Not due to last Top Gear revenues. Although that can't help. It's down to a long term hatred of the BBC by the Conservatives on ideological grounds. Even though the BBC is one of the best broadcasters in the world, the neo-liberals can't stand to see public bodies, and they want to privatise it. However the public don't want that, so instead they are killing the BBC with cuts.
That's not the real story. The Met Office have all ready been knocked out.
It's stupid, ideology driven nonsense. They are both effectively state organisations. Far better for Britain that the money the BBC spends on forecasts stays in Britain, rather than enriches a foreign commercial enterprise.
What the state BBC has gained, the state Met Office has lost. Pointless.
I bet they're very happy with their decision to make Apple products impossible to disassemble and make all the parts practically impossible to replace.
The fact that they are replacing them rather proves your assumption wrong.
We co-evolved with our food. It's been optimized for us, and we for it. You can experiment with changing over to something that only slightly resembles it, but don't expect that experiment to go well.
We didn't evolve to eat pizza, pasta, donuts and all the rest of the crap that the average person brings home from the store.
The idea to design foods that are closer to a nutritional optimum is a good one. Though Soylent is a primitive step in that direction.
Of course Apple would buy parts in, just as every other car builder does. And as they do for their computers.
Note Apple does still do some manufacturing themselves. The Mac Pro is manufactured by Apple themselves in the USA.
It's hard to see Apple wanting to get into the car assembly business and as far as I know there really isn't a Foxconn of final assembly you can have build your car design. It's very labor intensive, the UAW is still something of a force to be dealt with, and it's a business Apple has zero experience with.
You could make all those same arguments for Tesla. Yet they manufacture their own cars in California. And Tesla has far more capital available to do it.
Frankly, I see the "Apple car" as a way to come up with CarPlay on steroids -- a test platform to figure out how they can come up with some kind of next generation interface and management system that they can sell to carmakers. I would seriously doubt they have the slightest interest in actually getting into the vehicle assembly business.
Small beer. And it doesn't explain why Apple would want the autonomous vehicle testing site, unless you mean CarPlay expanding to a universal car autopilot system.
No, Apple need a new product lined up for after Apple Watch. A product that can have significant margins for an upscale version with a desirable brand. The signs are that its going to be cars. Until this news, EVs were a given. Now it's clear that they are going the whole way to autonomous cars.
Except for the fact that they were sold out for months.
What else is there? iPad was already in development when Jobs was still alive. So it comes down to some new form-factor sizes. That's all. You just can't say that Apple's going in the wrong direction based on a highly successful watch, and nothing failing.
I don't think that Steve Jobs
What you think doesn't matter, because you haven't got a fucking clue what Steve Jobs would have done.
* Turning your car on will take forever and it will not tell you that it is starting up
Just to take this one item. I just switched my Mac off. Then switched it on. Switch on to login screen = 7 seconds. Login screen to completely loaded desktop with all 17 apps I was previously using already opened with documents = an additional 2 seconds.
And of course progress bars during the 7 seconds for the impatient heads.
Apple Is the most profitable company of any company in the world, ever. Right now. And it does so whilst having the highest customer satisfaction in the industry.
The lanes as you describe it are not wide enough. You can't overtake and believe me there are a lot of very slow cyclists in London, and I'm not even referring to the amateurs and tourists wobbling around on Boris bikes.
Boo hoo. You just gave the exact same reason that jack-ass drivers giver for not wanting you on the roads. Because they are too self-important to slow down and wait for the opportunity to pass safely.
See those bad drivers in cars, that everyone hates? You're like that on a bike.
I say this a person who drives the vast majority of the time... so don't think I'm arguing my own side here.
Sure cyclists do those things. But they aren't generally the cause of the accidents. A car driver jumping the lights generally consists of one anticipating the change to red and and accelerating before going through a red light. For a cyclist it consists of slowing or stopping first, seeing that the junction is clear, and then crossing. Although illegal it's very often safer that doing it when the traffic is running.
Not indicating - it's a shame cycles don't typically come equipped with turn indicators. Hand indicating is a mixed blessing because only one hand on the handlebars makes the cycle more unstable, and precludes use of the brakes. But again, cyclists will make very sure the way is safe when moving across traffic. They know how exposed they are. It's cars making unindicated turns without looking for cycles that typically causes accidents.
Slashdot Mirror
Not due to last Top Gear revenues. Although that can't help.
It's down to a long term hatred of the BBC by the Conservatives on ideological grounds. Even though the BBC is one of the best broadcasters in the world, the neo-liberals can't stand to see public bodies, and they want to privatise it. However the public don't want that, so instead they are killing the BBC with cuts.
That's not the real story. The Met Office have all ready been knocked out.
It's stupid, ideology driven nonsense. They are both effectively state organisations. Far better for Britain that the money the BBC spends on forecasts stays in Britain, rather than enriches a foreign commercial enterprise.
What the state BBC has gained, the state Met Office has lost. Pointless.
Bing Tasher E - number of posts for August = 82.
BasilBrush - number of posts for August = 36.
You're pathetic AND self-delusional.
What? The rubber and glue argument? Good grief you guys really are pathetic.
I bet they're very happy with their decision to make Apple products impossible to disassemble and make all the parts practically impossible to replace.
The fact that they are replacing them rather proves your assumption wrong.
Takes about 3 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I couldn't give a fuck what you care about, prick.
That's what I mean.
You keep telling yourself that fat boy.
