People who demonstrate such a lack of judgment by purchasing an SUV in the first place certainly can't be expected to demonstrate good judgment behind the wheel, now can they?
I read once that a Scion XB has more interior space than a Suburban. Maybe I misread it, but the point is that giant SUV driving apologists are exactly that. 9 out of 10 SUV drivers will tell you they need it but maybe 3 of 10 actually do.
I have three kids (one in a car seat, and one who is 240lbs) and a wife. Care to guess what we drive?
2008 Mazdaspeed 3 1999 Ford Contour SVT
And we all fit just fine. My kids live with their mom 70 miles away and we meet halfway every weekend, just in case you want to play the "kids don't like small cars on long rides" argument.
Wow, that's quite the backwards thinking. Instead of lobbying for equally tall and giant space hogging SUVs, I'd posit that we need smaller cars that take up less space and are easier to maneuver. Lower center of gravity and shorter stopping distances are far better for safety than your crazy "equal heights" requirement.
But yeah, I'd LOVE to live in a society where everyone drives an SUV. 65mph speed zones would bog down to 45mph, parking lots would double in size, and gas prices would triple to take advantage of the market.
Neck-snapping torque is quite the exaggeration. Otherwise, I agree. I'd love to have purchased a VW Golf diesel, but they are nearly $30k when I can get a Focus that gets 40mpg for $20k. If Ford would make an affordable turbo-diesel in a small passenger car, it'd probably beat the VW in price handily, and I'd be first in line.
I've passed both the UK and the US drivers tests. They are both equally easy when it comes to passing the "driving" portion. The UK one is harder with the rules-of-the-road test, but that's probably because I'm American and it was new to me.
Germany, on the other hand...they're doing it right.
As to #2, I'm an American and lived in England. Not only are your cars smaller (well, our cars, since I drive a Fiesta here in the US), but your roads are far more dangerous, yet you have less deaths (something about traffic circles being less death inducing than 4 way intersections). I'm willing to bet you have more actual accidents, and as you posted, less deaths. The answer is easy--in America we have far too many SUVs and Pickup Trucks. A pickup truck is a shell on a frame. It is probably the least safe thing to be inside when you roll into a ditch, kareem off a wall, or get hit by another vehicle. An SUV is a horrible engineered vehicle (a heavier shell on the same truck frame) usually driven by the worst drivers who have a faux sense of safety due to driving a ten-foot tall miniature house.
The difference is that trucks and busses have to be big for the job they do and additional training is required to drive them,
Please try to tell this to the Battalion of suburban moms on their way to Starbucks every morning in their giant SUVs after having dropped off their 1.5 children at day care.
Had your sister been in a Honda Civic and the other been a VW GTI, they would have avoided a collision in the first place. Driving a 5,000 lb rust-bucket doesn't prevent the floaty suspensions and 200+ feet 60-0 stopping distance-induced wrecks.
You and I are smart and understand going after rich people would make more sense, but that's also why we aren't criminals. Criminals are dumb. I've read on here many times that most property crime occurs in poor neighborhoods, not rich ones. Criminals are too lazy to drive a few blocks I guess?
Except the people I know with Windows partitions were long time Mac users, not recent Windows converts still trying to hold on to the platform. I'm talking first mac they owned was released in 1984 kind of Mac users. And as new Windows users, they are learning that they don't really need OSX.
You live in quite the alternative reality there. If anything, the past 10 years or so (OS X) has proven that more and more people are figuring out they really don't need Windows, not the other way around. The ONLY reason Windows has the market share it does is because people were dead scared in the 90s to try anything else. The Internet came along and all of a sudden OS-agnosticism kicked in. Once people were left up to their own choice and no longer feared that there stuff wouldn't work in Windows, Macs started picking up steam.
And as one of the 1984 era Mac loyalists myself, you citing Sculley-era Mac fans says everything I need to know about your perspective.
I still can't believe you think Mac owners boot into Windows for anything other than playing video games.
When I got my hands re-trained on the laptop, I found that they re-trained on scroll-wheels on mice too. Now at work, where I use a Win7 machine, I constantly try to scroll in the "wrong" direction. Major pain in my ass. Needless to say, I've switched the laptop back to the previous scrolling direction, and am again re-training my hands to accept that.
As far as I'm concerned, changing the default scroll behaviour in Lion was a bad decision. Thankfully I can still reverse it, but who the hell thought it'd be a good idea in the first place?
You hit on everything I'd say. I like the new direction myself, I always go the wrong way on my PC now, and thankfully it can be changed by the user. Luckily I use a Mac at work too, so I've kept the new direction. It works much better in conduction with left/right swiping as well.
