aricher
Nov 27, 01:10 PM
meh - does this matter? Isn't 17" is getting to be a bit skimpy by any consumer standards.
Frosticus
Apr 21, 05:20 AM
Performance and specifications determine whether or not it's a "Pro", not the people who use them. I'm not a professional race car driver, but my car has over 400hp. Does that mean that my car is not the high-performance sports car that the automotive world widely claims it to be?
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
Agreed, the "Pro" bit is referring to it's spec relative to the standard MacBook.. not to the users.. :rolleyes:
BTW - has anyone else noticed the shipping times for the Mac Pros? 12-core and server are now 3-5 days in UK and US stores. Is this a slip also ahead of potential refresh? /optimism
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
Agreed, the "Pro" bit is referring to it's spec relative to the standard MacBook.. not to the users.. :rolleyes:
BTW - has anyone else noticed the shipping times for the Mac Pros? 12-core and server are now 3-5 days in UK and US stores. Is this a slip also ahead of potential refresh? /optimism
NameUndecided
Apr 2, 05:16 PM
On a happier note -- I don't think I've seen this mentioned yet -- DP 2 seems to be taking about 1.5gb less space.
steviem
Apr 11, 01:56 PM
DSG isn't an automatic gearbox by the standard of Torque Converters or CVT.
It uses two banks of gears and two clutches.
My friend had a Citroen C2 with a Tiptronic gearbox. This is an automatic with flappy paddles on the steering wheel. That was an automatic (Torque converter) that just changed the way the automatic gear selector layout to a stick with Park, Drive, reverse and if you flicked the gear selector to the right, you could use the flappy paddles.
The differences with this Automatic and DSG, was that in the Citroen, when you flicked up, you then had to wait more than a beat for the gear to change up. You had to wait more than a beat for the gear to change down, and if you went too far out of rev range, it would change up or down without your input.
On the DSG, in manual mode, you still have control over the gears and revs, just the clutches are controlled by computer, which can disengage the clutch and engage the other clutch (with the next gear) in a flash.
It uses two banks of gears and two clutches.
My friend had a Citroen C2 with a Tiptronic gearbox. This is an automatic with flappy paddles on the steering wheel. That was an automatic (Torque converter) that just changed the way the automatic gear selector layout to a stick with Park, Drive, reverse and if you flicked the gear selector to the right, you could use the flappy paddles.
The differences with this Automatic and DSG, was that in the Citroen, when you flicked up, you then had to wait more than a beat for the gear to change up. You had to wait more than a beat for the gear to change down, and if you went too far out of rev range, it would change up or down without your input.
On the DSG, in manual mode, you still have control over the gears and revs, just the clutches are controlled by computer, which can disengage the clutch and engage the other clutch (with the next gear) in a flash.
babyj
Nov 30, 12:46 PM
The quoted price is $299 which nominally translates to £157 + Apple stiff a brit tax + Government screw yer countryman tax.
I'm expecting £199.
If you think the iTV will do everything that a media centre pc circa(£800) does then i want to know what you are smoking?
It'll be a highly focused 1st release ie, everything in the Sept presentation + RSS feeds rebranded as clever channels, delivering usual junk off YouTube and Google video.
Games, ichat, online imovie editing, they'll be in patch releases, when you buy iTV 2 or never, cos Steve thinks those things suck ass on a TV.
I'm not expecting iTV to do everything a Media Centre PC does, but it needs to be able to do what the Xbox 360 can when connected to a PC running Media Centre. Whether that means it has to connect to a Mac or do it stand alone doesn't matter, but it needs to compete with the Microsoft solution.
If you've got an old PC (or you buy a cheap 2nd hand PC) you can run Media Centre on then it only costs £80 for Media Centre, £200 for an Xbox and £50 for a TV card.
I'd of already gone with Microsoft but I want to be able to download video on to my iPod - the different video formats make that a pain in the arse at the moment.
I'm expecting £199.
If you think the iTV will do everything that a media centre pc circa(£800) does then i want to know what you are smoking?
It'll be a highly focused 1st release ie, everything in the Sept presentation + RSS feeds rebranded as clever channels, delivering usual junk off YouTube and Google video.
Games, ichat, online imovie editing, they'll be in patch releases, when you buy iTV 2 or never, cos Steve thinks those things suck ass on a TV.
