"Burdensome, bureaucratic oversight is out of place in an Internet structure that has worked so well for many around the globe."
I can see the US Gov digging into the internets freedoms over VOIP in the future and are they not already getting into P2P filesharing networks?
IMO, Condi was likely instructed to do what it takes to keep control in the US. This letter is the typical doublespeak we've come to expect from the Bush Admin.
LoB
hmm, what would I want, chewed face or anothers?
on
First Face Transplant
·
· Score: 1
It seems strange that they would have held back on this kind of proceedure because of concerns with psychological reactions to looking different. It would seem that there would be a number of people out there who would take a whole new face over the remains of one chewed off, blown off, or burned off...
Or maybe there is more concern over the situation depicted in the film, "Face off"?
For the people involved in the reconstruction, I hope it works out well.
I did RTA, but you must believe that what a Microsoft executive states to the press is true and factual. I've seen little proof of this being the case over the last 20 years so it must be regarded as meaningless. And actually, it's usually the opposite of what they say...
Did he say there would be plenty of consoles available? Let's wait and see if this actually holds true. There's always a first time.
Just as word got out that Microsoft would limit supply of the new xbox in order to leverage the massive amounts of free press this gets( remember the Elmo press coverage? ), Microsoft pushes out a story of how fragile their production process is. Brilliant I say. Now it'll be easy to blame the supply chain instead of getting called on holding back production... Wait, isn't the WSJ.com usually a fee based site? Hmm, no problem getting to this article so I guess we have a sponsor to thank for this. Now who could that be? Can you say Microsoft?;-)
Another interesting tidbit in the article was the $4 billion in xbox business losses since 2001! That's right up there with the ~$8 billion in losses for the Windows CE product lines. Hey, atleast they're consistant.;-) But I suspect that the losses they'll create with this new xbox will allow them to surpass the WinCE losses somewhat quicker. So they have that going for them.
How these guys buy their way into conferences they have no right being at is beyond me. Let alone marketing...I mean speaking/presenting at them. I pity the fools who have to attend Gates speach because their bosses told them to.
A.C., Toyota already stated last year that the Prius is not a money losser for them and it's built on the same production line with the other cars. It was true of the earlier Prius production since they were built off the standard mass production lines. I found it interesting that GM decided to release public statements saying how bad and idea hybrids were the very same week that Toyota had invited the press to see the Prius being built on the standard Toyota production line.
And WTF is with the comment, "rolling tubs of acid"? You sound like some 90 year old who's out of touch with the subject. These hybrids currently use NiMH battery technology, not Pb based ones. And actually, you sound more like a GM employee. The same GM who was happy to drop their hybrid plans and start screaming from a soapbox about hydrogen instead, and all for a few hundred million dollars from the Bush administration. Talk about econonmics... They'll(GM) put down hybrids for being too costly but then show off million dollar prototypes as if they were ready for the market.
Good comment looking at the other responders link to the Kelley Bluebook site for weight comparisons, it does look like the Prius( 2nd and 3rd generation ) are lighter by about 300 lbs compared to 2005 Camry( a comparible Toyota vehicle IMO ).
And as noted, the brake pads don't come into play much unless you're heavy on the foot while braking at speeds above 7 or 8 MPH. The Prius friction braking really kicks in below 7/8 MPH with steady braking.
The good thing about electric motors is the very low number of moving parts to wear and they provide 100% of their torque from 0 RPM. Great for reducing the strain on ICE engines. And the Prius engine is designed specifically around this fact. Not to mention that any ICE does not provide/have its efficient torque band at low RPMs.
Now had the Toyota Hybrid System and car been a few hundred pounds heavier than its comparible counterpart, there might be something to this. Fortunately, it seems that by making the engine lighter, eliminating the transmission, and using a smallish battery pack, Toyota ended up with a reasonable curb weight without sacrificing in other areas.
One of the tricks they did with the 3rd Gen Prius was that they dropped the total battery voltage by a few cells( lighter battery pack ) and added a voltage doubler at the batt pack to reduce losses in the wires providing energy from the back of the vehile to the front. They also let the battery deplete further so that the smaller battery pack still provides the same or more total power to the THS system. So they were able to make the 3rd Gen Prius longer and taller than the 2nd Gen Prius while making it heavier by only 125 lbs. Yet, it gets better EPA numbers and real world MPG. Oh, the larger wheels/tires help add to that 125 lbs difference.
Good discussion/thoughts IMO. Thanks for bringing up these concerns.
