Most of us in the US own automatics (not me, haven't owned one in 25 years of driving), which makes engine braking hard. Although they have dual clutch multiple speed selector automatics now days, most people don't ever touch the gear selector except to go D, R or N.
When you engine brake, you put the car in a lower gear, which increases the revs on the engine, which requires more fuel. Why would you think the engine cuts fuel completely? First, it needs fuel, even at idle. Second, it needs more fuel to produce more rpms in the lower gear.
Instead of saving 20% in fuel, why don't we rip up most unnecessary lighted intersections and replace them with roundabouts. The initial cost would be high, but the fuel savings for ALL cars will recover that cost in a few weeks.
How is it NOT a kindle? It has the Kindle app and runs Kindle books. Unless there's something about the hardware that is significant, I don't see how a one-task device like a Kindle is better than an iPad, that can also be a Kindle. (price being the obvious exception)
My wife's textbooks where $600 for this semester. The eBook version where only $200. The $400 we saved paid for a new iPad (almost). It will pay for itself, plus some with each semester.
While I appreciate your attempt at sarcasm, it is foiled by the fact that the Alarm Clock app isn't included on the iPad (probably for the reasons you cited).
Also, as we get older, more mature, and more responsible, we stop relying on alarm clocks to be on time.
$600+? How about $499. Are we really going to continue the disingenuous tactic of overstating the price of Apple products to somehow make them seem bad?
I remember when I bought my $600 iPhone (according to slashdot), for $299.
How many of our clueless in-laws who are in the perpetual "buy a new $400 PC every two years" cycle really need to buy a new PC every two years? Wouldn't they be better off with an iPad, considering what little they do with their computers?
I know my in-laws want a 27" iMac for email, Facebook, and the internet. Seems a bit of overkill to me.
Well, there's more use than you are considering. Just yesterday I saw iPads in use at the Dentist office (medical records AND imagery to show the patient). I saw it at work with the mail room guys using it to track delivery and receipt. I saw it at the eye doctor (in the lobby replacing magazines). My pediatrician uses them in the screening area to take medical notes (using a PC VM, nonetheless) and syncing back to the server. I've seen it as point-of-sales devices. I've seen restaurant hostesses using it to track seating in the restaurant. I've seen schools use them. Hell, even the local quick lube place is using them to track customer services and history.
In fact, on a daily basis I see more iPads being used for work than I do people using them for pleasure. Hardly a status symbol, and hardly a niche market for artists, to say the least.
But the iPad is also a Kindle, but not vice versa. If all you need is a good eReader, than yeah, get a Kindle. Most people will be able to justify a little more money for more utility, though.
Next time, read the instructions and don't click OK on every popup without reading and understanding what you are about to do.
Except that the Apple GUI guidelines strictly dictate to never use just "OK" (or "yes" or "no") in a dialog. More than likely (don't have it memorized), the dialogue button says something like, "yes, delete my files", not just "OK".
By any reasonable definition, it's a backup, since the files are physically there. It does, however, deliberately pretend for them to be inaccessible, unlike every other similar device on the planet.
Thank the record labels. This argument is moot in another couple of weeks anyway.
The lesson you should have learned is that Apple has been the vanguard of freeing us from the tyranny of the record labels ridiculous demands. You lost your data because the labels didn't want easy transfer of my entire iTunes library to my iPod, then to your iPod, then to your iTunes library. Apple has mitigated this greatly, and will full out eradicate it this Fall.
You are simply being disingenuous. I suppose you can submit an anecdote of your custom written app that violates the default file management settings of the OS as proof that OS X handles open files just like Windows. Better proof would be for you to use any app on a Mac, open a file then rename/move/replace it in the Finder. You simply won't be bothered with lock files or dialogs like you will in Windows every time.
I swear, every time a legitimate complaint about Windows file management comes up, some slashdotter will blast this forum with the technical reasons why users are stupid and shouldn't be trusted to do anything the way they want to, instead of just accepting that Microsoft has spent 20 years cutting corners, instead of making the system work well. I'm still waiting to hear a good argument of why Windows defaults to this behavior instead of just saying, "yeah, that kinda sucks...we should have fixed that in XP service pack 1."
That's a nice technical answer and all, but here's the reality of what the user experiences:
Scenario 1: Rename an open File
Windows: open MS Word, create a doc, save it as my page.doc. Then, with that file still open, because like 99% of all users, you are working with a document so therefore it is open, go to the desktop and rename the file. It tells you the document is in use and cannot be renamed.
Mac: do all that same stuff, except when you get to the "rename" part, it renames the file. The open copy in Word updates the file name.
Scenario 2: Move an open File
Windows: Open MS Word, create a doc, save it as my_page.doc. Continue working on the doc then get a email from your boss telling you to stick the doc in a different directory. You go to the file in Windows and cut and paste it to the new location, only to be greeted by the message that the file is in use and cannot be moved. Go back to Word, choose "save as" and save the document to a new place, then go to the old place and delete the dupe.
