I gave up on CFLs--too many early failures to justify the extra cost
Yeah, I know what you mean. When they came out with LCD monitors, I bought one. It totally sucked. Very expensive and it started fading after a short time. And then it developed a few dead pixels. I figure CRT is the way to go.
Did you also take recycling it into account? CFLs must be recycled, because of their mercury content.
No they musn't. It's great if they are, but even without recyling them, the energy results in far less mercury put into the atmosphere by the coal-fired power plants we have in the US. No, this is not true in places like France where something like 80% of their power comes from nuclear. But anyone who suggests the CFLs are a one-size-fits-the-globe solution is an idiot.
Wow, following someone elses post I downloaded the full word doc of the supposed "study."
Here is what they ACTUALLY used for the lifetimes:
Accord Hybrid - 117,000
Prius - 109,000
Civic Hybrid - 113,000
Escape Hybrid - 127,000
Insight - 109,000
Hummer H1 - 379,000
So, not only did they lowball the Prius at 109k, they put the H1 down for 379,000 miles. If you read the explanation of expected life, the author says:
Finally, the "Estimated Life in Miles" is based on historical data as well as manufacturer information and real-world life-cycle information that average the miles over comparable historic models as well as a CNW analysis of repair and replacement as well as scrappage records. In effect, the miles figure here is a realistic approximation of the likely life-cycle of the individual models.
Note that there are clearly many consumers who have driven further and clocked more miles for some of these vehicles, but this information takes into account historic accident and disposal records for individual demographic groups and how long these vehicles are likely to last.
So, basically, they have some kind of formula that they're not going to share with us. But just trust them.
This paper is really a hoot. You can get it from http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/Dust% 20Zip%20Folder.zip The first 300 or so pages are the explanation and tables. Then there's another 60 pages of the author answering emails. Yet nowhere in those 60 pages can I find anyone apparently asking for hard evidence that the 109k/379k numbers are anywhere in the ballpark. You would think more than a couple of people asked that. But maybe I missed it. Did I mention this went on for 60 pages?
And then the next 120 pages are disclosures, articles, correspondance, photos of cars, editorial cartoons and song lyrics. I am NOT joking.
"HAH! Do you realize water covers almost 71% of the Earth's surface. So you're telling me these skis are useless on over two-thirds of the planets surface?!"
"Uh, I'm not really sure what that has to do with-"
"And these skis, can they be used on mountains?"
"Well, mountains with snow and-"
"Not rocky mountains? What part of the definition of the word 'country' says that it doesn't include rocks?"
"Again, I don't really see-"
"And how about roads?"
"Roads?"
"Yes, roads. Streets. Boulevards. Avenues. And sidewalks. And freeway entrance ramps. And stairs."
"Look, are you actually going to buy these skis?"
"Why would I buy these skis? I live in Los Angeles and it never snows. So until you come out with some skis that can be used in downtown LA, I suggest you stop calling these "cross-country" skis. Also, I don't have any legs, you insensitive clod!"
Considering the Prius maximum lifetime was off by 3x, that's a pretty biased "correction" you're doing there. Plus, I'm not sure how "half-way-or-so wrong" turns $3.25 into $2 (a decrease of 60%) but only turns $1.95 into $2 (an increase of 2%). How is this meeting half-way? You're biasing it by assuming the Hummer estimate must be way 30x more accurate than the Prius estimate.
Anyway, using reversing their numbers:
Prius: $3.25 x 100,000 = $325,000 Hummer: $1.95 x 300,000 = $585,000
So, if the Prius gets 200,000, which seems more reasonable: Prius: $325,000 / 200,000 = $1.625 Hummer: $585,000 / 300,000 = $1.95
That puts the Prius at 17% less. That's pretty significant.
And if you drop the Hummer down to 200,000? Prius: $325,000 / 200,000 = $1.625 Hummer: $585,000 / 200,000 = $2.925
That puts the Prius at 56% less.