1) The brake pads will wear less because of regenerative braking Barely... and brake pads are pretty cheap, unlikely to exceed $100 over the lifetime of the car
But brake pads don't just appear on your vehicle, someone must install them and do so correctly or you'll end up in the middle of an intersection with a Freightliner on your lap. Not to mention that many don't inspect their brakes and need rotor turning or replacement too.
2) NO transmission repair costs, it uses constant mesh planetary gears instead Any transmission craps out occasionally. I don't know what a Prius has.. if it has a standard automatic (which is constant mesh planetary gears), they crap out all the time and require oil changes from tiem to time; and if it uses a new system, chances are it will have some bugs because it hasn't been run for 10 years!
It has a planetary gearbox and we're getting close to 10 years in service now. IIRC, 1997 was when Toyota released the Prius into the wild in Japan. As you say, time will tell, but a gearbox with just gears running around like a spirograph don't have a whole lot to go wrong. I will have to look at it's lube system but I suspect it is lubricated by the same oil the engine uses and if so, it'll get new oil when the owner services the ICE.
3) minimized eng wear because the electric motor handles high torque demands Huh? The electric motor is used at LOW speeds. The torque needed at low speeds is minimal (think humans pushing a dead car). High torque demands occur when accelerating at high speeds.
actually, the electric motor is used at all speeds since it is pretty much directly connected to the wheel output shaft. As far as torque goes, electric motors have 100% of their torque at 0 RPM while an ICE( Internal Combustion Engine ) will have its peak torque at some RPM above 0 RPM. And all acceleration involves torgue, it's just that and ICE if inefficient at getting a vehicle moving from 0 RPM up into its peak torque range. I figure that these inefficiencies mean poorer fuel burning and higher wear on engine components.
4) minimized eng wear because the engine is spun up BEFORE any cylinder ignition
5) minimized eng wear because the engine fires 2 cyl and then the other 2 on start
7) minimized eng and exhaust system wear because of first 5 minute warmup cycle Anytime the engine is running but the oil hasn't warmed up properly yet, there is (slightly) excessive engine wear. If the engine turns over without the oil even being pumped around properly then you will get excessive wear.
But its gotta help that there is no internal combustion pressures(firing explostions) on the engine bearings, pistons, etc until the engine RPM hits 1000 RPM and oil pressure has to have increased by then since it uses a mechanical oil pump. A better way would be to have an electric oil pump and start that going even before the engine is turned a single revolution, but the benefits would probably be minimul considering the bearing pressures when turning over a non-firing engine, compared to turning an engine over a couple of revolutions and having all cylinders start firing before there is any oil pressure. It's still amazing how todays bearings handle this so well as it is.
6) The engine was designed lighter because of the shared load so bearing wear is reduced The Prius is much heavier than your average hatchback, and their wheel bearings often last the car's lifetime.
I don't think the average hatchback is a 4 door and actually, the Prius is lighter than a compareable Toyota Camry. Anyways, my statement was that because the engine piston, piston rods, etc can be lighter, there would be less wear on the bearings through the other engine cycles besides the combustion cycle. Does it really matter? I'm not sure but I do think it will provide less wear than a conventional engine does.
Yes, and I also forgot to mention that I'm a former auto mechanic, I researched the crap out of this car before purchasing it AND after purchasing it. I also was already researching doing my own electric conversion when the Prius was announcing furture availability of the Prius in the US. I don't work for Toyota in any way, shape or form, nor do I have ANY financial ties to the hybrid industry other than owning a 5 year old model hybrid. And I will gladly discuss, in these forums, your opionions regarding my statements.
I guess attacking my motives is valid since I didn't disclaim anything... Fair enough I suppose.
You didn't include the cost of having a qualified auto repair person replace the brake pads and left out that the Prius Service manuals are over $200( I purchased those ). IMO, it's unlikely that 90% of those purchasing vehicles can or would do their own brake jobs. BTW, the drums/rotors usually need "turning" at every other brake pad change, if not every one. So, IMO, there should be fewer brake jobs required with hybrids and they are not cheap unless you cut corners,do-it-yourself, and your time is worthless.
I know Toyota engines are long lasting but I did not know they were ALWAYS outlasting the vehicles. Same goes for the transmissions. Good points if this is true for ALL Toyota vehicles.
On the exhaust system wearing out sooner because of hot/cold cycling, The Prius engine is not inactive for THAT long a period. Heck, one can only go about 3 miles just on battery power alone and I doubt that it's required to keep the system HOT 100% of the time and the Toyota Hybrid system does keep the catalytic converter temp hot enough to work.