Mac: Go to the finder and move the open Word doc wherever you want. All the relative file paths are updated. OR, use "save as" in Word and deal with duplicate copies (but then again Lion introduces an entirely new versioning system, and there is no longer "save as", but that's another conversation)
So lock file, no lock file, whatever. You cannot debate that OS X handles open files differently (more elegantly) than Windows. I've never had to install an "unlocker" app in OS X.
Do you never work in an environment where files are shared and you don't want others overwriting your changes? These are not uncommon situations in the least bit. And yet, to handle all these you *gasp* have to put exclusive write locks on files. Apps for both OS X and Linux do this as well.
The difference being, with OS X, I never have to worry about the consistency of my data and it works like humans work, not people who dabble in 1s and 0s. Whatever tech goes on in the background that allows me to move, replace, rename, overwrite an open document is what I like about OS X. I don't care what tech goes on to maintain "the consistency of my data". When I have a document open, then realize I want to move it somewhere else, rename it, or replace it, I want it to do that. I don't want to have to install a stupid unlocker program like I do on Windows. I don't want to have to quit what I'm doing, shut everything down, just to do a simple task like renaming a file.
In OS X, when a document is over a network, the write lock is present, but not when the document is on the local account. Files on my local account on my local machine don't have sharing or versioning issues, because I'm the only user that will be touching them, so I don't care to be bothered with unnecessary lock files. Windows sucks in this regard...period.
This behavior doesn't exist on OS X, nor did it in Mac OS (as far back as I can remember).
As a user, your logic makes no sense to me. There are plenty of good reasons (behind the scenes technical reasons?) why the OS should make it harder for me to accomplish work?
How about being able to move or rename an open file while we are at it. These three shortcomings, the fact Windows wouldn't tell you there wasn't enough disk space until it was 30 minutes into the transfer, and the issue in this story are the reason I'm a Mac user.
Excellent point. I'd argue I use my wife's iPad for MORE things than my MacBook Pro. If you count the number of "things" I do with each device, the iPad is far more diverse, but the MacBook Pro is more powerful (obviously). Even though the MacBook Pro is far more expandable and flexible, I don't use it in nearly as many situations as I do the iPad. People who don't get this are the people who, well, don't get the iPad's success.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of us in the US own automatics (not me, haven't owned one in 25 years of driving), which makes engine braking hard. Although they have dual clutch multiple speed selector automatics now days, most people don't ever touch the gear selector except to go D, R or N.
How do I keep the AC going when I cut the engine at red lights? It was 112 yesterday.
When you engine brake, you put the car in a lower gear, which increases the revs on the engine, which requires more fuel. Why would you think the engine cuts fuel completely? First, it needs fuel, even at idle. Second, it needs more fuel to produce more rpms in the lower gear.
Unless you are talking about some sort of hybrid?
Instead of saving 20% in fuel, why don't we rip up most unnecessary lighted intersections and replace them with roundabouts. The initial cost would be high, but the fuel savings for ALL cars will recover that cost in a few weeks.
How is it NOT a kindle? It has the Kindle app and runs Kindle books. Unless there's something about the hardware that is significant, I don't see how a one-task device like a Kindle is better than an iPad, that can also be a Kindle. (price being the obvious exception)
Good thing my local Best Buy doesn't have an entire aisle devoted to iPad covers...oh wait...
My wife's textbooks where $600 for this semester. The eBook version where only $200. The $400 we saved paid for a new iPad (almost). It will pay for itself, plus some with each semester.
While I appreciate your attempt at sarcasm, it is foiled by the fact that the Alarm Clock app isn't included on the iPad (probably for the reasons you cited).
Also, as we get older, more mature, and more responsible, we stop relying on alarm clocks to be on time.
$600+? How about $499. Are we really going to continue the disingenuous tactic of overstating the price of Apple products to somehow make them seem bad?
I remember when I bought my $600 iPhone (according to slashdot), for $299.
Hey, somebody who actually gets it!
How many of our clueless in-laws who are in the perpetual "buy a new $400 PC every two years" cycle really need to buy a new PC every two years? Wouldn't they be better off with an iPad, considering what little they do with their computers?
I know my in-laws want a 27" iMac for email, Facebook, and the internet. Seems a bit of overkill to me.
He doesn't actually believe what he's saying, as evident by the shameless plug for Windows 8 in the last part.
Well, there's more use than you are considering. Just yesterday I saw iPads in use at the Dentist office (medical records AND imagery to show the patient). I saw it at work with the mail room guys using it to track delivery and receipt. I saw it at the eye doctor (in the lobby replacing magazines). My pediatrician uses them in the screening area to take medical notes (using a PC VM, nonetheless) and syncing back to the server. I've seen it as point-of-sales devices. I've seen restaurant hostesses using it to track seating in the restaurant. I've seen schools use them. Hell, even the local quick lube place is using them to track customer services and history.
In fact, on a daily basis I see more iPads being used for work than I do people using them for pleasure. Hardly a status symbol, and hardly a niche market for artists, to say the least.