I'm not expecting iTV to do everything a Media Centre PC does, but it needs to be able to do what the Xbox 360 can when connected to a PC running Media Centre. Whether that means it has to connect to a Mac or do it stand alone doesn't matter, but it needs to compete with the Microsoft solution.
If you've got an old PC (or you buy a cheap 2nd hand PC) you can run Media Centre on then it only costs £80 for Media Centre, £200 for an Xbox and £50 for a TV card.
I'd of already gone with Microsoft but I want to be able to download video on to my iPod - the different video formats make that a pain in the arse at the moment.
twoodcc
Oct 5, 10:30 PM
Congrats, keep the bigadv coming!
thanks. like i said, i'll have them coming when it gets colder. but it looks like mc68k will keep them coming
EDIT: and congrats to you! over 2 million now!
thanks. like i said, i'll have them coming when it gets colder. but it looks like mc68k will keep them coming
EDIT: and congrats to you! over 2 million now!
skunk
Mar 27, 04:57 AM
Well, the US controls the AWACSThe AWACS involved are owned and operated by NATO. There may not even be US personnel on board.
toddybody
Apr 19, 12:02 PM
Which is why desktops won't die out.
+1
Dont get me wrong...I love my iPad 2. I just could never give up the ease and efficiency of a Dektop.
+1
Dont get me wrong...I love my iPad 2. I just could never give up the ease and efficiency of a Dektop.
DavidLeblond
Apr 21, 01:59 PM
To those laughing at this and pointing out that Android phones don't have a file recording your movements:
https://github.com/packetlss/android-locdump
(NOTE: I did not write this)
https://github.com/packetlss/android-locdump
(NOTE: I did not write this)
johnalan
Mar 23, 05:27 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but people keep going on about ThunderBolt like it's gonna fill 200gig ipods in a minute and how you can copy 500gig files between computers in minutes...
That may be the case between ThunderBolt connected RAID arrays, and Macbook Pros with lightning fast SSD write rates,
but isn't the case that the 1.8inch HDD in the ipod wouldn't be able to write files to it's disk at anything close to ThunderBolt speeds, I wouldn't be suprised if USB2.0 nearly saturates these 1.8inch drive write speeds.
Another thing, even if you take two brand new MBP's with TB, unless they both have SSD's you're not gonna see anything like 10gbps when transfering between them because even there 2.5inch 7200 disks cannot write at 1Gigabyte a second.
That may be the case between ThunderBolt connected RAID arrays, and Macbook Pros with lightning fast SSD write rates,
but isn't the case that the 1.8inch HDD in the ipod wouldn't be able to write files to it's disk at anything close to ThunderBolt speeds, I wouldn't be suprised if USB2.0 nearly saturates these 1.8inch drive write speeds.
Another thing, even if you take two brand new MBP's with TB, unless they both have SSD's you're not gonna see anything like 10gbps when transfering between them because even there 2.5inch 7200 disks cannot write at 1Gigabyte a second.
heffemonkeyman
Sep 7, 12:59 PM
On my lunch break at work, I just downloaded a couple of HD trailers, both 2min30sec in length; 1 at 480p and the other at 720p. My set up is an 3.0Ghz Pentium D, 1G ram, 256K Nvidia Gforce 6800, 20" Dell Digital LCD.
I could tell no difference in file quality. The problem lies in download time. Both files average dl speed was 150KBps. Thats 1.2Mbps if my math is right. The 420p file took 4:28 to dl, translating to 3:34:24 for a 2hr movie. For 720p, it took 12:39, meaning a full movie would take 9:28:45.
I know my cable provider offers up to 4Mbps downlaods, for about $120/month. And thats before the cable servise itself. Even then its not dedicated. Most people with cable will opt for their providers basic service ,like $40 - 50/month for 500-600kbps, or 1/2 as fast as my test. The movies would take twice as long to dl. 19hrs to downlaod will not fly. 7hrs may not either.
If the compression works to get a DVD quality movie down to 1G, then it could be downloaded in about 1h50mim, nearly realtime at work, or 3h40min at home. At work, I would only need maybe a 15min buffer before I start watching, and not catch up to the dl. But at home, I would need about 1h40min buffer. Maybe this is acceptable to some, but if I can walk to Wal-mart or Blockbuster and back in that time, then what's the consumer advantage beyond the novelty?
