usually involves most of us coming from different directions, meeting at someone's house, and then going off to dinner. The ability to take the whole bunch in one vehicle had a huge appeal.

I didn't (and don't) give a rat's ass about automotive stereotypes. I had a problem, and the minivan solved it. My friends called it the "Maytag" or the "appliance" because it was big and white, but they sure didn't mind riding in it.

(Full disclosure: I ended up having to sell it in 2003 because I was laid off, ended up in a job paying half of my prior one, and could no longer afford the payments. Once I get my income back up to something respectable again, I will buy another minivan. They're just too bloody useful.)

John

If I was batman, I would have to ride one of these.

How does strapping a Neon to it make a Civic go faster?

...Finally a 60 mpg car that can go 90 mph and look cool at the same time!!...

If we're going to talk about a Daimler-Chrysler product that looks cool, how about this. The Zap looks like a golf cart with a good paintjob.

If your Ford had a Harley engine in it (which compared to my truck, might as well be the case), then yes, Harley Davidson SHOULD be able to fix it. Also, next time you need something that doesn't have a lame engine, buy a real truck, dipshit.

If your Ford had a Harley engine in it (which compared to my truck, might as well be the case), then yes, Harley Davidson SHOULD be able to fix it. Also, next time you need something that doesn't have a lame engine, buy a real truck, dipshit.

It may not be exactly what you're looking for, but the Dodge Sprinter is a step in the right direction- a full size van that gets 30MPG. It's actually a rebadged Mercedes van from Europe, the land of $4/gallon gas. This one's not built for the soccer moms and SUV yuppies (too slow, ugly and trucky for that). It's a real work truck for plumbers, shuttle vans, those people.

I disagree, here is a great one-seat commuter 'car'.

But you are a cromagnum for using such a 1993ish setup.

Aha!

Now Dodge's overpriced station wagon makes sense to me.

When you absolutely positively need that backup overnight... depress the pedal to the floor.

Y'know, justify your SUV love if you want, but don't make up shit. It's just *stupid* to try to claim that an SUV carries more people than a van. Or cargo.

Are you talking to someone else? You responded to me, but I never said any of those things.

They do *not* have a place hauling the kids around (they are insanely insafe, not having the full body construction that is a lifesaver in cars)

Actually, my new 2004 Durango has a five-star crash rating. The old one (1999 Durango) didn't do so well in government tests, but it certainly passed mine. It went off the road sideways at 70 mph into soft dirt which rolled it four times -- once end over end. My wife, four young children and I were all in it and we walked away with two small cuts, some bruises and sore muscles. I'm not sure we'd have done so well in a less sturdy vehicle. There's a picture here.

or commuting to work downtown

I don't commute, except to stumble downstairs or to drive to the airport from time to time, but until recently I had a Saturn SL2 for those purposes, and right now I'm driving a Toyota Echo.

You seem to assume that because I drive an SUV I must not have thought through what my needs are and what the vehicles offer. I assure you that I have and, for me, an SUV is ideal. If you had any reading comprehension skills you'd see that the *point* of the post you responded to was that SUVs *don't* make sense for the majority of people who buy them.

The perfect accessory to the Bugatti

I am a karma whore.

Dodge Tomahawk

when you could be riding one of these

Dodge's working concept seems to have some much cooler design cues:

Dodge Tomahawk

The *concept* of the Akira bike seems cool, but the implementation leaves a bit to be desired. They should buff up their implementation by stealing some designs from the Dodge - particularly the two-tire look back & front which looks amazingly great.

Being a car enthusiast and a "driver", I could not imagine the thrill someone would get from getting behind a Civic Hybrid pumping out a whopping 85hp. Sure I'd have a few extra dollars in my pocket, but I'd dread driving a car with that little oomph.

For the same price as the Civic Hybrid (around $20K, I'd buy an SRT-4 with a 2.4-liter DOHC 16-valve 4-cylinder that produces an impressive 215-horsepower and 245 lb. ft. of torque.

Awesome!

There really isn't much to do in the way of research here. Most of the major manufacturers list their affiliations on their web sites.