Again, if ALL Toyota engines and transmissions are trouble free then you are correct and a hybrid system will not save on repair bills in these areas.
As energy prices go higher and higher, more and more will start to realize that green can be econonmical too. But, that "money-draining nightmare" you mention is well entrenched in many because it has been just that, money-draining, in the past when energy was considered cheap. Not to mention that "conservation" is a dirty word in the US because it's unAmerican. Keeping up with the "Jones" and spend-spend-spend is promoted everywhere.
Regarding this "Math Behind the Hybrid Hype" article, did it include saving related to lower vehicle maintenance costs? Nobody ever mentions these things, which I believe will reduce repair/replacement costs:
1) The brake pads will wear less because of regenerative braking 2) NO transmission repair costs, it uses constant mesh planetary gears instead 3) minimized eng wear because the electric motor handles high torque demands 4) minimized eng wear because the engine is spun up BEFORE any cylinder ignition 5) minimized eng wear because the engine fires 2 cyl and then the other 2 on start 6) The engine was designed lighter because of the shared load so bearing wear is reduced 7) minimized eng and exhaust system wear because of first 5 minute warmup cycle
The site is down so I can't verify if he included these in his "math" but since even other Prius owners don't seem to consider these, I figure he missed it too. BTW, I own a 2001 model Prius and it has been a very reliable car so far and we expect more of the same. We will know if that continues since we typically keep our vehicles for 10 - 15 years.
And I agree, anything which opens eyes to environmentally better consumables is a good thing.
those type of "agreements", when they exist, would not be publicly available and just like Microsofts previous OEM agreements, they'd be under NDA. Granted, Microsoft only leverage in this case would be financial support or IT infrastructure based( software licensing/etc ) so I'm not sure how effective it would be against MIT or the people accepting the donation.
Most likely, anything like this would only come to light in court ordered/opened emails or depositions. Remember how HP executives received a timely phone call from a Microsoft executive the day before COMDEX L.V. 1994? HP employees were instructed to remove all the PCs on the showroom floor which were running IBMs OS/2 operating system. That only came to light in the last MSFT vs DOJ case... So, this is how Microsoft does business. As a matter of fact, I think a couple three years ago, there was a University which took MSFT donations and magically the C.S. course material had a number of classes on the new MS.NET software. Students flipped out and it was found out that it was a tit-for-tat kind of "donation".
So, anyplace you see Microsoft $$$, expect this kind of "competition" from Microsoft. There's over 20 years of supporting history of these kinds of actions.
If you're talking about the first part then I agree but it's also the kind of thing he/they do. If you're talking about the second part then I can only guess that Apple still has a foothold in your school system. One of the very few left.
It was part stipulations clause of the building "donation" Bill Gates made to MIT. I might have went something like this" Any new technology from hence forth produced in ANY/ALL MIT buildings, can not be released in the United States if it contains a keyboard and display, unless it comes only with Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Windows based software.
Really now, it might have something to do with the massive reliance on Microsoft Windows in the US school system and the profits those generate which prevents this. I doubt Dell, Microsoft, and possibly AMD really want for-cost computers going to our school kids when they already make millions to billions on this market. The pressure from these folks and their business partners would crush the project quickly. But, if it's a big hit around the world, it might make it into the US via the back door. And by then, there wouldn't be much chance of stopping it.
Except this is probably the same situation which taught Microsoft to market to management and not the technologists. Too bad Apple didn't catch on to this. If they had, they might have had some training materials and courses for the adults so they could learn what that new fangled computer thingy was supposed to do. I don't think Apple would have recognized the marketing potential of such data. IMO.
What a great marketing plan. If only they put as much into actually building good product...
Considering how much they will be losing on each unit and how questionable the quality might be, this is a very good move for them. But it does follow their typical process of providing new releases before the products are ready. Especially when there is someone else already in the market( Sony in this case ).
OT. Something to watch with this release is if MSFT can get hardware OEMs to take the hardware losses and how the device and software vendors are willing to give MSFT more of their profits. These are all plans MSFT has had in order to try and stop the losses in the Xbox division. After 9 years, they finally have the WinCE division losses down to double digit( millions ) per quarter. Lackluster investor interest in MSFT is not going to be helped by more massive quarterly losses in the XBox div. IMO.
they might be talking about something called osa.exe or something like it. Given that Microsoft owns and strictly controls the Windows OS and their Office software, I would not doubt that there is direct communications and involvement between those two groups. And if something does not show up in the task/server/service list does not mean it isn't getting loaded or cached because Microsoft can do this to make sure its applications run better.
