If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
XP Pro SP2, Vista & Vienna -- A Useful Progression?
"Alias" wrote in message
... Adam Albright wrote: . Justin, you're really a funny character. EVERYONE (but you) knows the faster you drive the MORE fuel you'll use. It therefore will cost you more in fuel burned driving at 95 MPH then it would at 60 MPH. Not if you're coasting down a hill. No gas needed at all. In fact, you can turn the engine off completely. Awe crap! There always comes a time when I just have to admit....damn that was good! |
Ads |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
XP Pro SP2, Vista & Vienna -- A Useful Progression?
Justin wrote:
"Alias" wrote in message ... Adam Albright wrote: . Justin, you're really a funny character. EVERYONE (but you) knows the faster you drive the MORE fuel you'll use. It therefore will cost you more in fuel burned driving at 95 MPH then it would at 60 MPH. Not if you're coasting down a hill. No gas needed at all. In fact, you can turn the engine off completely. Awe crap! There always comes a time when I just have to admit....damn that was good! Alias takes a bow and waves to the throngs on their feet clapping. That said, I try to avoid moving vehicles as they are the most dangerous place you can put your body, even more dangerous than strolling down a street in downtown Baghdad or South Central LA, although I'm not sure which of those two are more dangerous :-) Alias |
#153
|
|||
|
|||
XP Pro SP2, Vista & Vienna -- A Useful Progression?
HEMI-Powered wrote:
Today, TOM7601 made these interesting comments ... HEMI-Powered wrote: Today, TOM7601 made these interesting comments ... You're probably right, no one *NEEDS* a hybrid automobile any more than anyone *NEEDS* a Hemi powered car. We buy what we want and if it feeds our perception of our environmental consciousness, or our driving skills, then so be it. Different strokes for different folks. Let's try to separate "need" from "want". Nobody needs a hot PC and nobody needs Vista. Nobody needs a hybrid nor a HEMI nor an F-150 nor a Mercedes-Benz S-650 for $150,000+. But, people want these things, or think they do. This is what freedom is all about, and is also what the free enterprise system is all about. And, yes, ALL companies try to implant the "need" in prospective customer's minds so they would rather die than not buy the thing du jour. Anyway, with the desert and mountains less than an hour away, I can make use of the 4X4... :)) I thought that formatting *NEEDS* the way I did, I was making a distinction of sorts. Next time I'll try to make the distinction more clear (double-double?) by including *WANT* for those who are slow on the uptake. Thanks for the heads-up... :)) Tom, who of us are you arguing with and why? I believe, and have stated so several times, that buying decisions for ALL products hard or soft, consumer or vehicular, application SW or O/S is all about freedom. Freedom to choose, freedom to decline, freedom to buy what they want for whatever reason they want, and freedom to not buy what they don't want to buy. WRT vehicles, I can see really broad-based definitions of "need", "want", "desire", "lust for", "require", and other adjectives applied to cars as small as imported sub-sub compacts through the entire spectrum of car sizes, price classes, engines, features, etc. The, there's the people and cargo haulers, including traditional minivans or SUVs, and the trucks. More recently, we've seen the rapid rise of CUVs, again, all the way from sub-compact to really large. 4X4 vehicles abound, as do AWD which is different. Some folks want an off-road vehicle while others just want to pretent and still others just want to be safe in rain and snow. There's other market segments and many other quantitative and qualitative definitions one can use to "justify" why people do or don't buy what any of us may think they should. So, just because Justin has a F-150, someone else has a 4X4 truck or SUV, I have a 5.7L HEMI, lots of folks lust after the modern day muscle cars, and then there's the Prius crowd. So, as the old Wendy's ads used to say "where's the beef?" And, note that none of the protagonists in this OT debate have politicized the vehicle buying process nor evangelized any favorite brands/models nor disparaged any, that I can tell. I'll say it again: I may not like my company's competitures, but I sure as Hell highly respect them. The Asians and some European brands definitely do it right the first time, are price efficient, plant build time efficient, have outstanding quality, often superior fuel economy, and frequently competitive performance. And, while the American Big Three ARE improving rapidly across the board, the Asians are improving at a higher rate. So, I can and will respect your views, just keep it factual and no name calling, OK? Thanks. I didn't realize that *WANTS* and *NEEDS* were considered "name calling." We live and learn... :)) -- Tom - Vista, CA |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
XP Pro SP2, Vista & Vienna -- A Useful Progression?