No trolling here. I thought the same way you did...for about a day. I was testing Lion at work, and using Snow Leopard on my production machine so I had to use both scrolling behaviors at the same time. After a day or so, the "new" way just makes more sense.
You prefer the old way because it's what you know. People don't like to change. I'm not saying Apple is telling you what's better, I'm saying they have HID experts who do.
Another thing people aren't considering is the totality of the gestures. Natural scrolling (the new way) makes way more sense with swiping left and right to go forward and back in a web browser or full screen app.
You are exactly right. Apple, in 1984, decided to build a brand identity based on ease-of-use. If you ever got to an Apple campus, you'll see the constant reminders of Apple's "focus" (doing a few things really well, as opposed to long feature-lists of crap). They hang posters of the 1984 ad campaign of the one button mouse. A single finger pressing a single button. Easy.
Yes, they clung to that ideology way beyond what the average user was capable of, but there were a billion third party options, and Apple themselves even included right click functionality in the OS, even though their hardware didn't have two buttons. They aren't dumb. They make both paradigms possible.
Even today you see remnants of this focus. Right click is turned off by default. I think this is really stupid, but it takes 2 seconds to turn it on. In somebody's mind (somebody who makes a lot more money than me), it is more important to not alienate new users than it is to run the risk of irritating us power users.
iPad is not a netbook. It's a new paradigm (built on an old paradigm). Unlike netbooks, it isn't a laptop replacement. Unlike tablets, it's not a computer in tablet form. I just ordered one for my wife. I hope she likes it. I am too old and set to let go of this Core i7 MBP with 8GB of ram.
The PowerPC decision was easy. The Apple/IBM/Motorola partnership was falling apart and Intel introduced a ground-breaking processor design. Apple jumped ship, which was the single best decision they've made since 1984. The iPod Halo Effect + Bootcamp have doubled Mac market share in the past 5 years.
No, but I reckon a PowerPC G3 333 was way faster than a P2 of the same era, and a PowerPC G4 800 was way faster than a P4 at that time.
But yeah, if you can only go back 7 years to the very small window of time when the G5 got overrun by the Intel Cores, sure. However, I'm going to just go ahead and go back to 1997-2003 and say for the majority of its lifespan, PowerPC was a better processor than the Intel chips at the time.
This is the crux of the ignorant anti-mac argument. You guys are (mostly) too young to remember history. You cling to arguments like "one button mouse" and "PowerPC was slow".
Yeah, there's a lot of stuff missing, but for all the uproar (Lion pun intended) right now, it's a loud minority. FCP is the loudest, because of the workflows. People aren't going to leave Mac video editing just because of FCP X, because FCP 7 still works for them, and FCP X will get updates. Some people may leave and I wish them luck with the daily hard reboots required with Premiere. At least Lion's Resume feature will save your data when that happens.
computer mice need only one button and no scroll wheel
Hey thanks for the argument that hasn't been valid for 10 years! Have you even used a Mac?
And for the record, PowerPC was faster than the equivalent x86 (not sure how you can even argue otherwise) and Apple never released a netbook. What's your point?
Yes. It encourages you to scroll things in the natural direction, as opposed to scrolling the scroll bars. If you can't see the scroll bar, you are more likely to "pull" the content on your screen "down", which is natural, as opposed to the wrong way we've been doing it for years...pull the SCROLL BAR down and the content goes up. Hide the scroll bar and that association goes away.
It's an error that is easily avoidable. You don't have to use Launchpad, and it is trivial to revert scrolling back (although I prefer the new way better, but it has nothing to do with iOS biases...just makes more sense to pull the information on the screen down by scrolling down, especially with the hidden menu bars).
The effort to include iOS like features is most likely to lure new users into the computer division of Apple, not the other way around.
We used to call them "wall walkers"...you know, you are walking down the hall, they'd see you coming and they'd immediately suck up against the wall and creep past you.
Uh, yeah, then you aren't a good candidate. The rest of us are like, "I just cracked this code and a hundred bad mofo's are dead! Sweet!" (high fives all around).
Slashdot Mirror
People who demonstrate such a lack of judgment by purchasing an SUV in the first place certainly can't be expected to demonstrate good judgment behind the wheel, now can they?
How is it then that USA' s death rates because of car accidents are so ridiculously high?
SUVs and trucks. But you already knew that, and SUV apologists don't want to believe it so they'll make ridiculous claims in this thread.
