Size differences are indeed an issue. Many people don't read the fine print, the SmartCar that gets the 5 star rating gets it because they only compare crashes into similar size cars.
A Suburban hitting a SmartCar will flatten it, a SmartCar hitting a Suburban? The Suburban might not even notice.
That being said, crumple zones, airbags, etc. all help, and now Auto Emergency Braking is an optional feature in Suburbans, within 5-10 years I expect it will be standard and that will help.
Note: I drive such a truck for the very concerns you list, I have three kids, I consider the 5,900lbs of steel to be armor for my family.
My current truck doesn't have all those safety features which is why I just ordered a 2015 model, and yes that one includes auto crash braking, lane departure warning, blind spot warning, and it has the haptic vibrating seat to warn you of all that in case you miss the lights.
I figure it has to prevent just a single crash with my family in it to be worth every single penny.
You can get a private pilot certificate with 35 hours of training in a 141 school, you don't yet have a clue as to everything you could run into, but you're legal to take off from California and fly to New York, by yourself, at night, with 35 hours of total flight time.
I strongly disagree with that, I think it is unsafe and stupid, but that's the law.
As I always tell new pilots, that pilot certificate is a licence to learn, you'll always learn new things as a pilot and the day you think you have it figured out, is the day to hang it up.
That would never fly with the FAA, they have no sense of humor at all.
Keep in mind that you have no right to fly, the FAA has the right to suspend your pilot certificate (it isn't a licence, it is a certificate), at any time they deem necessary for the safety of the public, then you have to go to court to try and get it back.
The FAA actually looks at the spirit of the law more than most government agencies, but in that regard it is towards the "don't do it" side of things.
They believe in the "if it looks like a duck, quakes like a duck, and walks like a duck, then it's a duck, regardless of anything else."
Some pilots know what they are doing, others are a hazard. You're right at how much of a joke the medical really is, the basic training isn't all that much better.
Having been the chief flight instructor for a Part 141 school and a check pilot for a 135 outfit, I know all too well how many "experienced and certified pilots" have no idea what they are doing.
As a professional pilot with many thousands of hours of flight time, I'll say there are two factors...
1. The quality of skill and knowledge of the pilot and how current those are.
2. The quality and technology in the airplane itself and how well it is maintained.
The pilot is easy enough to figure out if you know what you're doing, problem is, people using this service won't know that.
The airplane? There are vast differences between different airplanes. A 1970 Cessna Turbo 210 is a nice airplane, if you spend all the money required to make it that way and safe. It is horrible when flown on a tight budget. A 2013 Cirrus SR-22? Great airplane, much safer than most of what is flying, but it also costs over half a million dollars, so not that many of them out there.
And there is a lot in-between those two.
I've flown a lot of junk, I've also flown brand new and nice. One of my favorite flights was the delivery flight of a brand new 2004 King Air 350, fresh from the factory with 9 hours of time on it. I flew the first 94 hours in that airplane, what a beautiful nice airplane... I've also flown a 1982 King Air 90 that needed... well, everything... it more less needed to be scrapped, the cost to overhaul and update it was more than the airplane was worth.
Your average person doesn't know or understand any of that. This is why commercial flights are regulated and the inspections and maintenance required are higher.
Yep, lawyers... Uber already has a lawsuit against it for someone killed while getting a ride.
It will only get worse...
If we had national driver licence rules and national standards, it would be easier to put something in place like a middle licence, such as a "part time taxi" licence that was somewhere in-between a full one and a private driver.
But with 50 states to work with, it is very hard to get that sort of thing done.
Actually, it was 28,000 last year, it has dropped by almost a third in the past 10 years.
All that safety technology is starting to make a difference. People crap and required airbags and antilock brakes, but they do save lives.
Required auto emergency braking, adaptive cruise control, lane departure warning, blind zone alert, electronic stability control, traction control, and the like will reduce it even further.
Auto driving cars will reduce it to nearly zero. Those can't get here fast enough...
Yep, a light airplane will glide for miles and miles with just a few thousand feet of altitude.
When I was actively teaching in 172s, one of the things I'd do on a cross country was to pull the power back to idle and tell the student the engine has "failed" and they need a place to land. I'd do this at about 4,000 feet above the ground and within gliding range of 2 or 3 small airports.
About half the time, the student would freak out and aim for the nearest highway, when they actually have 10 to 15 minutes of time in the air at that point and plenty of glide range to reach an airport.
Powerful learning experience that should be done more often to new pilots.
Frankly Windows 7 does not have a single feature I need that I did not have with XP. NOT ONE.
