Where is the fun in that? I can't watch them die if we fire them out of a cannon into the sun. Even if I could point a telescope at the sun and watch them approach, it would be nonspectuaular. The execs would merely disintegrate as they approached the corona. Booooring.
If we fire them out of cannons I would much prefer a skeet shoot. Here is my idea: we find a wide open area and get about 100 music fans and arm them with shotguns, get a cannon, a few truck loads of ASCAP or BMI music CDs, a few dozen of these so-called artist and a record exec. Start off by firing CDs out of the cannon a pallet at a time while the so-called artist and execs watch. Force the so-called artist and execs to wear headphones playing their own quote-unquote music. When you get through the CDs load up an artist into the cannon...oh well you get the idea...
Not only that, but this thing goes about 40 miles on batteries. How much do you think it would cost to go 80 miles? How about 100 miles? 200? Hey you just bought yourself a Tesla worth of Volt.
I don't think that's true, when I looked into it I found NiMH to cost between $225 to $500 per kWh. That sounds like a lot, but it's cheaper than Li-ion.
The problem with NiMH (or any battery) is not necessarily the upfront cost, but that the battery may last only 3 years.
Where do you think the original electric car (EV1) would have been if they allowed it to be sold and then *surprise* 3 years later you have to essentially pay for a new car?
"foo bar baz" may be a bad example, but Google does selectively ignore terms even when you put them in quotes. It didn't used to and it drives me crazy. But you are correct, even if the example is flawed.
Dude, electric cars are really easy to build. The hard part is making them affordable. Tesla hasn't demonstrated they can do that. No one has. That's why they made a Roadster. The Model S isn't with the affordable range either. It's all hype, nothing more.
The range is 150 miles for the $57,400 version. There will be "larger" battery packs available that will increase the range for an unannounced price. Yeah they just took batteries out.
Improvements, yes. But practical affordable electric cars, not likely. Not unless the price comes way down. I don't see how Tesla shipping a few thousand cars will bring the price down.
I mean, does that make sense? I get the feeling I'm missing something since everyone is so adamant about Tesla's "trickle down" effect. How does selling a few extra batteries change the market?
Perhaps, but it didn't trickle down or come from Tesla in anyway. Not to mention it probably cost even more than off the shelf Li-ions, so it's still not the magic bullet.
The LG Chem ones are being used in the Chevrolet Volt which only goes 40 miles on a charge and still needs a gas engine for distance. It cost $40,000 too. That's not affordable by any stretch of the imagination, especially when you consider the replacement cost of the batteries (keeping in mind that 10 years is what GM "expects" not what will be reality). If it turns out the batteries don't last as long as they expect then I wouldn't expect to see this car on the road anytime soon.
Except that the Tesla cars use off the shelf Li-ions. It's not tech it hype!
The sedan uses less batteries that's where the reduced cost comes from. It also comes at the cost of less range.
Tesla is a hype company and you guys are drinking it up like there is no tomorrow.
Seriously I'm not trying to be a dick to anyone here. I'm just being realistic. Tesla is not going to save us and they're not going to turn the industry upside down. They'll make a few buck no doubt and they might even get lucky when someone really does develop the mythical "batteries" they need.
To be clear I really hope this does happen. I hope some new battery tech comes out and I really hope the cost comes down. It just hasn't happened and I don't think Tesla is making any headway. As far as I know they're not developing batteries or researching new battery tech. They're using off the shelf batteries and they will not move enough volume to reduce costs. The Model S appears to just use less batteries to reduce the price.
Sure, I guess I'm a little arrogant today, but this kind of delusion really annoys me. It really boils down to this: companies are going to take advantage of people's desire to be environmentally friendly. They will talk up their "tech" to get buyers and investors, but when it comes down to it all they will be selling is the good feeling of going green. The Tesla hasn't produce anything new or innovative. There's no industry changing technology coming from them that I can see. Even there business model isn't new, it is basically duping consumers, investors and government. They're promising the world and delivering nothing.
And as to not be so arrogant and full-of-myself, please someone tell me how Tesla is going to make electric cars more efficient and affordable? I'm pretty damn sure it all boils down to batteries, but they use standard computer batteries. Are they going to take the millions of dollars of government money and develop better battery tech? What is their plan? And will it really benefit us or will the Tesla people get rich and jump ship?
Second, since when is a $57,400 car with a $7,500 tax credit affordable? How is that trickling down?
The car only has a range of 150 miles where as the Roadster has a range of over 200 miles. The battery technology didn't get any better or cheaper. All they did was take some batteries out to reduce the price. Again, no technology, no innovation and certainly no trickling down.
That's my point exactly. The batteries you're talking about don't exist. The Tesla uses standard Li-ions found in laptops and cell phones. There is no innovative technology here. There is nothing to trickle down.