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
This is a good test, but your connection is not fast enough for this to be viable. If your getting only getting 1.2mbps, that not going to cut it.
Bandwith is a huge issue. In my area, Seattle, I can get Comcast cable for about $50/mo and I get 6-8mbps solid download. So I can stream anything that is encoded at 6-8mbps just fine. The 720p trailers are about 4-8mbps, so it works for me.
I know not everyone can get that kind of bandwidth/price, but they will soon. I think this is where Apple is going, but it's not going to work for everyone. At least not right away. But maybe enough to be profitable?
I could tell no difference in file quality. The problem lies in download time. Both files average dl speed was 150KBps. Thats 1.2Mbps if my math is right. The 420p file took 4:28 to dl, translating to 3:34:24 for a 2hr movie. For 720p, it took 12:39, meaning a full movie would take 9:28:45.
I know my cable provider offers up to 4Mbps downlaods, for about $120/month. And thats before the cable servise itself. Even then its not dedicated. Most people with cable will opt for their providers basic service ,like $40 - 50/month for 500-600kbps, or 1/2 as fast as my test. The movies would take twice as long to dl. 19hrs to downlaod will not fly. 7hrs may not either.
If the compression works to get a DVD quality movie down to 1G, then it could be downloaded in about 1h50mim, nearly realtime at work, or 3h40min at home. At work, I would only need maybe a 15min buffer before I start watching, and not catch up to the dl. But at home, I would need about 1h40min buffer. Maybe this is acceptable to some, but if I can walk to Wal-mart or Blockbuster and back in that time, then what's the consumer advantage beyond the novelty?
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
This is a good test, but your connection is not fast enough for this to be viable. If your getting only getting 1.2mbps, that not going to cut it.
Bandwith is a huge issue. In my area, Seattle, I can get Comcast cable for about $50/mo and I get 6-8mbps solid download. So I can stream anything that is encoded at 6-8mbps just fine. The 720p trailers are about 4-8mbps, so it works for me.
I know not everyone can get that kind of bandwidth/price, but they will soon. I think this is where Apple is going, but it's not going to work for everyone. At least not right away. But maybe enough to be profitable?
Deathlok2001
Mar 25, 07:40 PM
Jesus! :eek: As Mac Addict use to say, freaking awesome! (does that mag still exist?) This just SOLD me on an iPad 2! :D
fenixx
Sep 6, 07:38 PM
Even though Apple is Apple, going up against Amazon, which will have more movie options at the time of launch is going to be tough...
unless... they release some sort of new hardware [full screen ipod, plzkthx] that will take the spotlight.
Here's hoping for "one more thing"... on Sept 12.
unless... they release some sort of new hardware [full screen ipod, plzkthx] that will take the spotlight.
Here's hoping for "one more thing"... on Sept 12.
brenden
Feb 24, 05:46 PM
my setup
yukio
Apr 12, 10:11 PM
Supposedly the guy behind this new version is also the criminal that destroyed iMovie a few years back.
Randy Ubillos is brilliant, and a really good guy to boot.
Seriously.
Randy Ubillos is brilliant, and a really good guy to boot.
Seriously.
Apple OC
Mar 25, 01:10 PM
Looks like the Canadians will be commanding the "No Fly" operation in Lybia
interesting
http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110325/110325_cda_libya_military/20110325/?hub=CP24Home
interesting
http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110325/110325_cda_libya_military/20110325/?hub=CP24Home
twoodcc
Nov 27, 04:59 PM
well it depends on the resolution of the monitor. i don't really see this a big deal affecting me, but i can see alot of people buying them though. maybe it's good for Apple, but unless the 20" price comes down, doesn't really help me any
mdelaney123
Jul 18, 07:35 AM
For this to work:
1. The movies will have to be able to play on a TV. I would even say they would have to be hi-def...
2. A Rental system would have to allow me to buy/download when I want, and then watch it when I want, with the ability to pause for a week or more if I want. (None of this having to watch it 24 hours after you download it.)
The people I have spoken to about this just don't want to watch a video on an iPod type device. We all have TiVos, Video On-Demand, Windows Media Center, etc. Most people don't want to watch a movie on their computer...