Today, TOM7601 made these interesting comments ...
I didn't realize that *WANTS* and *NEEDS* were considered "name calling." It was my perception of your tone and the way you've previously been chipping away at both Justin and Me. I put out a short epistle explaining what I thought you were "clarifying" in a short, read: smart aleck way, message, so I add my 50 cents worth. I tend to lost track of who says what since I clear the old headers, but someone, maybe you maybe not you, was coming on very strong saying that Justin's buying experience was hooey, dealers are out to screw you, and the same old saw complainst came across in the tone, not necessarily the words, that the cars under discussion are all in the same crap basket. When I started talking about cars in this thread, it was to use their product development process and the fact that theres tens of millions of lines of computer code to try to illustrate to some who were concerned about the bloat, slowness, and bugs in Vista. It turned more into an OT discussion when Justin came in, and I think one other person. So, in the middle of this, I put out my own views of how and why people buy what they do, and clarified it in response to another person - again, it may or may not hat been you - and I was replying to your "wants" vs "need" statement. We live and learn... :)) Yes, we do, and that's why a free flow of ideas both pro and con for the issue(s) du jour is a healthy thing. What I'd ask you to do is to look at my comments and Justin's as clarification and amplification, and some refutation, of your views, but NOT a personal attack. I'd rather not get into that, as with DSH Spence suddenly turning on me. So, with all of that, have a great day! - HP, aka Jerry |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
XP Pro SP2, Vista & Vienna -- A Useful Progression?
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 13:12:41 -0500, Adam Albright wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:16:25 -0700, "Justin" wrote: "HEMI-Powered" wrote in message Me, too! Can you offer me some psycho-babble that will convince me to pop for that SRT8? I need some sort of excuse to salve my conscience that I really need that much power. Man, it sure would be fun! Less time on road = less fuel spent. Justin, you're really a funny character. EVERYONE (but you) knows the faster you drive the MORE fuel you'll use. It therefore will cost you more in fuel burned driving at 95 MPH then it would at 60 MPH. System efficiency plays a role, too. It wouldn't surprise me if driving from LA to NY in 1st gear at 5 mph costs more than in top gear cruise at 55 mph. In terms of computing, there's a "capacity" or "speed" below which it is more expensive to deliberately develop "smaller" systems, and a higher level above which it's cheaper and more effective to harness multiple smaller systems than to try and make one big one. There's efficiency, too. It's not "cheaper" to use 22-bit data than 32-bit, or 5-bit ASCII than 8-bit, because of this. --------------- ---- --- -- - - - - Saws are too hard to use. Be easier to use! --------------- ---- --- -- - - - - |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
XP Pro SP2, Vista & Vienna -- A Useful Progression?
Today, cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) made these interesting
comments ... On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 13:12:41 -0500, Adam Albright wrote: On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:16:25 -0700, "Justin" wrote: "HEMI-Powered" wrote in message Me, too! Can you offer me some psycho-babble that will convince me to pop for that SRT8? I need some sort of excuse to salve my conscience that I really need that much power. Man, it sure would be fun! Less time on road = less fuel spent. Justin, you're really a funny character. EVERYONE (but you) knows the faster you drive the MORE fuel you'll use. It therefore will cost you more in fuel burned driving at 95 MPH then it would at 60 MPH. System efficiency plays a role, too. It wouldn't surprise me if driving from LA to NY in 1st gear at 5 mph costs more than in top gear cruise at 55 mph. In terms of computing, there's a "capacity" or "speed" below which it is more expensive to deliberately develop "smaller" systems, and a higher level above which it's cheaper and more effective to harness multiple smaller systems than to try and make one big one. There's efficiency, too. It's not "cheaper" to use 22-bit data than 32-bit, or 5-bit ASCII than 8-bit, because of this. All that is true. I'd add that the OP you're replying to missed a joke from who HE was replying to, and Windows has never been a paragon of efficiency and has generally depended highly on the HW folks to build a better machine to "hide" their "inefficiency". -- HP, aka Jerry |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|