But the carrot is that the technology in these 100k$ cars will trickle down to cheaper, more consumer targeted vehicles.
This is delusional. Sorry but it is. You're not alone and it's the support argument that gets repeated the most. But think about what technology it is that is supposed to magically trickle down: batteries.
Hmm, where have I see those before? I don't know maybe in millions of laptops, cell phones, handheld devices, power tools, calculators, and cars. Nearly everything uses batteries, but good batteries still cost about $100 per pound.
If all those batteries haven't reduce the price thus far why would a car company selling a few thousand cars make any difference at all? I highly suspect it won't.
That's not a "report" button, its a "customize my results for the future button" and it is really stupid. The elephant in the room is that Google is exploitable just like every other search engine. People are noticing the quality of their searches declining and there doesn't seem to be much Google can do or is willing to do. Most of the shitty sites that have no value are loaded with AdSense. Pretty much Google needs to start filtering results or they need to replace PageRank which is fundamentally the problem. Either that or someone else needs to build a better search engine.
MTV doesn't play music. Radio stations will stop playing music now too. Services like last.fm and Pandora only suggest music you already know about anyway. Live music sounds like crap (hey mr. indy band ever heard of an eq?). And I don't even care, because the industry quit making music long ago, it's just taken awhile for everyone to catch up.
You're not only confused, you're miss informed. The iPhone was specifically designed to be a smart phone. Not only that it was the iPod touch that followed the iPhone.
Furthermore, they got the phone right the first time. I own a first generation iPhone and am completely happy with it. I'm not even compelled to upgrade (AT&T is a different story). The industry has barely started to catchup (there might be something to the Pre, etc).
Sure the eMate was a flop, but you're talking about historic Apple Computer, not Apple Inc. proper. I don't think they've flopped since the eMate (their netbook as you say). Certainly nothing has flopped after the release of the original iMac.
And you really shouldn't reference belligerent bloggers when you are attempting to make a point. That guy is as laughable as he is loony.
Slashdot Mirror
Where, oh where, are my mod points?
Why do you say
where where are your mod points?
I took the CHSPE too. My only gripe is that people confuse it with a GED.
I took the test back in 1999. Looks like New England is about 11 years behind.
Where is the fun in that? I can't watch them die if we fire them out of a cannon into the sun. Even if I could point a telescope at the sun and watch them approach, it would be nonspectuaular. The execs would merely disintegrate as they approached the corona. Booooring.
If we fire them out of cannons I would much prefer a skeet shoot. Here is my idea: we find a wide open area and get about 100 music fans and arm them with shotguns, get a cannon, a few truck loads of ASCAP or BMI music CDs, a few dozen of these so-called artist and a record exec. Start off by firing CDs out of the cannon a pallet at a time while the so-called artist and execs watch. Force the so-called artist and execs to wear headphones playing their own quote-unquote music. When you get through the CDs load up an artist into the cannon...oh well you get the idea...
comment.c:1: error: âover-exaggerationâ(TM) undeclared (first use in this function)
Not only that, but this thing goes about 40 miles on batteries. How much do you think it would cost to go 80 miles? How about 100 miles? 200? Hey you just bought yourself a Tesla worth of Volt.
I'm so sick of hype.
I don't think that's true, when I looked into it I found NiMH to cost between $225 to $500 per kWh. That sounds like a lot, but it's cheaper than Li-ion.
The problem with NiMH (or any battery) is not necessarily the upfront cost, but that the battery may last only 3 years.
Where do you think the original electric car (EV1) would have been if they allowed it to be sold and then *surprise* 3 years later you have to essentially pay for a new car?
"foo bar baz" may be a bad example, but Google does selectively ignore terms even when you put them in quotes. It didn't used to and it drives me crazy. But you are correct, even if the example is flawed.
Need I say more?
Dude, electric cars are really easy to build. The hard part is making them affordable. Tesla hasn't demonstrated they can do that. No one has. That's why they made a Roadster. The Model S isn't with the affordable range either. It's all hype, nothing more.
The range is 150 miles for the $57,400 version. There will be "larger" battery packs available that will increase the range for an unannounced price. Yeah they just took batteries out.
I feel like I'm posting on twitter yelling into the wind. Not a single person remotely understands what the fuck I am saying.
Improvements, yes. But practical affordable electric cars, not likely. Not unless the price comes way down. I don't see how Tesla shipping a few thousand cars will bring the price down.
I mean, does that make sense? I get the feeling I'm missing something since everyone is so adamant about Tesla's "trickle down" effect. How does selling a few extra batteries change the market?
Perhaps, but it didn't trickle down or come from Tesla in anyway. Not to mention it probably cost even more than off the shelf Li-ions, so it's still not the magic bullet.