• Ford makes it easy. They list their brands right on the front page. Along with the previously mentioned Volvo, Jaguar, and Mazda, there's the surprise of Aston Martin (think it was a coincidence that the major cars in the last Bond movie were a Ford, a Jaguar, and an Aston Martin?).
• GM makes you have to look a little more. Aside from the previously mentioned Opel, Isuzu, and Suzuki, GM also has ties to Fiat and Subaru, as well as owning Saab. (Toyota isn't listed, but I mentioned it before because Toyota sells the Cavalier under the Toyota brand in Japan.)
• Chrysler/Dodge make you work harder. You have to know that they're part of Daimler-Chrysler, and then you'll see that they not only have Chrysler, Dodge, and Mercedes Benz, but also Maybach and Jeep as well as "strategic relationships" with Mitsubishi and Hyundai.
• Similarly, Volkswagen makes it pretty difficult to find their list of brands, but it can be found. They're pretty small-time, only having Audi, Bentley, Bugatti, Lamborghini, and Skoda alongside the Volkswagen moniker.
• Porsche actually makes you have to learn history before you can get to its complex relationship with other brands. For instance, did you know that Dr. Ferdinand Porsche founded Volkswagen on Hitler's request? Also, before Porsche even formed Volkswagen, he did designs for Mercedes and Daimler. Over the years, Porsche (the company) and Porsche Design (separate company, same family) have consulted for quite a few different firms. As well, ties to Volkswagen have remained strong (the original 356 was based around a Volkswagen engine, as was the 914; lots of parts in all models of cars have been shared with VW; and the most recent model, the Cayenne, shares a base platform with VW's Touareg).

No. If it had 4 wheels, it would BE a car.

You obviously haven't seen the 4-wheeled Tomahawk.

Dodge didn't think so. Just drop a new engine in there. :)

Simple car, 215 turbo horses for under $20k. It absolutely squashes everything in its class. The only thing that is in its class is the high model WRX (not the lower $24k one) which is $10k more.

You can not get more bang for your buck then this machine. I'm buying one when I get enough cash together.

"So now, cheap slow cars are all any domestic companies can make"
are you a troll, or just ignorant?
Viper
or

my favorite

That just the 2 big ones off the top of my head.

I've always hated automatic boxes (and in the UK, they're in the minority, thank goodness). They take away all the fun from driving; they never seem to be in the right gear.

I think I read that something like 89% of new vehicles sold in the US now come with a slushbox. I have never owned one, nor do I want one. Especially in a car with no torque.

But the SMG is very, very fun. It's not big or clever to be able to use a manual gearbox. Heck, every 17 year old over here can do it (we learn just about exclusively in manual cars).

See above. I know far too many people who turn the color of an iMac when asked to drive a stick. It is disgusting, indeed.

But being a "yank," and no disrespect to the Europeans, I like this better. And yeah, it's got a real clutch. :-D

Well I guess we could compare a V10 Viper and a V8 Ram then just to keep the numbers in line. However, I think it would be pretty safe to say that the Viper would not be able to pull as much as a Ram because the Viper isn't designed to pull like a Ram is. We can head over to Dodge.com and pull up a comparison sheet between a 2002 Viper GTS and a 2002 Ram 3500 SLT LWB and look at them together. And one of the most notable set of numbers I see is the weight of the vehicle itself. The Viper weighs in at 3,460 lb and the Ram weighs in at 5,979 lb - an extra 2,500 pounds. This weight is important in towing because although the Viper can get 490 lb*ft of torque, more than the 345 lb*ft from the Ram, it does not have as much weight to put that torque to the ground in order to pull something. It could prolly pull any small item like a jet ski, or mid size boat. But, if you try load up a 2,000 lb trailer with 8,000 lb of gravel, you aren't gonna get as far in the Viper as you will in the Ram.

Soccer moms of America and yuppie cockeaters need to belly up to the table and cut out the fucking consumption competition..

Look Jon -- It's a convenient device to raise the battle between Spider-man and AotC to the level of culture-shifting battles between one kids generation and the next.

But to say that Lucas has a lock on marketroid obsession and that the Stan Lee clan hasn't tried to "shroud Spider-man in market hype", and that that's why Spider-man is winning the hearts of all the little Generation X++ers, isn't just wishful thinking... it's plain wrong.

For breakfast this morning, I had Kellog's Spider-man cereal. (Honestly. I really did.) It tasted just like Cap'n Crunch Berries, but it sure looked like little spider webs. I could have tried the Spider-man Pop-tarts or Rice-Krispies, but I was in the mood for something a little sweeter.

After breakfast I signed up for the new Spider-man Cingular account that I saw lots of cool commecials for, and entered to win a custom Spider-man Dodge Viper.