IMO, it boils down to if you want one company to write ALL the software for the PC, or you would like to see many companies provide software. Microsoft can and does make sure its software has closer ties into the OS than any other 3rd party company and thus has the upperhand if all you care about is speed. But, some people are concerned that they must ask Microsoft for permission to use its software just to read their own documents. Ownership of these documents is finally becoming an issue as people realize they must ask/pay Microsoft for the right to access those documents...
unfortunately, the memory is not likely to get handed to them by a neighbor, friend, or cowworker like MSOffice does. And even if it were, there's the Microsoft name, which the general population THINKs means high-tech, quality, and something they already know. And finally, most people wouldn't know what to do with the memory and would probably try to stick it into the floppy disk slot or something like that.
So, while it's cheaper to upgrade ones memory and use OO instead of PURCHASING MSO, the general population would not find it as easy as "borrowing" a copy of MSO and installing that. I've seen this happen over and over again and I wish MS would implement a annual registration system for their software because it would bump up the use of opensource software by the millions. IMO.
yup, don't need all that stuff and it just makes it harder to figure out how to use it. ie, too complicated. Just look at the iPod. There have been other MP3 mplayers for years before the iPod. IMO, the reason the iPod took off was because Apple made getting music and getting it onto the iPod REALLY easy. The UI on the iPod is pretty simple too and I think the simplicity is what makes it sell to the broader market.
Now if someone were to build a Linux image for your iPaq that strips it down to a simple music and video player, AND builds a website or desktop app( JAVA maybe ) to easily load the files.... Then again, it won't look like an iPod so it ain't got THAT going for it.
Sorry but I hit reply when there weren't many responses and didn't get back to the reply for sometime later. But still, if you are saying that Microsoft is against Blu-Ray because it has DRM features above and beyond HD-DVD than I would question that. IMO, it would be more likely that Blu-Ray had DRM which was NOT MSFTs DRM and therefore could not control the use/market/platform/users/etc. There is no way MSFT is looking out for customer fair-use in this battle. Everything MSFT does is about control and protecting Windows and if HD-DVD has hooks keeping Windows safer than Blu-Ray, then THAT makes sense. Given MS's history of course.
Personally, I think that fat pipes( broadband, wireless, etc ) will make DVD's a niche market and the real DRM fight will be in the appliance market( Tivo, etc ). I don't see right now how who wins here in the DVD market is going to mean anything in the 'fat pipe' market.
I agree that it currently looks like MSFT will have to put its tail between its legs and move to Blue-Ray or look like a follower for longer than they would otherwise. But why are they SO tied to HD-DVD and opposed to Blue-Ray? It stunned me when they put out that press release putting down Blue-Ray and attempting to pump up HD-DVD. So did the HP/Dell rebuttal but that's another story. IIRC, the Blue-Ray spec has it with a network I/F for standalone use so maybe that's the reason, no Windows needed.
Does anybody else have an idea of what the possible motivations for MS opposing Blue-Ray?
Not sure if Krusty would be so willing to even let THEM drive a dumptruck near him if he'd been shot at BY THEM, pulled under water a few times BY THEM, had is house burned and family taken hostage, BY THEM. But I suppose if one were standing next to Krusty during all these attacks, one might consider accepting that dumptruck full of cash...
Now Scratchy seems to be THAT stupid, but Krusty?
So this might explain why a person( Chris Green ) would sell out, but organizers of a *nix conference? Are they secretly hoping to become another MS Windows conference? Or I guess they could have the "Miguel de Icaza complex".
What would he have to say that would have any resemblence to reality? I mean, can anyone outside of other MSFT execs believe anything he says? I think the facts show that he can't be trusted IMO.
Since he now works for MSFT and they have NO HISTORY of working productively with competitors, he and his company will only do harm. Why on earth would anybody let an MSFT badge keynote a *nix conference is beyond me... It's bull that they say it'll be about interoperability and most likely all you'll get is how you can ftp into their system if you use their ftp client, written in MS.net, and run on Mono. And if your dumb enough to think that you'll have any future supporting a *nix interface from MSFT, good luck with that. Remember Bristol and Wind/U?
I sure hope he gets heckled out the door, cause MSFT hasn't done anything to earn more respect than that. IMO.
Slashdot Mirror
I can see the US Gov digging into the internets freedoms over VOIP in the future and are they not already getting into P2P filesharing networks?