The LG Chem ones are being used in the Chevrolet Volt which only goes 40 miles on a charge and still needs a gas engine for distance. It cost $40,000 too. That's not affordable by any stretch of the imagination, especially when you consider the replacement cost of the batteries (keeping in mind that 10 years is what GM "expects" not what will be reality). If it turns out the batteries don't last as long as they expect then I wouldn't expect to see this car on the road anytime soon.
Except that the Tesla cars use off the shelf Li-ions. It's not tech it hype!
The sedan uses less batteries that's where the reduced cost comes from. It also comes at the cost of less range.
Tesla is a hype company and you guys are drinking it up like there is no tomorrow.
Seriously I'm not trying to be a dick to anyone here. I'm just being realistic. Tesla is not going to save us and they're not going to turn the industry upside down. They'll make a few buck no doubt and they might even get lucky when someone really does develop the mythical "batteries" they need.
To be clear I really hope this does happen. I hope some new battery tech comes out and I really hope the cost comes down. It just hasn't happened and I don't think Tesla is making any headway. As far as I know they're not developing batteries or researching new battery tech. They're using off the shelf batteries and they will not move enough volume to reduce costs. The Model S appears to just use less batteries to reduce the price.
Sure, I guess I'm a little arrogant today, but this kind of delusion really annoys me. It really boils down to this: companies are going to take advantage of people's desire to be environmentally friendly. They will talk up their "tech" to get buyers and investors, but when it comes down to it all they will be selling is the good feeling of going green. The Tesla hasn't produce anything new or innovative. There's no industry changing technology coming from them that I can see. Even there business model isn't new, it is basically duping consumers, investors and government. They're promising the world and delivering nothing.
And as to not be so arrogant and full-of-myself, please someone tell me how Tesla is going to make electric cars more efficient and affordable? I'm pretty damn sure it all boils down to batteries, but they use standard computer batteries. Are they going to take the millions of dollars of government money and develop better battery tech? What is their plan? And will it really benefit us or will the Tesla people get rich and jump ship?
It hasn't happened.
First of all, the car is only in development.
Second, since when is a $57,400 car with a $7,500 tax credit affordable? How is that trickling down?
The car only has a range of 150 miles where as the Roadster has a range of over 200 miles. The battery technology didn't get any better or cheaper. All they did was take some batteries out to reduce the price. Again, no technology, no innovation and certainly no trickling down.
Right, that's what has been holding the electric car back, "efficient drive-trains".
If you think the drive train adds anything significant to the car's "efficiency", then I have a perpetual motion machine to sell you.
That's my point exactly. The batteries you're talking about don't exist. The Tesla uses standard Li-ions found in laptops and cell phones. There is no innovative technology here. There is nothing to trickle down.
But the carrot is that the technology in these 100k$ cars will trickle down to cheaper, more consumer targeted vehicles.
This is delusional. Sorry but it is. You're not alone and it's the support argument that gets repeated the most. But think about what technology it is that is supposed to magically trickle down: batteries.
Hmm, where have I see those before? I don't know maybe in millions of laptops, cell phones, handheld devices, power tools, calculators, and cars. Nearly everything uses batteries, but good batteries still cost about $100 per pound.
If all those batteries haven't reduce the price thus far why would a car company selling a few thousand cars make any difference at all? I highly suspect it won't.
Technically, a dictionary maps the definitions to words. What good would a "list" of definitions be? You need a way to look them up.
That's not a "report" button, its a "customize my results for the future button" and it is really stupid. The elephant in the room is that Google is exploitable just like every other search engine. People are noticing the quality of their searches declining and there doesn't seem to be much Google can do or is willing to do. Most of the shitty sites that have no value are loaded with AdSense. Pretty much Google needs to start filtering results or they need to replace PageRank which is fundamentally the problem. Either that or someone else needs to build a better search engine.
MTV doesn't play music. Radio stations will stop playing music now too. Services like last.fm and Pandora only suggest music you already know about anyway. Live music sounds like crap (hey mr. indy band ever heard of an eq?). And I don't even care, because the industry quit making music long ago, it's just taken awhile for everyone to catch up.
You're not only confused, you're miss informed. The iPhone was specifically designed to be a smart phone. Not only that it was the iPod touch that followed the iPhone.
Furthermore, they got the phone right the first time. I own a first generation iPhone and am completely happy with it. I'm not even compelled to upgrade (AT&T is a different story). The industry has barely started to catchup (there might be something to the Pre, etc).
Sure the eMate was a flop, but you're talking about historic Apple Computer, not Apple Inc. proper. I don't think they've flopped since the eMate (their netbook as you say). Certainly nothing has flopped after the release of the original iMac.
And you really shouldn't reference belligerent bloggers when you are attempting to make a point. That guy is as laughable as he is loony.
DirectX provides access to the hardware. Think arbitrary code execution from a maliciously crafted 3d-talking-paper-clip.