I read once that a Scion XB has more interior space than a Suburban. Maybe I misread it, but the point is that giant SUV driving apologists are exactly that. 9 out of 10 SUV drivers will tell you they need it but maybe 3 of 10 actually do.
I have three kids (one in a car seat, and one who is 240lbs) and a wife. Care to guess what we drive?
2008 Mazdaspeed 3
1999 Ford Contour SVT
And we all fit just fine. My kids live with their mom 70 miles away and we meet halfway every weekend, just in case you want to play the "kids don't like small cars on long rides" argument.
Wow, that's quite the backwards thinking. Instead of lobbying for equally tall and giant space hogging SUVs, I'd posit that we need smaller cars that take up less space and are easier to maneuver. Lower center of gravity and shorter stopping distances are far better for safety than your crazy "equal heights" requirement.
But yeah, I'd LOVE to live in a society where everyone drives an SUV. 65mph speed zones would bog down to 45mph, parking lots would double in size, and gas prices would triple to take advantage of the market.
Neck-snapping torque is quite the exaggeration. Otherwise, I agree. I'd love to have purchased a VW Golf diesel, but they are nearly $30k when I can get a Focus that gets 40mpg for $20k. If Ford would make an affordable turbo-diesel in a small passenger car, it'd probably beat the VW in price handily, and I'd be first in line.
I've passed both the UK and the US drivers tests. They are both equally easy when it comes to passing the "driving" portion. The UK one is harder with the rules-of-the-road test, but that's probably because I'm American and it was new to me.
Germany, on the other hand...they're doing it right.
As to #2, I'm an American and lived in England. Not only are your cars smaller (well, our cars, since I drive a Fiesta here in the US), but your roads are far more dangerous, yet you have less deaths (something about traffic circles being less death inducing than 4 way intersections). I'm willing to bet you have more actual accidents, and as you posted, less deaths. The answer is easy--in America we have far too many SUVs and Pickup Trucks. A pickup truck is a shell on a frame. It is probably the least safe thing to be inside when you roll into a ditch, kareem off a wall, or get hit by another vehicle. An SUV is a horrible engineered vehicle (a heavier shell on the same truck frame) usually driven by the worst drivers who have a faux sense of safety due to driving a ten-foot tall miniature house.
The difference is that trucks and busses have to be big for the job they do and additional training is required to drive them,
Please try to tell this to the Battalion of suburban moms on their way to Starbucks every morning in their giant SUVs after having dropped off their 1.5 children at day care.
Had your sister been in a Honda Civic and the other been a VW GTI, they would have avoided a collision in the first place. Driving a 5,000 lb rust-bucket doesn't prevent the floaty suspensions and 200+ feet 60-0 stopping distance-induced wrecks.
You and I are smart and understand going after rich people would make more sense, but that's also why we aren't criminals. Criminals are dumb. I've read on here many times that most property crime occurs in poor neighborhoods, not rich ones. Criminals are too lazy to drive a few blocks I guess?
Except the people I know with Windows partitions were long time Mac users, not recent Windows converts still trying to hold on to the platform. I'm talking first mac they owned was released in 1984 kind of Mac users. And as new Windows users, they are learning that they don't really need OSX.
You live in quite the alternative reality there. If anything, the past 10 years or so (OS X) has proven that more and more people are figuring out they really don't need Windows, not the other way around. The ONLY reason Windows has the market share it does is because people were dead scared in the 90s to try anything else. The Internet came along and all of a sudden OS-agnosticism kicked in. Once people were left up to their own choice and no longer feared that there stuff wouldn't work in Windows, Macs started picking up steam.
And as one of the 1984 era Mac loyalists myself, you citing Sculley-era Mac fans says everything I need to know about your perspective.
I still can't believe you think Mac owners boot into Windows for anything other than playing video games.
When I got my hands re-trained on the laptop, I found that they re-trained on scroll-wheels on mice too. Now at work, where I use a Win7 machine, I constantly try to scroll in the "wrong" direction. Major pain in my ass. Needless to say, I've switched the laptop back to the previous scrolling direction, and am again re-training my hands to accept that.
As far as I'm concerned, changing the default scroll behaviour in Lion was a bad decision. Thankfully I can still reverse it, but who the hell thought it'd be a good idea in the first place?
You hit on everything I'd say. I like the new direction myself, I always go the wrong way on my PC now, and thankfully it can be changed by the user. Luckily I use a Mac at work too, so I've kept the new direction. It works much better in conduction with left/right swiping as well.