So really, the only way you could make the comparison look favorable to the Hummer was to use bullshit numbers. Which is what the study did. Very sad.
Yes, but as has been pointed out numerous times, the file itself is not worth $38 billion as was stated. If I write a check for $100 and it gets destroyed, I can just write you another check. That means the check itself isn't worth $100. It's only worth how much it costs to get that check printed and reissued.
But I think I'm done replying to you. You started off ranting "Not to mention a forced reboot after EACH and EVERY patch!". I pointed out that has never been the case with Flash/Flex. Your message was in reply to someone griping about Acrobat, which was once again a moot point as Flash/Flex is not done by the same team. It really looks like both of you are just trying to invent something to gripe about that has nothing to do with Apollo.
I think you're being incredibly unrealistic. If it weren't for Firefox, it's likely there simply wouldn't be a good browser AT ALL on Linux. We're talking about predicting what might have been, so this is very much your opinion and mine. But I certainly feel this is true. Firefox is successful because it brings together not only the Linux developers with free time, but the plethora of Windows ones.
Even if you take the other side of the argument, then the existence of Firefox means you probably get OTHER software on Linux you would never have gotten. This is because a lot of people who now build other apps for Linux might be working on a browser instead.
But even with the amount of developers Firefox has, it still has a lot of shortcomings. A browser is a very large project that has a lot of nooks and crannies. To think that Firefox is the roadblock to you having a good native browser on Linux (much less Linux/ppc, NetBSD, Zeta, eComStation, blah blah blah) is fairly incredible.
And there's even more of a complicating factor in open source OSes. Will the browser look great in Gnome? KDE? Enlightenment? AfterStep? XFCE? Due to all these differences, even a "great" app written for Linux and only for Linux is STILL going to look like an app written for Windows, as it will be supporting some common widget behavior that isn't specific to one Window Manager and GUI toolkit. So, even on Linux, what the best you can really hope for even from a "great" app is for the theming to basically match the look of your other windows. That's what I was saying about Apollo. I think Apollo will look and feel as good as any app for Linux, other than those built to a very specific window manager and a very specific gui toolkit.
I never seem to encounter forced reboots when I upgrade flash player. I never even have to restart my BROWSER. So please, give them a little benefit of the doubt.
The way Flex works is that it is extremely themable. I would think that Apollo would give them an excellent chance to make default themes for the different OSes fit with that particular OS. So you could get a well written app and it won't stick out like a sore thumb on your OS.
Actually, I would think the last thing you need would be to have a dearth of popular software for your platform.
FYI, if you're going to gripe based on "flash portals", you're kind of out of date. Flex is something completely different. It's more akin to Qt than it is to Flash.
I don't get what you're complaining about. You're saying you don't want to run the apps because the make them write poorly written apps? Well, don't run them. Why is that so hard?
On the other hand, if you DO want to run them, now you'll be much more likely that the WELL WRITTEN apps will also come out on your minority OSes. And the way Flex works is that it is extremely themable. I would think that Apollo would give them an excellent chance to make default themes for the different OSes fit with that particular OS. So you could get a well written app and it won't stick out like a sore thumb on your OS.
For the most part, I usually am very skeptical of those "We'll add this feature soon" kinds of claims. But Adobe has been pretty good with Linux support for Flash/Flex. It just usually lags the other OSes by a few months.
Assuming his number are correct, I'd say the only thing it really shows for sure is that for every person willing to buy and play a game at their asking price, there are a three to ten people willing to play the game at some price lower than that. True, that price may be zero for some or all of them.
But what if two of those ten would be willing to pay it at half the price? So instead of one player at original price, you get three at half price. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that would be an increase in sales, and most likely an increase in profits. This is especially true when you sell online and cut out a lot of the distribution costs.
Their problem with the alleged 200k copies being pirated before release has nothing to do with "normal" piracy. Those people did not choose to pirate a game rather than buy it, as the option to buy it wasn't available. That's a completely different ball of wax.
