Does anyone else think it a bit disturbing that the New York Times' review of OS 10.2 is written by David Pogue? His effusive review of "the best-looking, least-intrusive and most thoughtfully designed operating system walking the earth today" only mentions one feature flaw - the lack of an adequate online help system.
And there's the strange thing -- for what do we think that a reader of this review would do? Well, how about buy the software, but also look for a good book to replace the online manual? And there's where David Pogue's own "Mac OS X: The Missing Manual" comes in. Described by Tim O'Reilly as the fastest seller in O'Reilly's history since 1994, Mr. Pogue's review would seem to have precisely the effect of increasing his own net worth.
Mass media may not have the credibility that it used to, but surely we should expect at least a disclaimer from an institution with the reputation of the New York Times?
The efficiency of the locomotives aside, perhaps the real question is: why not try to take advantage of some of the energy produced by *moving* trains?
Yes, these engines are designed to produce massive amounts of power, and do so in a reasonably continuous and predictable way. Why not take some of the extra energy produced (using waste heat to move or boil water comes to mind) and bottle it up in a battery? It would seem that there has to be some leftover that perhaps can't be efficiently used to move the train, but might be captured and resold after the run....
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone else think it a bit disturbing that the New York Times' review of OS 10.2 is written by David Pogue? His effusive review of "the best-looking, least-intrusive and most thoughtfully designed operating system walking the earth today" only mentions one feature flaw - the lack of an adequate online help system.
And there's the strange thing -- for what do we think that a reader of this review would do? Well, how about buy the software, but also look for a good book to replace the online manual? And there's where David Pogue's own "Mac OS X: The Missing Manual" comes in. Described by Tim O'Reilly as the fastest seller in O'Reilly's history since 1994, Mr. Pogue's review would seem to have precisely the effect of increasing his own net worth.
Mass media may not have the credibility that it used to, but surely we should expect at least a disclaimer from an institution with the reputation of the New York Times?
The efficiency of the locomotives aside, perhaps the real question is: why not try to take advantage of some of the energy produced by *moving* trains?
....
Yes, these engines are designed to produce massive amounts of power, and do so in a reasonably continuous and predictable way. Why not take some of the extra energy produced (using waste heat to move or boil water comes to mind) and bottle it up in a battery? It would seem that there has to be some leftover that perhaps can't be efficiently used to move the train, but might be captured and resold after the run