No trolling here. I thought the same way you did...for about a day. I was testing Lion at work, and using Snow Leopard on my production machine so I had to use both scrolling behaviors at the same time. After a day or so, the "new" way just makes more sense.
You prefer the old way because it's what you know. People don't like to change. I'm not saying Apple is telling you what's better, I'm saying they have HID experts who do.
Another thing people aren't considering is the totality of the gestures. Natural scrolling (the new way) makes way more sense with swiping left and right to go forward and back in a web browser or full screen app.
You are exactly right. Apple, in 1984, decided to build a brand identity based on ease-of-use. If you ever got to an Apple campus, you'll see the constant reminders of Apple's "focus" (doing a few things really well, as opposed to long feature-lists of crap). They hang posters of the 1984 ad campaign of the one button mouse. A single finger pressing a single button. Easy.
Yes, they clung to that ideology way beyond what the average user was capable of, but there were a billion third party options, and Apple themselves even included right click functionality in the OS, even though their hardware didn't have two buttons. They aren't dumb. They make both paradigms possible.
Even today you see remnants of this focus. Right click is turned off by default. I think this is really stupid, but it takes 2 seconds to turn it on. In somebody's mind (somebody who makes a lot more money than me), it is more important to not alienate new users than it is to run the risk of irritating us power users.
iPad is not a netbook. It's a new paradigm (built on an old paradigm). Unlike netbooks, it isn't a laptop replacement. Unlike tablets, it's not a computer in tablet form. I just ordered one for my wife. I hope she likes it. I am too old and set to let go of this Core i7 MBP with 8GB of ram.
The PowerPC decision was easy. The Apple/IBM/Motorola partnership was falling apart and Intel introduced a ground-breaking processor design. Apple jumped ship, which was the single best decision they've made since 1984. The iPod Halo Effect + Bootcamp have doubled Mac market share in the past 5 years.
No, but I reckon a PowerPC G3 333 was way faster than a P2 of the same era, and a PowerPC G4 800 was way faster than a P4 at that time.
But yeah, if you can only go back 7 years to the very small window of time when the G5 got overrun by the Intel Cores, sure. However, I'm going to just go ahead and go back to 1997-2003 and say for the majority of its lifespan, PowerPC was a better processor than the Intel chips at the time.
This is the crux of the ignorant anti-mac argument. You guys are (mostly) too young to remember history. You cling to arguments like "one button mouse" and "PowerPC was slow".
I'm not sure what "no audio tracks" means. http://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/fcp-x-audio-tutorial-part-1-adding-sound-and-music-to-your-final-cut-pro-x-projects-and-using-snapping-to-control-placement-on-the-timeline/
Yeah, there's a lot of stuff missing, but for all the uproar (Lion pun intended) right now, it's a loud minority. FCP is the loudest, because of the workflows. People aren't going to leave Mac video editing just because of FCP X, because FCP 7 still works for them, and FCP X will get updates. Some people may leave and I wish them luck with the daily hard reboots required with Premiere. At least Lion's Resume feature will save your data when that happens.
None of those will come true, which makes me sad, because I really want subscription based iTunes (ala Spotify).
Apple has stated repeatedly that
computer mice need only one button and no scroll wheel
Hey thanks for the argument that hasn't been valid for 10 years! Have you even used a Mac?
And for the record, PowerPC was faster than the equivalent x86 (not sure how you can even argue otherwise) and Apple never released a netbook. What's your point?
Yes. It encourages you to scroll things in the natural direction, as opposed to scrolling the scroll bars. If you can't see the scroll bar, you are more likely to "pull" the content on your screen "down", which is natural, as opposed to the wrong way we've been doing it for years...pull the SCROLL BAR down and the content goes up. Hide the scroll bar and that association goes away.
It's a bit presumptuous to declare the pro video market "gone" after a month of a new release.
It's an error that is easily avoidable. You don't have to use Launchpad, and it is trivial to revert scrolling back (although I prefer the new way better, but it has nothing to do with iOS biases...just makes more sense to pull the information on the screen down by scrolling down, especially with the hidden menu bars).
The effort to include iOS like features is most likely to lure new users into the computer division of Apple, not the other way around.
Yes, because they NSA has the time and inclination to wiretap 300 million people.
The word is extraverts, you fucking idiot.
Nice people skills. You are probably one of those extroverts he's talking about.
We used to call them "wall walkers"...you know, you are walking down the hall, they'd see you coming and they'd immediately suck up against the wall and creep past you.
Uh, yeah, then you aren't a good candidate. The rest of us are like, "I just cracked this code and a hundred bad mofo's are dead! Sweet!" (high fives all around).