Apple has a opportunity here to really beef up Front Row, adding TiVo functionality, Movie downloads, etc... Really make the Mac a media hub. I hope they do it... I have Windows Media Center. It is lacking in a few areas, namely it doesn't record HD well yet... But it is close to being really good.
Our Tivo went on the fritz and we missed a Survivor last season. The next day, I went to CBS.com, paid $0.99 and downloaded it to our media center PC. We then watched it via our Xbox 360 hooked up to our 60" HD TV. The picture quality was better than broadcast, and there were no commercials. My wife was really impressed at how easy and seamless it was. (Note: My Media Center PC does not have a tuner card, so we don't use it for streaming videos. It is a gaming PC that came with Media Center...)
I really hope Apple gets this right!
1. The movies will have to be able to play on a TV. I would even say they would have to be hi-def...
2. A Rental system would have to allow me to buy/download when I want, and then watch it when I want, with the ability to pause for a week or more if I want. (None of this having to watch it 24 hours after you download it.)
The people I have spoken to about this just don't want to watch a video on an iPod type device. We all have TiVos, Video On-Demand, Windows Media Center, etc. Most people don't want to watch a movie on their computer...
Apple has a opportunity here to really beef up Front Row, adding TiVo functionality, Movie downloads, etc... Really make the Mac a media hub. I hope they do it... I have Windows Media Center. It is lacking in a few areas, namely it doesn't record HD well yet... But it is close to being really good.
Our Tivo went on the fritz and we missed a Survivor last season. The next day, I went to CBS.com, paid $0.99 and downloaded it to our media center PC. We then watched it via our Xbox 360 hooked up to our 60" HD TV. The picture quality was better than broadcast, and there were no commercials. My wife was really impressed at how easy and seamless it was. (Note: My Media Center PC does not have a tuner card, so we don't use it for streaming videos. It is a gaming PC that came with Media Center...)
I really hope Apple gets this right!
BoyBach
Aug 7, 05:14 AM
Not too brag or anything :D but it works out great for us in UK. Get in from work 5.30pm / open a beer / macrumors / keynote 6pm / tears of joy / rob bank 9pm / buy mac pro :D
Finish work at 5.30pm - 1 hour of 5-a-side footy (6.00 - 7.00pm) - drive home, eat & shower by 7.30pm - turn on Mac, log into MacRumors (hopefully it'll be running!) - and laugh at all you silly bugger's who have to spend �1000's on a new Mac and display :p
Finish work at 5.30pm - 1 hour of 5-a-side footy (6.00 - 7.00pm) - drive home, eat & shower by 7.30pm - turn on Mac, log into MacRumors (hopefully it'll be running!) - and laugh at all you silly bugger's who have to spend �1000's on a new Mac and display :p
Evangelion
Jul 20, 11:36 AM
I have used Linux before, admit that I gave up with linux with Suse 9. The point I was trying to make with the package manager is that its not easy to go out and find something, every time you either have to find a package for your specific distribution or have it "built" for your distro. If you look at the way the mac works now I can drag the aduim icon to a remote drive, and from almost any machine that meets the basic specs I can then double click that app, even if its on a network drive, it will run, can you say the same for Linux?
Yes I can. Like I said, I just fire up the package-manager, find the app in question and click "Install". That really is all there is to it. No need to browse the web, looking for installers to download.
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example.
Things are different these days. You are basing your judgement on SUSE9, which was released three years ago. During that three years, Linux has made HUGE progress. Things are chaning for the better, and they are changing FAST. I would say that Linux has changed more during the last three years than it did during the five years before 2003.
Note: that is NOT a bad thing for Apple. I bet that Apple would much rather co-exists with Linux than with Windows. There could never be a monopoly Linux could exploit to harm competitors, Microsoft could do that, and they have done it. Linux is open and follows established standards, Microsoft does not, if they can get away with it. Linux has no interest in destroying competitors, Microsoft does.
I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult.
Well, SUSE does ship with tons of apps on the DVD (mainly so that it could be used wby people without broadband). But if you look at Ubuntu for example, it ships with relatively few apps. In a way, they have selected "best of breed"-apps for their distro. But if the user wants to have some additional piece of software, he can just fire up the package-manager, where he can choose from 16.000 pieces of software. The app the user is looking for is most likely listed there. If he's installing a piece of commercial software, they usually ship with nice installers that are not one bit harder to use than the ones in OS X or Windows.