IMO, Condi was likely instructed to do what it takes to keep control in the US. This letter is the typical doublespeak we've come to expect from the Bush Admin.
LoB
It seems strange that they would have held back on this kind of proceedure because of concerns with psychological reactions to looking different. It would seem that there would be a number of people out there who would take a whole new face over the remains of one chewed off, blown off, or burned off...
Or maybe there is more concern over the situation depicted in the film, "Face off"?
For the people involved in the reconstruction, I hope it works out well.
LoB
I did RTA, but you must believe that what a Microsoft executive states to the press is true and factual. I've seen little proof of this being the case over the last 20 years so it must be regarded as meaningless. And actually, it's usually the opposite of what they say...
Did he say there would be plenty of consoles available? Let's wait and see if this actually holds true. There's always a first time.
LoB
Just as word got out that Microsoft would limit supply of the new xbox in order to leverage the massive amounts of free press this gets( remember the Elmo press coverage? ), Microsoft pushes out a story of how fragile their production process is. Brilliant I say. Now it'll be easy to blame the supply chain instead of getting called on holding back production... Wait, isn't the WSJ.com usually a fee based site? Hmm, no problem getting to this article so I guess we have a sponsor to thank for this. Now who could that be? Can you say Microsoft? ;-)
;-) But I suspect that the losses they'll create with this new xbox will allow them to surpass the WinCE losses somewhat quicker. So they have that going for them.
Another interesting tidbit in the article was the $4 billion in xbox business losses since 2001! That's right up there with the ~$8 billion in losses for the Windows CE product lines. Hey, atleast they're consistant.
LoB
NOT!
How these guys buy their way into conferences they have no right being at is beyond me. Let alone marketing...I mean speaking/presenting at them. I pity the fools who have to attend Gates speach because their bosses told them to.
LoB
A.C., Toyota already stated last year that the Prius is not a money losser for them and it's built on the same production line with the other cars. It was true of the earlier Prius production since they were built off the standard mass production lines. I found it interesting that GM decided to release public statements saying how bad and idea hybrids were the very same week that Toyota had invited the press to see the Prius being built on the standard Toyota production line.
And WTF is with the comment, "rolling tubs of acid"? You sound like some 90 year old who's out of touch with the subject. These hybrids currently use NiMH battery technology, not Pb based ones. And actually, you sound more like a GM employee. The same GM who was happy to drop their hybrid plans and start screaming from a soapbox about hydrogen instead, and all for a few hundred million dollars from the Bush administration. Talk about econonmics... They'll(GM) put down hybrids for being too costly but then show off million dollar prototypes as if they were ready for the market.
LoB
And as noted, the brake pads don't come into play much unless you're heavy on the foot while braking at speeds above 7 or 8 MPH. The Prius friction braking really kicks in below 7/8 MPH with steady braking.
The good thing about electric motors is the very low number of moving parts to wear and they provide 100% of their torque from 0 RPM. Great for reducing the strain on ICE engines. And the Prius engine is designed specifically around this fact. Not to mention that any ICE does not provide/have its efficient torque band at low RPMs.
Now had the Toyota Hybrid System and car been a few hundred pounds heavier than its comparible counterpart, there might be something to this. Fortunately, it seems that by making the engine lighter, eliminating the transmission, and using a smallish battery pack, Toyota ended up with a reasonable curb weight without sacrificing in other areas.
One of the tricks they did with the 3rd Gen Prius was that they dropped the total battery voltage by a few cells( lighter battery pack ) and added a voltage doubler at the batt pack to reduce losses in the wires providing energy from the back of the vehile to the front. They also let the battery deplete further so that the smaller battery pack still provides the same or more total power to the THS system. So they were able to make the 3rd Gen Prius longer and taller than the 2nd Gen Prius while making it heavier by only 125 lbs. Yet, it gets better EPA numbers and real world MPG. Oh, the larger wheels/tires help add to that 125 lbs difference.
Good discussion/thoughts IMO. Thanks for bringing up these concerns.
LoB
Barely... and brake pads are pretty cheap, unlikely to exceed $100 over the lifetime of the car
But brake pads don't just appear on your vehicle, someone must install them and do so correctly or you'll end up in the middle of an intersection with a Freightliner on your lap. Not to mention that many don't inspect their brakes and need rotor turning or replacement too.
2) NO transmission repair costs, it uses constant mesh planetary gears instead .. if it has a standard automatic (which is constant mesh planetary gears), they crap out all the time and require oil changes from tiem to time; and if it uses a new system, chances are it will have some bugs because it hasn't been run for 10 years!
