Just to keep expanding on this model: - batteries would be certified by some authority and batteries could meter their use. This would prevent arguments about getting a bad battery for the service station. Certification would be via controlled pass/fail test equipment on site. service stations would handle the recycling of expired batteries. since you are exchanging batteries, the cost of new batteries can be amortized over the life of the battery.
The hardest parts would be 1) to get car companies to standardize on a small set of battery types. and 2) design a battery compartment that could be both easily accessed for swapping, and securely locked at other times.
Why are we not looking at making a standard for a swappable battery? You could then pull into the equivalent of the gas station and swap your near dead battery for a freshly charged one.
This fixes 2 problems.
1. range anxiety, I don't want to get stuck waiting 2-4 hours for a charge while I am doing some errands on my way home from work. with a battery swap this would only take 5 minutes
2. sticker shock in a few years when the batteries need replaced and their cost are not being subsidized by the government. Since I would be swapping batteries, battery replacement would be part of the "gas station's" business model.
Someone may want to hack you innocuous account so they can post something:
-- libelous
-- embarrising
-- obnoxiious
-- illegal
-- covertly embedded in the message... and you will get the blame for it.
trustno1
Apple is making a mistake here, there are real problems with Apps and the App store that they should focus on. redundant app would only make the platform more desirable, as no app is perfect for every user.
Some of the real problems I see are: I can't update an app without deleting it. I get an error message for each app of app update failure every time I sync with my MBP.
It makes me think seriously about jaibreaking the device.
The usual argument for wanting MacOS X on PCs is that it will foster wider adoption. Most organizations look for multiple sources when buying computers so Apple, being single source, gets locked out of many purchase decisions. But if you look at it from an OS level, most are buying single source anyway. Windows is M$, even Linux will lock you in to a certain extent to a distro once you add in all the applications needed to support a business.
I prefer Apple HW with the OS. Apple is comming back with this strategy. Focus needs to be kept on maintaining the real value propositions: "it just works"; "less overhead to achieve secure operation", "pleasing to work with"...
Someone please explain why they think the net is, or can ever be truely neutral.
In my area AT&T Yahoo offers small businesses 3 connections 384K-786K, 1.5M-3M, and 3M-6M; for enterprise customers they offer OC-48 to OC-192... you get what you pay for.
Every connection is a consumer and any connection can be a "Content Provider", there is no way to guarantee equal access to every content provider.
The alternative is the least-common-denominator and have dial-up only, then it would just depend on how good a modem you can afford and how many phone lines you can bring in to your facility. Ah...but then that is not neutral either.
Or perhaps another common word like windows!!!
even though there were other windowing products (X-Windows) with windows in th name proir to the MS product.
Proceed @ 11.5740741uHz
Sounds like the folks in Redmond discovered an old VAX with VMS. More than 10 years, whenever you saved a file, DEC's VMS would automatically incriment the verion field and save a new copy of the file. Normally, you just worked with the latest version but you could always go back to previous versions (that is, if you had not purged them).
I wonder if MS is going to try to patent this feature?
Slashdot Mirror
Just to keep expanding on this model: - batteries would be certified by some authority and batteries could meter their use. This would prevent arguments about getting a bad battery for the service station. Certification would be via controlled pass/fail test equipment on site. service stations would handle the recycling of expired batteries. since you are exchanging batteries, the cost of new batteries can be amortized over the life of the battery. The hardest parts would be 1) to get car companies to standardize on a small set of battery types. and 2) design a battery compartment that could be both easily accessed for swapping, and securely locked at other times.
Why are we not looking at making a standard for a swappable battery? You could then pull into the equivalent of the gas station and swap your near dead battery for a freshly charged one. This fixes 2 problems. 1. range anxiety, I don't want to get stuck waiting 2-4 hours for a charge while I am doing some errands on my way home from work. with a battery swap this would only take 5 minutes 2. sticker shock in a few years when the batteries need replaced and their cost are not being subsidized by the government. Since I would be swapping batteries, battery replacement would be part of the "gas station's" business model.
Someone may want to hack you innocuous account so they can post something: -- libelous -- embarrising -- obnoxiious -- illegal -- covertly embedded in the message ... and you will get the blame for it.
trustno1
The new administration should be looking to support projects like this that create high quality job opportunities in the US not shutting them down.
Apple is making a mistake here, there are real problems with Apps and the App store that they should focus on. redundant app would only make the platform more desirable, as no app is perfect for every user. Some of the real problems I see are: I can't update an app without deleting it. I get an error message for each app of app update failure every time I sync with my MBP. It makes me think seriously about jaibreaking the device.
The usual argument for wanting MacOS X on PCs is that it will foster wider adoption. Most organizations look for multiple sources when buying computers so Apple, being single source, gets locked out of many purchase decisions. But if you look at it from an OS level, most are buying single source anyway. Windows is M$, even Linux will lock you in to a certain extent to a distro once you add in all the applications needed to support a business. I prefer Apple HW with the OS. Apple is comming back with this strategy. Focus needs to be kept on maintaining the real value propositions: "it just works"; "less overhead to achieve secure operation", "pleasing to work with" ...
Someone please explain why they think the net is, or can ever be truely neutral. In my area AT&T Yahoo offers small businesses 3 connections 384K-786K, 1.5M-3M, and 3M-6M; for enterprise customers they offer OC-48 to OC-192... you get what you pay for. Every connection is a consumer and any connection can be a "Content Provider", there is no way to guarantee equal access to every content provider. The alternative is the least-common-denominator and have dial-up only, then it would just depend on how good a modem you can afford and how many phone lines you can bring in to your facility. Ah...but then that is not neutral either.
Or perhaps another common word like windows!!! even though there were other windowing products (X-Windows) with windows in th name proir to the MS product. Proceed @ 11.5740741uHz
Sounds like the folks in Redmond discovered an old VAX with VMS. More than 10 years, whenever you saved a file, DEC's VMS would automatically incriment the verion field and save a new copy of the file. Normally, you just worked with the latest version but you could always go back to previous versions (that is, if you had not purged them).
I wonder if MS is going to try to patent this feature?
Proceed @ 11.5740741uHz