So really, all those number say to me is that there is a possible untapped potential. It does not say "we're losing the full price that three to ten copies would have made for every one we sell, because all of those people would have bought the game if they couldn't pirate it." That's RIAA math.
Unless all that damage doesn't compound, I would think the argument that a lot of things cause it is even more reason not to introduce a new source of it.
Slashdot Mirror
;)
Here is what they ACTUALLY used for the lifetimes:
So, not only did they lowball the Prius at 109k, they put the H1 down for 379,000 miles. If you read the explanation of expected life, the author says:
So, basically, they have some kind of formula that they're not going to share with us. But just trust them.
This paper is really a hoot. You can get it from http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/Dust% 20Zip%20Folder.zip
The first 300 or so pages are the explanation and tables. Then there's another 60 pages of the author answering emails. Yet nowhere in those 60 pages can I find anyone apparently asking for hard evidence that the 109k/379k numbers are anywhere in the ballpark. You would think more than a couple of people asked that. But maybe I missed it. Did I mention this went on for 60 pages?
And then the next 120 pages are disclosures, articles, correspondance, photos of cars, editorial cartoons and song lyrics. I am NOT joking.
"Can I cross water with these skis?"
"Well, no, not really. They're not water skis..."
"HAH! Do you realize water covers almost 71% of the Earth's surface. So you're telling me these skis are useless on over two-thirds of the planets surface?!"
"Uh, I'm not really sure what that has to do with-"
"And these skis, can they be used on mountains?"
"Well, mountains with snow and-"
"Not rocky mountains? What part of the definition of the word 'country' says that it doesn't include rocks?"
"Again, I don't really see-"
"And how about roads?"
"Roads?"
"Yes, roads. Streets. Boulevards. Avenues. And sidewalks. And freeway entrance ramps. And stairs."
"Look, are you actually going to buy these skis?"
"Why would I buy these skis? I live in Los Angeles and it never snows. So until you come out with some skis that can be used in downtown LA, I suggest you stop calling these "cross-country" skis. Also, I don't have any legs, you insensitive clod!"
Sorry, there's a typo in my first sentence. "3x" should be "2x" (which agrees with the figures I stated)
Considering the Prius maximum lifetime was off by 3x, that's a pretty biased "correction" you're doing there. Plus, I'm not sure how "half-way-or-so wrong" turns $3.25 into $2 (a decrease of 60%) but only turns $1.95 into $2 (an increase of 2%). How is this meeting half-way? You're biasing it by assuming the Hummer estimate must be way 30x more accurate than the Prius estimate.
Anyway, using reversing their numbers:
Prius: $3.25 x 100,000 = $325,000
Hummer: $1.95 x 300,000 = $585,000
So, if the Prius gets 200,000, which seems more reasonable:
Prius: $325,000 / 200,000 = $1.625
Hummer: $585,000 / 300,000 = $1.95
That puts the Prius at 17% less. That's pretty significant.
And if you drop the Hummer down to 200,000?
Prius: $325,000 / 200,000 = $1.625
Hummer: $585,000 / 200,000 = $2.925
That puts the Prius at 56% less.
So really, the only way you could make the comparison look favorable to the Hummer was to use bullshit numbers. Which is what the study did. Very sad.
I'd hate to be the sporting goods salesman when you people come around to ask about the cross-country skis...
Yes, the better examples would have actually been destroying a check written out to CASH that you intended to cash for yourself.
Yes, but as has been pointed out numerous times, the file itself is not worth $38 billion as was stated. If I write a check for $100 and it gets destroyed, I can just write you another check. That means the check itself isn't worth $100. It's only worth how much it costs to get that check printed and reissued.
Actually, they ARE much better.
But I think I'm done replying to you. You started off ranting "Not to mention a forced reboot after EACH and EVERY patch!". I pointed out that has never been the case with Flash/Flex. Your message was in reply to someone griping about Acrobat, which was once again a moot point as Flash/Flex is not done by the same team. It really looks like both of you are just trying to invent something to gripe about that has nothing to do with Apollo.