We co-evolved with our food. It's been optimized for us, and we for it. You can experiment with changing over to something that only slightly resembles it, but don't expect that experiment to go well.
We didn't evolve to eat pizza, pasta, donuts and all the rest of the crap that the average person brings home from the store.
The idea to design foods that are closer to a nutritional optimum is a good one. Though Soylent is a primitive step in that direction.
I seem to remember that Soylent doesn't contain soya.
I find this comment hysterical because it wasn't the FDA that found this out but a private watchdog company. That's how the free market works.
It's a non-profit, reporting on state regulations.
Only if the doses are higher than you'd get in the average diet. It's not clear to me that that is the case.
Of course Apple would buy parts in, just as every other car builder does. And as they do for their computers.
Note Apple does still do some manufacturing themselves. The Mac Pro is manufactured by Apple themselves in the USA.
It's hard to see Apple wanting to get into the car assembly business and as far as I know there really isn't a Foxconn of final assembly you can have build your car design. It's very labor intensive, the UAW is still something of a force to be dealt with, and it's a business Apple has zero experience with.
You could make all those same arguments for Tesla. Yet they manufacture their own cars in California. And Tesla has far more capital available to do it.
Frankly, I see the "Apple car" as a way to come up with CarPlay on steroids -- a test platform to figure out how they can come up with some kind of next generation interface and management system that they can sell to carmakers. I would seriously doubt they have the slightest interest in actually getting into the vehicle assembly business.
Small beer. And it doesn't explain why Apple would want the autonomous vehicle testing site, unless you mean CarPlay expanding to a universal car autopilot system.
No, Apple need a new product lined up for after Apple Watch. A product that can have significant margins for an upscale version with a desirable brand. The signs are that its going to be cars. Until this news, EVs were a given. Now it's clear that they are going the whole way to autonomous cars.
Indeed. Pretty much all of them.
You mean Trash.
Perhaps you've been using Windows too much.
Oh no! Some moron from the internet called me an idiot! I'm doomed!
On no! Some idiot off the internet called me a moron. But that's OK, he doesn't know what it means. :-)
Nothing Apple has done since Job's death has done anything to turn around the company's fortune.
You are an idiot. They were the best performing company in the world, and they still are. Didn't need "turning around".
And yet they only have a minority of the market. If they are actually that great, everyone should buy Apple, right?
Of course not. That would be sub optimal pricing. If you have great products there's no reason to sell them too cheaply.
You only think they're great if you've drunk the kool-aid
Or you have the intelligence to realise that the company making the most profit of any company ever in the entire world is doing a good job.
And there's no need to exaggerate surveys. Apple is consistently the top of every customer satisfaction survey.
You you don't have one it probably means you can't afford one.
Who says that? I haven't heard it. And I wouldn't believe it if I had. Apple doesn't put their name on products designed by other companies.
Apple have the money and the design ambition to do it. And they've seen Tesla already do it for the EV market.
And they know the major player so far is Google, and what they will design will be shit, with low desirability.
So why wouldn't Apple produce their own autonomous car.
You want smug? Try this. I've got an Android phone and an iPhone. The iPhone cost 11 times as much as the Android. Yet it was far better value. :-)
We see this in the watches that nobody wants
Except for the fact that they were sold out for months.
What else is there? iPad was already in development when Jobs was still alive. So it comes down to some new form-factor sizes. That's all. You just can't say that Apple's going in the wrong direction based on a highly successful watch, and nothing failing.
I don't think that Steve Jobs
What you think doesn't matter, because you haven't got a fucking clue what Steve Jobs would have done.
* Turning your car on will take forever and it will not tell you that it is starting up
Just to take this one item. I just switched my Mac off. Then switched it on.
Switch on to login screen = 7 seconds.
Login screen to completely loaded desktop with all 17 apps I was previously using already opened with documents = an additional 2 seconds.
And of course progress bars during the 7 seconds for the impatient heads.
Read it and weep.
Detail? What detail? We know Apple is interested in booking some time at an autonomous vehicle testing site. Nothing more. Where's the detail?
You're still an idiot.
Kick the company into shape? Ah ha ha ha ha.
Apple Is the most profitable company of any company in the world, ever. Right now.
And it does so whilst having the highest customer satisfaction in the industry.
You're an idiot.
The lanes as you describe it are not wide enough. You can't overtake and believe me there are a lot of very slow cyclists in London, and I'm not even referring to the amateurs and tourists wobbling around on Boris bikes.
Boo hoo. You just gave the exact same reason that jack-ass drivers giver for not wanting you on the roads. Because they are too self-important to slow down and wait for the opportunity to pass safely.
See those bad drivers in cars, that everyone hates? You're like that on a bike.
I say this a person who drives the vast majority of the time... so don't think I'm arguing my own side here.
Sure cyclists do those things. But they aren't generally the cause of the accidents. A car driver jumping the lights generally consists of one anticipating the change to red and and accelerating before going through a red light. For a cyclist it consists of slowing or stopping first, seeing that the junction is clear, and then crossing. Although illegal it's very often safer that doing it when the traffic is running.
Not indicating - it's a shame cycles don't typically come equipped with turn indicators. Hand indicating is a mixed blessing because only one hand on the handlebars makes the cycle more unstable, and precludes use of the brakes. But again, cyclists will make very sure the way is safe when moving across traffic. They know how exposed they are. It's cars making unindicated turns without looking for cycles that typically causes accidents.