You're mistaken, security is that feature. It isn't one that you can touch and taste so much, but it is there. The core of 64-bit Win7 is far more secure than the core of XP.
I took a look at this list... clearly some people have been trying to make inroads here, but none of those are ready for prime time.
Full disclosure, my wife is a Chiropractor and she uses Medisoft, I'm her technical support so I have an idea of what it has to do.
Accountability, upgrades, support with insurance billing, etc. are all mission critical applications. It also is fairly easy to find a front desk girl who knows Medisoft already, those others would take a lot of training.
So it isn't just the cost of the software (Medisoft is many thousands of dollars), but the cost of training and the ease of finding someone already trained in the software.
Something to consider... it isn't that XP is now 13 years old and they have "yet to fix all the bugs", the fact is, XP SP3 is not really the same OS as XP RTM.
So a lot of new features were added over the years, many of those have added bugs and security problems. SP2 really could have been a new OS, give it a new coat of paint and call it Vista and it would have sold. MS is not given enough credit for all the feature updates over the years they have given away for free.
Another point... the more people demand "support", the more MS might decide that future OSs only come with three years of patches and after that are $19 a year to continue to update.
Then you'd end up with an OS that doesn't do much.
Think about the USB stack, or the FireWire stack, or DVD playback? All of those are licenced and none are "free for MS to give away", yet you wouldn't want an OS that doesn't support USB.
How about networking, or video drivers, or a hundred other things...
You're asking for a perfect world, but that just doesn't exist. Modern OS are complex, even Android and iOS are complex and involve a lot of patents and cross licencing. To just say "well, they should have done it better" ignores the reality of the world.
7 is a nice upgrade over XP, if you don't see or understand that, I'm not sure what I can say, 5 years on, that will help you understand.
Besides proper 64 bit support, the seamless way it installs and updates drivers and software for almost anything you plug into it is vastly improved over XP.
XP still wants a floppy disk for drivers needed during install, it was developed in another time, the world has moved on.
I have played with 8, it doesn't do enough over 7 to make the upgrade worthwhile for me, but I suspect 9 will when it comes.
1. Define "full support"? There is a lot of wiggle room in that.
2. Using that rule, MS would have to support MS DOS 1.0. Ok, fine, on what hardware? Running what programs? Exactly what is "full support" for MS DOS 1.0?
Is it valuable in that it contains some code that has been reused in Vista, 7, and 8.
It is valuable in that it is currently the primary competition MS is facing in getting people to buy 8.
MS doesn't want XP around, it is now a competitor that isn't earning them any money.
Trying to make MS do something that will make it easier to NOT upgrade to 8 is nuts, they would fight that tooth and nail.
On top of that, it is reasonable to assume that MS doesn't have exclusive rights to all the code in Windows XP, much of it may be licensed or otherwise entangled with 3rd parties and it isn't theirs to give away.
Slashdot Mirror
Size differences are indeed an issue. Many people don't read the fine print, the SmartCar that gets the 5 star rating gets it because they only compare crashes into similar size cars.
A Suburban hitting a SmartCar will flatten it, a SmartCar hitting a Suburban? The Suburban might not even notice.
That being said, crumple zones, airbags, etc. all help, and now Auto Emergency Braking is an optional feature in Suburbans, within 5-10 years I expect it will be standard and that will help.
Note: I drive such a truck for the very concerns you list, I have three kids, I consider the 5,900lbs of steel to be armor for my family.
My current truck doesn't have all those safety features which is why I just ordered a 2015 model, and yes that one includes auto crash braking, lane departure warning, blind spot warning, and it has the haptic vibrating seat to warn you of all that in case you miss the lights.
I figure it has to prevent just a single crash with my family in it to be worth every single penny.
This...
You can get a private pilot certificate with 35 hours of training in a 141 school, you don't yet have a clue as to everything you could run into, but you're legal to take off from California and fly to New York, by yourself, at night, with 35 hours of total flight time.
I strongly disagree with that, I think it is unsafe and stupid, but that's the law.
As I always tell new pilots, that pilot certificate is a licence to learn, you'll always learn new things as a pilot and the day you think you have it figured out, is the day to hang it up.
That would never fly with the FAA, they have no sense of humor at all.
Keep in mind that you have no right to fly, the FAA has the right to suspend your pilot certificate (it isn't a licence, it is a certificate), at any time they deem necessary for the safety of the public, then you have to go to court to try and get it back.
The FAA actually looks at the spirit of the law more than most government agencies, but in that regard it is towards the "don't do it" side of things.