Any transmission craps out occasionally. I don't know what a Prius has
It has a planetary gearbox and we're getting close to 10 years in service now. IIRC, 1997 was when Toyota released the Prius into the wild in Japan. As you say, time will tell, but a gearbox with just gears running around like a spirograph don't have a whole lot to go wrong. I will have to look at it's lube system but I suspect it is lubricated by the same oil the engine uses and if so, it'll get new oil when the owner services the ICE.
3) minimized eng wear because the electric motor handles high torque demands
Huh? The electric motor is used at LOW speeds. The torque needed at low speeds is minimal (think humans pushing a dead car). High torque demands occur when accelerating at high speeds.
actually, the electric motor is used at all speeds since it is pretty much directly connected to the wheel output shaft. As far as torque goes, electric motors have 100% of their torque at 0 RPM while an ICE( Internal Combustion Engine ) will have its peak torque at some RPM above 0 RPM. And all acceleration involves torgue, it's just that and ICE if inefficient at getting a vehicle moving from 0 RPM up into its peak torque range. I figure that these inefficiencies mean poorer fuel burning and higher wear on engine components.
4) minimized eng wear because the engine is spun up BEFORE any cylinder ignition
5) minimized eng wear because the engine fires 2 cyl and then the other 2 on start
7) minimized eng and exhaust system wear because of first 5 minute warmup cycle
Anytime the engine is running but the oil hasn't warmed up properly yet, there is (slightly) excessive engine wear. If the engine turns over without the oil even being pumped around properly then you will get excessive wear.
But its gotta help that there is no internal combustion pressures(firing explostions) on the engine bearings, pistons, etc until the engine RPM hits 1000 RPM and oil pressure has to have increased by then since it uses a mechanical oil pump. A better way would be to have an electric oil pump and start that going even before the engine is turned a single revolution, but the benefits would probably be minimul considering the bearing pressures when turning over a non-firing engine, compared to turning an engine over a couple of revolutions and having all cylinders start firing before there is any oil pressure. It's still amazing how todays bearings handle this so well as it is.
6) The engine was designed lighter because of the shared load so bearing wear is reduced
The Prius is much heavier than your average hatchback, and their wheel bearings often last the car's lifetime.
I don't think the average hatchback is a 4 door and actually, the Prius is lighter than a compareable Toyota Camry. Anyways, my statement was that because the engine piston, piston rods, etc can be lighter, there would be less wear on the bearings through the other engine cycles besides the combustion cycle. Does it really matter? I'm not sure but I do think it will provide less wear than a conventional engine does.
LoB
Yes, and I also forgot to mention that I'm a former auto mechanic, I researched the crap out of this car before purchasing it AND after purchasing it. I also was already researching doing my own electric conversion when the Prius was announcing furture availability of the Prius in the US. I don't work for Toyota in any way, shape or form, nor do I have ANY financial ties to the hybrid industry other than owning a 5 year old model hybrid. And I will gladly discuss, in these forums, your opionions regarding my statements.
I guess attacking my motives is valid since I didn't disclaim anything... Fair enough I suppose.
LoB
You didn't include the cost of having a qualified auto repair person replace the brake pads and left out that the Prius Service manuals are over $200( I purchased those ). IMO, it's unlikely that 90% of those purchasing vehicles can or would do their own brake jobs. BTW, the drums/rotors usually need "turning" at every other brake pad change, if not every one. So, IMO, there should be fewer brake jobs required with hybrids and they are not cheap unless you cut corners,do-it-yourself, and your time is worthless.
I know Toyota engines are long lasting but I did not know they were ALWAYS outlasting the vehicles. Same goes for the transmissions. Good points if this is true for ALL Toyota vehicles.
On the exhaust system wearing out sooner because of hot/cold cycling, The Prius engine is not inactive for THAT long a period. Heck, one can only go about 3 miles just on battery power alone and I doubt that it's required to keep the system HOT 100% of the time and the Toyota Hybrid system does keep the catalytic converter temp hot enough to work.
Again, if ALL Toyota engines and transmissions are trouble free then you are correct and a hybrid system will not save on repair bills in these areas.
LoB
As energy prices go higher and higher, more and more will start to realize that green can be econonmical too. But, that "money-draining nightmare" you mention is well entrenched in many because it has been just that, money-draining, in the past when energy was considered cheap. Not to mention that "conservation" is a dirty word in the US because it's unAmerican. Keeping up with the "Jones" and spend-spend-spend is promoted everywhere.