But the iPad is also a Kindle, but not vice versa. If all you need is a good eReader, than yeah, get a Kindle. Most people will be able to justify a little more money for more utility, though.
That was funny...10 years ago.
...and I loathe the whole iPlayskool aesthetic and hype,
Yeah, because the WinXP Fisher Price aesthetic was so much better...
Next time, read the instructions and don't click OK on every popup without reading and understanding what you are about to do.
Except that the Apple GUI guidelines strictly dictate to never use just "OK" (or "yes" or "no") in a dialog. More than likely (don't have it memorized), the dialogue button says something like, "yes, delete my files", not just "OK".
By any reasonable definition, it's a backup, since the files are physically there. It does, however, deliberately pretend for them to be inaccessible, unlike every other similar device on the planet.
Thank the record labels. This argument is moot in another couple of weeks anyway.
The lesson you should have learned is that Apple has been the vanguard of freeing us from the tyranny of the record labels ridiculous demands. You lost your data because the labels didn't want easy transfer of my entire iTunes library to my iPod, then to your iPod, then to your iTunes library. Apple has mitigated this greatly, and will full out eradicate it this Fall.
Exactly my point, and exactly why my argument that OS X handles open files more elegantly than Windows is correct.
You are simply being disingenuous. I suppose you can submit an anecdote of your custom written app that violates the default file management settings of the OS as proof that OS X handles open files just like Windows. Better proof would be for you to use any app on a Mac, open a file then rename/move/replace it in the Finder. You simply won't be bothered with lock files or dialogs like you will in Windows every time.
I swear, every time a legitimate complaint about Windows file management comes up, some slashdotter will blast this forum with the technical reasons why users are stupid and shouldn't be trusted to do anything the way they want to, instead of just accepting that Microsoft has spent 20 years cutting corners, instead of making the system work well. I'm still waiting to hear a good argument of why Windows defaults to this behavior instead of just saying, "yeah, that kinda sucks...we should have fixed that in XP service pack 1."
That's a nice technical answer and all, but here's the reality of what the user experiences:
Scenario 1: Rename an open File
Windows: open MS Word, create a doc, save it as my page.doc. Then, with that file still open, because like 99% of all users, you are working with a document so therefore it is open, go to the desktop and rename the file. It tells you the document is in use and cannot be renamed.
Mac: do all that same stuff, except when you get to the "rename" part, it renames the file. The open copy in Word updates the file name.
Scenario 2: Move an open File
Windows: Open MS Word, create a doc, save it as my_page.doc. Continue working on the doc then get a email from your boss telling you to stick the doc in a different directory. You go to the file in Windows and cut and paste it to the new location, only to be greeted by the message that the file is in use and cannot be moved. Go back to Word, choose "save as" and save the document to a new place, then go to the old place and delete the dupe.
Mac: Go to the finder and move the open Word doc wherever you want. All the relative file paths are updated. OR, use "save as" in Word and deal with duplicate copies (but then again Lion introduces an entirely new versioning system, and there is no longer "save as", but that's another conversation)
So lock file, no lock file, whatever. You cannot debate that OS X handles open files differently (more elegantly) than Windows. I've never had to install an "unlocker" app in OS X.
Do you never work in an environment where files are shared and you don't want others overwriting your changes? These are not uncommon situations in the least bit. And yet, to handle all these you *gasp* have to put exclusive write locks on files. Apps for both OS X and Linux do this as well.
The difference being, with OS X, I never have to worry about the consistency of my data and it works like humans work, not people who dabble in 1s and 0s. Whatever tech goes on in the background that allows me to move, replace, rename, overwrite an open document is what I like about OS X. I don't care what tech goes on to maintain "the consistency of my data". When I have a document open, then realize I want to move it somewhere else, rename it, or replace it, I want it to do that. I don't want to have to install a stupid unlocker program like I do on Windows. I don't want to have to quit what I'm doing, shut everything down, just to do a simple task like renaming a file.
In OS X, when a document is over a network, the write lock is present, but not when the document is on the local account. Files on my local account on my local machine don't have sharing or versioning issues, because I'm the only user that will be touching them, so I don't care to be bothered with unnecessary lock files. Windows sucks in this regard...period.
This behavior doesn't exist on OS X, nor did it in Mac OS (as far back as I can remember).
As a user, your logic makes no sense to me. There are plenty of good reasons (behind the scenes technical reasons?) why the OS should make it harder for me to accomplish work?
How about being able to move or rename an open file while we are at it. These three shortcomings, the fact Windows wouldn't tell you there wasn't enough disk space until it was 30 minutes into the transfer, and the issue in this story are the reason I'm a Mac user.
Excellent point. I'd argue I use my wife's iPad for MORE things than my MacBook Pro. If you count the number of "things" I do with each device, the iPad is far more diverse, but the MacBook Pro is more powerful (obviously). Even though the MacBook Pro is far more expandable and flexible, I don't use it in nearly as many situations as I do the iPad. People who don't get this are the people who, well, don't get the iPad's success.