They believe in the "if it looks like a duck, quakes like a duck, and walks like a duck, then it's a duck, regardless of anything else."
I can't really post it easily enough here, but the FAA has issued a letter in the past confirming what you've said.
If the pilot didn't need to go, then it is a commercial operation and requires a 135 certificate and all that goes with it, period dot the end.
There is indeed no gray here at all, pilots are busted for this all the time, just don't do it.
If the pilot was going anyway and was going to pay the full bill, and a friend wants to come along and pays for his/her share of the gas, that's fine.
If the pilot wasn't going unless the passenger comes, it is 135.
It is as black and white as that.
You sir, are totally correct in all respects.
Some pilots know what they are doing, others are a hazard. You're right at how much of a joke the medical really is, the basic training isn't all that much better.
Having been the chief flight instructor for a Part 141 school and a check pilot for a 135 outfit, I know all too well how many "experienced and certified pilots" have no idea what they are doing.
As a professional pilot with many thousands of hours of flight time, I'll say there are two factors...
1. The quality of skill and knowledge of the pilot and how current those are.
2. The quality and technology in the airplane itself and how well it is maintained.
The pilot is easy enough to figure out if you know what you're doing, problem is, people using this service won't know that.
The airplane? There are vast differences between different airplanes. A 1970 Cessna Turbo 210 is a nice airplane, if you spend all the money required to make it that way and safe. It is horrible when flown on a tight budget. A 2013 Cirrus SR-22? Great airplane, much safer than most of what is flying, but it also costs over half a million dollars, so not that many of them out there.
And there is a lot in-between those two.
I've flown a lot of junk, I've also flown brand new and nice. One of my favorite flights was the delivery flight of a brand new 2004 King Air 350, fresh from the factory with 9 hours of time on it. I flew the first 94 hours in that airplane, what a beautiful nice airplane... I've also flown a 1982 King Air 90 that needed... well, everything... it more less needed to be scrapped, the cost to overhaul and update it was more than the airplane was worth.
Your average person doesn't know or understand any of that. This is why commercial flights are regulated and the inspections and maintenance required are higher.
Yep, lawyers... Uber already has a lawsuit against it for someone killed while getting a ride.
It will only get worse...
If we had national driver licence rules and national standards, it would be easier to put something in place like a middle licence, such as a "part time taxi" licence that was somewhere in-between a full one and a private driver.
But with 50 states to work with, it is very hard to get that sort of thing done.
Actually, it was 28,000 last year, it has dropped by almost a third in the past 10 years.
All that safety technology is starting to make a difference. People crap and required airbags and antilock brakes, but they do save lives.
Required auto emergency braking, adaptive cruise control, lane departure warning, blind zone alert, electronic stability control, traction control, and the like will reduce it even further.
Auto driving cars will reduce it to nearly zero. Those can't get here fast enough...
More likely, that $19/year would get them the "current or last generation OS".
So they could have stayed on XP during the Vista years, but 7 would have been a required upgrade as XP would have gone away when 7 came out.
Likewise, staying on 7 would be fine, 8 is optional, but 9 will be required (or at least move to 8.
Keep in mind that "support" might well be giving everyone still running XP a free copy of Vista.
Would that make everyone happy?
Yep, a light airplane will glide for miles and miles with just a few thousand feet of altitude.
When I was actively teaching in 172s, one of the things I'd do on a cross country was to pull the power back to idle and tell the student the engine has "failed" and they need a place to land. I'd do this at about 4,000 feet above the ground and within gliding range of 2 or 3 small airports.
About half the time, the student would freak out and aim for the nearest highway, when they actually have 10 to 15 minutes of time in the air at that point and plenty of glide range to reach an airport.
Powerful learning experience that should be done more often to new pilots.
It is against the EULA to run Windows XP for either of those tasks, so you shouldn't be doing either anyway.
The EULA specifically states that XP should not be used for such mission critical applications.
Windows XP Embedded is for that, and MS is still supporting that and the contracts for that are written differently than the consumer version.
Frankly Windows 7 does not have a single feature I need that I did not have with XP. NOT ONE.
You're mistaken, security is that feature. It isn't one that you can touch and taste so much, but it is there. The core of 64-bit Win7 is far more secure than the core of XP.
We all need better security.
I took a look at this list... clearly some people have been trying to make inroads here, but none of those are ready for prime time.
Full disclosure, my wife is a Chiropractor and she uses Medisoft, I'm her technical support so I have an idea of what it has to do.