Regarding this "Math Behind the Hybrid Hype" article, did it include saving related to lower vehicle maintenance costs? Nobody ever mentions these things, which I believe will reduce repair/replacement costs:
1) The brake pads will wear less because of regenerative braking
2) NO transmission repair costs, it uses constant mesh planetary gears instead
3) minimized eng wear because the electric motor handles high torque demands
4) minimized eng wear because the engine is spun up BEFORE any cylinder ignition
5) minimized eng wear because the engine fires 2 cyl and then the other 2 on start
6) The engine was designed lighter because of the shared load so bearing wear is reduced
7) minimized eng and exhaust system wear because of first 5 minute warmup cycle
The site is down so I can't verify if he included these in his "math" but since even other Prius owners don't seem to consider these, I figure he missed it too. BTW, I own a 2001 model Prius and it has been a very reliable car so far and we expect more of the same. We will know if that continues since we typically keep our vehicles for 10 - 15 years.
And I agree, anything which opens eyes to environmentally better consumables is a good thing.
LoB
those type of "agreements", when they exist, would not be publicly available and just like Microsofts previous OEM agreements, they'd be under NDA. Granted, Microsoft only leverage in this case would be financial support or IT infrastructure based( software licensing/etc ) so I'm not sure how effective it would be against MIT or the people accepting the donation.
.NET software. Students flipped out and it was found out that it was a tit-for-tat kind of "donation".
Most likely, anything like this would only come to light in court ordered/opened emails or depositions. Remember how HP executives received a timely phone call from a Microsoft executive the day before COMDEX L.V. 1994? HP employees were instructed to remove all the PCs on the showroom floor which were running IBMs OS/2 operating system. That only came to light in the last MSFT vs DOJ case... So, this is how Microsoft does business. As a matter of fact, I think a couple three years ago, there was a University which took MSFT donations and magically the C.S. course material had a number of classes on the new MS
So, anyplace you see Microsoft $$$, expect this kind of "competition" from Microsoft. There's over 20 years of supporting history of these kinds of actions.
IMO,
LoB
The first part or the "Really now" part?
Seems pretty far-fetched to me.
If you're talking about the first part then I agree but it's also the kind of thing he/they do. If you're talking about the second part then I can only guess that Apple still has a foothold in your school system. One of the very few left.
LoB
It was part stipulations clause of the building "donation" Bill Gates made to MIT. I might have went something like this" Any new technology from hence forth produced in ANY/ALL MIT buildings, can not be released in the United States if it contains a keyboard and display, unless it comes only with Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Windows based software.
Really now, it might have something to do with the massive reliance on Microsoft Windows in the US school system and the profits those generate which prevents this. I doubt Dell, Microsoft, and possibly AMD really want for-cost computers going to our school kids when they already make millions to billions on this market. The pressure from these folks and their business partners would crush the project quickly. But, if it's a big hit around the world, it might make it into the US via the back door. And by then, there wouldn't be much chance of stopping it.
IMO.
LoB
Except this is probably the same situation which taught Microsoft to market to management and not the technologists. Too bad Apple didn't catch on to this. If they had, they might have had some training materials and courses for the adults so they could learn what that new fangled computer thingy was supposed to do. I don't think Apple would have recognized the marketing potential of such data. IMO.
LoB
What a great marketing plan. If only they put as much into actually building good product...
Considering how much they will be losing on each unit and how questionable the quality might be, this is a very good move for them. But it does follow their typical process of providing new releases before the products are ready. Especially when there is someone else already in the market( Sony in this case ).
OT. Something to watch with this release is if MSFT can get hardware OEMs to take the hardware losses and how the device and software vendors are willing to give MSFT more of their profits. These are all plans MSFT has had in order to try and stop the losses in the Xbox division. After 9 years, they finally have the WinCE division losses down to double digit( millions ) per quarter. Lackluster investor interest in MSFT is not going to be helped by more massive quarterly losses in the XBox div. IMO.
LoB
they might be talking about something called osa.exe or something like it. Given that Microsoft owns and strictly controls the Windows OS and their Office software, I would not doubt that there is direct communications and involvement between those two groups. And if something does not show up in the task/server/service list does not mean it isn't getting loaded or cached because Microsoft can do this to make sure its applications run better.
IMO, it boils down to if you want one company to write ALL the software for the PC, or you would like to see many companies provide software. Microsoft can and does make sure its software has closer ties into the OS than any other 3rd party company and thus has the upperhand if all you care about is speed. But, some people are concerned that they must ask Microsoft for permission to use its software just to read their own documents. Ownership of these documents is finally becoming an issue as people realize they must ask/pay Microsoft for the right to access those documents...