I think you're being incredibly unrealistic. If it weren't for Firefox, it's likely there simply wouldn't be a good browser AT ALL on Linux. We're talking about predicting what might have been, so this is very much your opinion and mine. But I certainly feel this is true. Firefox is successful because it brings together not only the Linux developers with free time, but the plethora of Windows ones.
Even if you take the other side of the argument, then the existence of Firefox means you probably get OTHER software on Linux you would never have gotten. This is because a lot of people who now build other apps for Linux might be working on a browser instead.
But even with the amount of developers Firefox has, it still has a lot of shortcomings. A browser is a very large project that has a lot of nooks and crannies. To think that Firefox is the roadblock to you having a good native browser on Linux (much less Linux/ppc, NetBSD, Zeta, eComStation, blah blah blah) is fairly incredible.
And there's even more of a complicating factor in open source OSes. Will the browser look great in Gnome? KDE? Enlightenment? AfterStep? XFCE? Due to all these differences, even a "great" app written for Linux and only for Linux is STILL going to look like an app written for Windows, as it will be supporting some common widget behavior that isn't specific to one Window Manager and GUI toolkit. So, even on Linux, what the best you can really hope for even from a "great" app is for the theming to basically match the look of your other windows. That's what I was saying about Apollo. I think Apollo will look and feel as good as any app for Linux, other than those built to a very specific window manager and a very specific gui toolkit.
Whole different kettle of fish. The people who make Flash/Flex are the former Macromedia crew. They're much better about those things.
I never seem to encounter forced reboots when I upgrade flash player. I never even have to restart my BROWSER. So please, give them a little benefit of the doubt.
Flash != Flex
The way Flex works is that it is extremely themable. I would think that Apollo would give them an excellent chance to make default themes for the different OSes fit with that particular OS. So you could get a well written app and it won't stick out like a sore thumb on your OS.
Actually, I would think the last thing you need would be to have a dearth of popular software for your platform.
FYI, if you're going to gripe based on "flash portals", you're kind of out of date. Flex is something completely different. It's more akin to Qt than it is to Flash.
I don't get what you're complaining about. You're saying you don't want to run the apps because the make them write poorly written apps? Well, don't run them. Why is that so hard?
On the other hand, if you DO want to run them, now you'll be much more likely that the WELL WRITTEN apps will also come out on your minority OSes. And the way Flex works is that it is extremely themable. I would think that Apollo would give them an excellent chance to make default themes for the different OSes fit with that particular OS. So you could get a well written app and it won't stick out like a sore thumb on your OS.
For the most part, I usually am very skeptical of those "We'll add this feature soon" kinds of claims. But Adobe has been pretty good with Linux support for Flash/Flex. It just usually lags the other OSes by a few months.
Just give up. Otherwise, this will eventually end with them complaining that it doesn't run on the VIC-20.
Thank god it was only a sim and not the real thing.
I hear that hydrogen can sometimes be harvested from water, too. ;)
Why oh why do I never have those mod points when I need them?...
Assuming his number are correct, I'd say the only thing it really shows for sure is that for every person willing to buy and play a game at their asking price, there are a three to ten people willing to play the game at some price lower than that. True, that price may be zero for some or all of them.
But what if two of those ten would be willing to pay it at half the price? So instead of one player at original price, you get three at half price. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that would be an increase in sales, and most likely an increase in profits. This is especially true when you sell online and cut out a lot of the distribution costs.
Their problem with the alleged 200k copies being pirated before release has nothing to do with "normal" piracy. Those people did not choose to pirate a game rather than buy it, as the option to buy it wasn't available. That's a completely different ball of wax.
So really, all those number say to me is that there is a possible untapped potential. It does not say "we're losing the full price that three to ten copies would have made for every one we sell, because all of those people would have bought the game if they couldn't pirate it." That's RIAA math.
Unless all that damage doesn't compound, I would think the argument that a lot of things cause it is even more reason not to introduce a new source of it.