Then I popped over to Wal-mart to pick up the new Spider-man game, and found out I could get a free trip to Universal Studios, complements of Sam Walton! For lunch I "swung into Carl's Jr" or did I "drop into Hardee's" for a quick Spider-man burger, and washed it down with a Spider-man Dr. Pepper, which I became a big fan of ever since I heard they were racing a Spider-man Dr. Pepper car in the NASCAR Busch Series.

The amazing thing is, even the marketing press is completely aware of what Sony Pictures is doing with Spider-man. Why aren't you?

I do not think a lot of the developers are going to take the time to answer a RFP in the depth that most software vendors or VARS would.

Open source people are not going to be paid for a "sale" were as the normal software vendors are competing for some money if they can make a sale.

He sends them a large bill - $15,000 - for his services, and someone in the Accounts Payable department says the bill is too expensive for what he did, and needs to be itemized. So he itemized his charges:

• Making chalk mark, $1.
• Knowing where to put mark, $14,999.

One can sell one's expertise in selecting software as much as one can sell one's expertise in creating it. Or one can sell other things. We sometimes miss this in our industry because it is extremely rare for someone other than the manufacturer of a software product to provide maintenance and support of it. But because a product is open source, a purchaser can find anyone who is capable of doing so to provide maintenance.

In about 50 miles I need to change the oil again in my 1998 Dodge Intrepid because it's been another 3,000 miles. I can do the work myself and perhaps save money, I can pay a third-party perhaps $12 to do it, or I can pay a little more, take it to a dealer of the car to do it. It's a commodity operation and I can get anyone I feel qualified to perform it.

With non-open-source you only have the last option when you need something done (if they even will do it; consider calling up Microsoft and asking for a customized change to Outlook. Better be prepared to either be a huge customer, pay a huge fee, or suck air). With open-source you can get your hands as dirty as you want or you can pay someone else if you don't feel competent (or your organization doesn't have the direct ability) to make the changes. You have choices.

An RFP has some type of reward (sale) possible to the winner for them to spend time on responding to it.

A RFP is a request for proposal - A proposal for what? A proposal is a first step toward a contract. A contract with who? Who will get paid? I do not think a RFP process will get you very far.

For an open source product the cost of the software will be zero.

What is the cost of water these days? I can get it for free from a water fountain, perhaps pay almost nothing for a quart of water out of the tap, perhaps pay $20 for a filter every couple of months if I don't like the taste of tap water, or perhaps pay anywhere from 50c to $3 for a bottle of it in a store. That does not ignore the fact that the original price of the water was probably in the neighborhood of 1/10 of 1c per gallon from a public utility or a municipal water district. For all intents and purposes the original price of the water might as well be considered 'free' yet that doesn't stop companies from making money 'selling' water that cost them next to nothing to obtain.

Perhaps the customer pays for having the supplier provide and deliver 20,000 CDs of the software to sites so everyone has a copy instead of clogging network usage downloading it from servers. Or pays for a customized installer where the original product didn't have one or it's too complicated. Or pays for special services to go with it, like paying not only for the software but having someone write documentation. Or train people in how to use it. Or train their technical staff in how to support it. Or doing the support themselves. Or that the customer pays the supplier for finding the precise package that best fits their needs because the supplier knows what products are better for their particular circumstances.

Support and maintenance I guess would be in-house.

Let's say the Sixth National Bank wants to stop paying for Microsoft Exchange as their mail server and client licenses for Microsoft Outlook. I offer to provide them with an equivalent functionality using a Linux box running QMail (let's say that they want a highly reliable e-mail system so that eliminates use of Sendmail) and include for the client end some Windows port of an open-source client or group of clients that originally ran on KDE or GNOME, for less money than it would cost to have one person at the bank to maintain it because the maintenance I can offer on an as-needed basis to several companies.

The bank has people who could do the work inhouse but they are better suited handling the stuff that is the bank's core expertise (handling checking accounts and the billing of outrageous fees on those checking accounts), and the bank can pay me to provide them with updates and added functionality without having to have people doing work that isn't part of their core competency, BUT with the additional advantage that since the product is open source if I decide to quit, they can find someone else to do it or they could do it themselves if they choose to do so.

What's left then is comparison of different capabilities. This becomes a request for comments now (RFC).

A suggestion change here. Maybe send a RFP to consulting firms on helping you with project(s). A selected firm could help in gathering requirements, research products, help in the installation and maintenance ... If you trying to spend money anyways. :)

Paul Robinson <Postmaster@paul.washington.dc.us>

• You cannot own a .com domain with the same name
• Otherwise, first come first served