LoB
unfortunately, the memory is not likely to get handed to them by a neighbor, friend, or cowworker like MSOffice does. And even if it were, there's the Microsoft name, which the general population THINKs means high-tech, quality, and something they already know. And finally, most people wouldn't know what to do with the memory and would probably try to stick it into the floppy disk slot or something like that.
So, while it's cheaper to upgrade ones memory and use OO instead of PURCHASING MSO, the general population would not find it as easy as "borrowing" a copy of MSO and installing that. I've seen this happen over and over again and I wish MS would implement a annual registration system for their software because it would bump up the use of opensource software by the millions. IMO.
LoB
yup, don't need all that stuff and it just makes it harder to figure out how to use it. ie, too complicated. Just look at the iPod. There have been other MP3 mplayers for years before the iPod. IMO, the reason the iPod took off was because Apple made getting music and getting it onto the iPod REALLY easy. The UI on the iPod is pretty simple too and I think the simplicity is what makes it sell to the broader market.
Now if someone were to build a Linux image for your iPaq that strips it down to a simple music and video player, AND builds a website or desktop app( JAVA maybe ) to easily load the files.... Then again, it won't look like an iPod so it ain't got THAT going for it.
LoB
Sorry but I hit reply when there weren't many responses and didn't get back to the reply for sometime later. But still, if you are saying that Microsoft is against Blu-Ray because it has DRM features above and beyond HD-DVD than I would question that. IMO, it would be more likely that Blu-Ray had DRM which was NOT MSFTs DRM and therefore could not control the use/market/platform/users/etc. There is no way MSFT is looking out for customer fair-use in this battle. Everything MSFT does is about control and protecting Windows and if HD-DVD has hooks keeping Windows safer than Blu-Ray, then THAT makes sense. Given MS's history of course.
Personally, I think that fat pipes( broadband, wireless, etc ) will make DVD's a niche market and the real DRM fight will be in the appliance market( Tivo, etc ). I don't see right now how who wins here in the DVD market is going to mean anything in the 'fat pipe' market.
Sorry to be replying to my own post but I did find a couple of possible reasons for MSFT opposition to Blu-Ray( not Blue-Ray ).
;-)
1) JAVA: Blu-Ray runs JAVA in the device
2) Streaming: There's some restrictions on streaming to other devices( game console ). Hey, maybe it requires JAVA on that other device too.
3) Codecs: Someone said that MS codecs( VC-1 ) were more prominently used/supported on HD-DVD
any others?
LoB
I agree that it currently looks like MSFT will have to put its tail between its legs and move to Blue-Ray or look like a follower for longer than they would otherwise. But why are they SO tied to HD-DVD and opposed to Blue-Ray? It stunned me when they put out that press release putting down Blue-Ray and attempting to pump up HD-DVD. So did the HP/Dell rebuttal but that's another story. IIRC, the Blue-Ray spec has it with a network I/F for standalone use so maybe that's the reason, no Windows needed.
Does anybody else have an idea of what the possible motivations for MS opposing Blue-Ray?
LoB
Not sure if Krusty would be so willing to even let THEM drive a dumptruck near him if he'd been shot at BY THEM, pulled under water a few times BY THEM, had is house burned and family taken hostage, BY THEM. But I suppose if one were standing next to Krusty during all these attacks, one might consider accepting that dumptruck full of cash...
Now Scratchy seems to be THAT stupid, but Krusty?
So this might explain why a person( Chris Green ) would sell out, but organizers of a *nix conference? Are they secretly hoping to become another MS Windows conference? Or I guess they could have the "Miguel de Icaza complex".
LoB
What would he have to say that would have any resemblence to reality? I mean, can anyone outside of other MSFT execs believe anything he says? I think the facts show that he can't be trusted IMO.
LoB
Since he now works for MSFT and they have NO HISTORY of working productively with competitors, he and his company will only do harm. Why on earth would anybody let an MSFT badge keynote a *nix conference is beyond me... It's bull that they say it'll be about interoperability and most likely all you'll get is how you can ftp into their system if you use their ftp client, written in MS.net, and run on Mono. And if your dumb enough to think that you'll have any future supporting a *nix interface from MSFT, good luck with that. Remember Bristol and Wind/U?
I sure hope he gets heckled out the door, cause MSFT hasn't done anything to earn more respect than that. IMO.
LoB