There is the issue of building your own kernel
You have no need to do that. Seriously. I haven't built my own kernels in years. And when I did, it was because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.
Just because you CAN compile your own kernel does not mean that you are required to do so. The possibility is there for power-users.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well.
I disagree. In Linux all the apps I could even want were just few mouse-clicks away. On OS X (and on Windows) I have to hunt for those apps in internet, only to find out that I'm expected to pay for them. I had none of those problems in Linux.
why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro?
There are several distros, because one distro can't do it all. Want an OS that can be tweaked and customized to your exact needs and for your specific hardware? Obviously Ubuntu is not ideal then, but Gentoo is. Want a distro that "just works"? Ubuntu would be a good choice then. Want a distro with rock-solid reliablity? Try Debian. Want to run Red Hat servers, but don't want to pay for support? Use CentOS.
All those distros exist because there are users who find them to be better for their needs than the other distros are. And there's nothing wrong with that, since one size does not fit all. No-one could tell the users that "from now on, there will be just one distro". And even if someone could say that, the users who were unhappy with the "one true distro" could start their own distro if they wanted to.
Why do users argue which distro is best? For the same reason why Mac-users tell Linux and Windows-users that OS X is the best? For the same reason why BMW-drivers tell others that BMW is better than Merc is? People like to rationalise their choice of OS.
Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
They know that there can't be one distro that "does everything". Ubuntu wants to be easy to use OS that just works. Gentoo wnts to be as customizable, flexible and powerful as possible. It would be very, very hard for single OS to offer both of those ideoogies in one package. It would en up being "jack of all trades, master of none".
Take Mandrake (Mandiva these days) and Red Hat for example. Years ago Red Hat decided to use GNOME as their default desktop. There were bunch of Red Hat users who liked the distro, but liked KDE more than GNOME. So they took Red Hat, replaced GNOME with KDE and voila: Mandrake was born. From that point te two started to diverge. as independted OS'es.
Yes I can. Like I said, I just fire up the package-manager, find the app in question and click "Install". That really is all there is to it. No need to browse the web, looking for installers to download.
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example.
Things are different these days. You are basing your judgement on SUSE9, which was released three years ago. During that three years, Linux has made HUGE progress. Things are chaning for the better, and they are changing FAST. I would say that Linux has changed more during the last three years than it did during the five years before 2003.
Note: that is NOT a bad thing for Apple. I bet that Apple would much rather co-exists with Linux than with Windows. There could never be a monopoly Linux could exploit to harm competitors, Microsoft could do that, and they have done it. Linux is open and follows established standards, Microsoft does not, if they can get away with it. Linux has no interest in destroying competitors, Microsoft does.
I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult.
Well, SUSE does ship with tons of apps on the DVD (mainly so that it could be used wby people without broadband). But if you look at Ubuntu for example, it ships with relatively few apps. In a way, they have selected "best of breed"-apps for their distro. But if the user wants to have some additional piece of software, he can just fire up the package-manager, where he can choose from 16.000 pieces of software. The app the user is looking for is most likely listed there. If he's installing a piece of commercial software, they usually ship with nice installers that are not one bit harder to use than the ones in OS X or Windows.
There is the issue of building your own kernel
You have no need to do that. Seriously. I haven't built my own kernels in years. And when I did, it was because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.
Just because you CAN compile your own kernel does not mean that you are required to do so. The possibility is there for power-users.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well.
I disagree. In Linux all the apps I could even want were just few mouse-clicks away. On OS X (and on Windows) I have to hunt for those apps in internet, only to find out that I'm expected to pay for them. I had none of those problems in Linux.
why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro?
There are several distros, because one distro can't do it all. Want an OS that can be tweaked and customized to your exact needs and for your specific hardware? Obviously Ubuntu is not ideal then, but Gentoo is. Want a distro that "just works"? Ubuntu would be a good choice then. Want a distro with rock-solid reliablity? Try Debian. Want to run Red Hat servers, but don't want to pay for support? Use CentOS.
All those distros exist because there are users who find them to be better for their needs than the other distros are. And there's nothing wrong with that, since one size does not fit all. No-one could tell the users that "from now on, there will be just one distro". And even if someone could say that, the users who were unhappy with the "one true distro" could start their own distro if they wanted to.