Accountability, upgrades, support with insurance billing, etc. are all mission critical applications. It also is fairly easy to find a front desk girl who knows Medisoft already, those others would take a lot of training.
So it isn't just the cost of the software (Medisoft is many thousands of dollars), but the cost of training and the ease of finding someone already trained in the software.
Something to consider... it isn't that XP is now 13 years old and they have "yet to fix all the bugs", the fact is, XP SP3 is not really the same OS as XP RTM.
So a lot of new features were added over the years, many of those have added bugs and security problems. SP2 really could have been a new OS, give it a new coat of paint and call it Vista and it would have sold. MS is not given enough credit for all the feature updates over the years they have given away for free.
Another point... the more people demand "support", the more MS might decide that future OSs only come with three years of patches and after that are $19 a year to continue to update.
Would everyone prefer *that* solution?
Yes, they could... but giving up the copyright and releasing the source are NOT the same thing...
Right now you can go copy MS DOS 1.0, and while that is copyright infringement, I doubt MS really cares unless you try to make money from it.
But having a "free" copy of MS DOS 1.0 or Windows XP doesn't fix any security holes in it, now does it?
Then you'd end up with an OS that doesn't do much.
Think about the USB stack, or the FireWire stack, or DVD playback? All of those are licenced and none are "free for MS to give away", yet you wouldn't want an OS that doesn't support USB.
How about networking, or video drivers, or a hundred other things...
You're asking for a perfect world, but that just doesn't exist. Modern OS are complex, even Android and iOS are complex and involve a lot of patents and cross licencing. To just say "well, they should have done it better" ignores the reality of the world.
Yep, and if the government came out tomorrow and said, "MS, you must support your OS for 20 years".
MS might well said, "ok, fine, we will do that... the price is $100 per machine per year for extended support, sign up here:"
Would everyone be happy with that answer?
Nonsense, it makes it look horrible for a desktop OS.
I've been reading about the "year of the Linux desktop" for 15 years now...
It won't be this year, or next, or 10 years from now.
Apple's OS X has 5 times the marketshare of Linux, and it costs an arm and a leg.
Windows 8's real threat is coming from Android and Apple, not Linux.
If they release them for free, then why would anyone pay for them in the first place?
In addition, they are providing extended support only for very large companies and governments, only because they must maintain those relationships.
It is not in MS's interest to keep XP around for the average user.
If you don't like or agree with this, there is always Apple, they provide decades of support for OS X, right?
Or Linux? After all, 2001 releases of Linux are still supported, right?
Not true about the safety recall thing.
That law is 10 years, except in rare cases.
After all, you don't hear about recalls of 1970s cars anymore, do you?
Also, recalls are done for safety related things, in other words, stuff that CAN KILL YOU.
Windows XP isn't going to kill you, even if it gets infected or crashes. So the whole "defect" thing is way over blown.
7 is a nice upgrade over XP, if you don't see or understand that, I'm not sure what I can say, 5 years on, that will help you understand.
Besides proper 64 bit support, the seamless way it installs and updates drivers and software for almost anything you plug into it is vastly improved over XP.
XP still wants a floppy disk for drivers needed during install, it was developed in another time, the world has moved on.
I have played with 8, it doesn't do enough over 7 to make the upgrade worthwhile for me, but I suspect 9 will when it comes.
Another way to look at it...
Lets say that you force MS to provide updates and support.
What can they charge for this? Car companies have to provide parts and service for 10 years, but they don't have to do it for free.
MS could simply raise the price of support each year until it becomes insane.
Microsoft likely does not own the copyright to everything that is in the Windows XP source code.
Just like Apple licensed the Rosetta software from another companies, MS has stuff in there that they didn't write.
It isn't MS's to release.
Nice idea, but the issue is FAR more complex than that.
That is a nice idea...
Two problems:
1. Define "full support"? There is a lot of wiggle room in that.
2. Using that rule, MS would have to support MS DOS 1.0. Ok, fine, on what hardware? Running what programs? Exactly what is "full support" for MS DOS 1.0?
Is it valuable in that it contains some code that has been reused in Vista, 7, and 8.
It is valuable in that it is currently the primary competition MS is facing in getting people to buy 8.
MS doesn't want XP around, it is now a competitor that isn't earning them any money.
Trying to make MS do something that will make it easier to NOT upgrade to 8 is nuts, they would fight that tooth and nail.
On top of that, it is reasonable to assume that MS doesn't have exclusive rights to all the code in Windows XP, much of it may be licensed or otherwise entangled with 3rd parties and it isn't theirs to give away.