Why do users argue which distro is best? For the same reason why Mac-users tell Linux and Windows-users that OS X is the best? For the same reason why BMW-drivers tell others that BMW is better than Merc is? People like to rationalise their choice of OS.
Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
They know that there can't be one distro that "does everything". Ubuntu wants to be easy to use OS that just works. Gentoo wnts to be as customizable, flexible and powerful as possible. It would be very, very hard for single OS to offer both of those ideoogies in one package. It would en up being "jack of all trades, master of none".
Take Mandrake (Mandiva these days) and Red Hat for example. Years ago Red Hat decided to use GNOME as their default desktop. There were bunch of Red Hat users who liked the distro, but liked KDE more than GNOME. So they took Red Hat, replaced GNOME with KDE and voila: Mandrake was born. From that point te two started to diverge. as independted OS'es.
KnightWRX
Apr 11, 12:47 PM
I'd be interested in a more complete explanation. CVT is what the particular manufacturer I'm considering calls their transmission. And, yes, you can get paddle shifters if you want.
A CVT is simply a transmission with no fixed gear ratios. It can have any gear ratio between a set minimum and maximum, it has no "steps" like "1st gear, 2nd gear". In other words, it's a transmission type where you could theoretically have the engine spin where it produces the most power (let's say at 5000 rpm) all the time while accelerating. In reality, car CVTs do still have gears, like the Honda Fit which is a 7 gear automatic CVT transmission.
CVT, DSG or the traditional fluid type are all automatics. They just differ in their inner workings. What you're talking about has nothing to do with the inner-working, the paddle like shifters or + - gates on the shifter is simply an interface that lets you override any of the automatic transmissions and select your own gear.
A distinction to make. You could technically have a CVT transmission that you put in "drive" and drive off and you could have a traditional automatic with paddle shifters. Both are unrelated in their function.
A CVT is simply a transmission with no fixed gear ratios. It can have any gear ratio between a set minimum and maximum, it has no "steps" like "1st gear, 2nd gear". In other words, it's a transmission type where you could theoretically have the engine spin where it produces the most power (let's say at 5000 rpm) all the time while accelerating. In reality, car CVTs do still have gears, like the Honda Fit which is a 7 gear automatic CVT transmission.
CVT, DSG or the traditional fluid type are all automatics. They just differ in their inner workings. What you're talking about has nothing to do with the inner-working, the paddle like shifters or + - gates on the shifter is simply an interface that lets you override any of the automatic transmissions and select your own gear.
A distinction to make. You could technically have a CVT transmission that you put in "drive" and drive off and you could have a traditional automatic with paddle shifters. Both are unrelated in their function.
jazzbo
Feb 24, 09:42 AM
One small con for diesel is that in cold climates, at the very least you pay a slight premium for winterized diesel, and often you may need to add a de-gelling agent even with "winterized" fuel, or if a cold snap happens before the local dealers switch to winterized. I used to have a VW TDI Beetle and it just shut off one very cold morning in Maine, and had to be hauled to a garage so the fuel line could thaw out. The dealer claimed they made it very clear to me (and everyone) who bought a TDI that they needed to put in the conditioner; this was after commenting on why my engine stopped, "fuel probably gelled, we had 2 others already today." I suggested maybe they needed to emphasize the point a little better to new buyers.
Granted there is a deal of regular maintenance that car owners should expect, but in speaking with other TDI owners, several in my area had this 'surprise' in their first winter.
I don't know if the cleaner diesel is winterized better or not and/or what the premium for winterized fuel is these days during the colder months.
Granted there is a deal of regular maintenance that car owners should expect, but in speaking with other TDI owners, several in my area had this 'surprise' in their first winter.
I don't know if the cleaner diesel is winterized better or not and/or what the premium for winterized fuel is these days during the colder months.
Goldfinger
Aug 31, 12:12 PM
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-08-31/#5869
What about this ? :)
What about this ? :)
maclaptop
Apr 21, 10:30 PM
These old Senators still believe in privacy.
The poor suckers have no clue. The word privacy should be removed from the dictionary.
The poor suckers have no clue. The word privacy should be removed from the dictionary.
No comments:
Post a Comment