Well, I can't burn rubber at all with mine but it does go from 0 to 60 in 4.73
seconds and I average 31 mpg. It is a 6 speed manual, four cylinders, and has
all the factory United States mandated smog control functions still on the
car, its even legal in California! Nothing special, just a bog standard
straight off the showroom floor, sold in the US, 2010 vehicle.
31 mpg for a 2010 4-cylinder 2010 car. Thats terrible. The US could do
with catching up with the rest of the world in this area.
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
05-10-2011, 08:02 AM
Chris Jones
Unity ROCKS not!!!
I've seen a number of more-or-less appreciative comments here relative
to the Mac gui, and apparently Ubuntu is aiming in that direction. It
should be remembered that the Mac is aimed at a specific audience,
which it admittedly serves very well: that is the writing and publishing
industry, with its corollaries layout and print design.
No so. See below.
I am not a Mac
user, so there may be other things that it does fairly well, but I don't
ever remember hearing of any scientific applications designed for it.
Where is the AutoCad, the Pro-E, the Agilent EEsof, etc.?
Speaking as a scientist and a mac user that is utter nonsense. In my
scientific circles makes have a much greater than the average 10% share.
More like 50%. Want to know why ? Its because its a UNIX operating
system. 'real' scientific applications, not those you mention above are
designed for UNIX systems, not windows.
I suppose it
must
have a spreadsheet--it has the Microsoft Office suite--but that's almost
a second thought.
Again not so. The latest 2011 MS Office for Mac is on a par with the
windows version.
And have you ever heard of anyone seriously writing
code on a Mac?
Yes. Me.
Or using one as a digital controller? Or a server?
Sure, Linux
has to catch up with some of these types of things, but it has not painted
itself into a corner, like Mac seems to have. If the Mac were anywhere near
as versatile as Windows,
Thats so backwards its laughable.
it wouldn't be sitting with only 10% or so of the
market.
So why is Ubuntu trying so hard to emulate Mac? Huh?
Because they are better and nicer to use. You say yourself you aren't a
mac user. So please, don't comment on things you have no experience of.
I've used all 3 (OSX, windows and linux) in equal measure and place UNIX
systems, either linux or OSX, head and shoulders above windows.
Chris
--doug
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
05-10-2011, 08:02 AM
Colin Law
Unity ROCKS not!!!
On 10 May 2011 08:54, Chris Jones <jonesc@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> ...
> 31 mpg for a 2010 4-cylinder 2010 car. Thats terrible. The US could do with
> catching up with the rest of the world in this area.
Remember that their gallons are smaller than real gallons. But even
so, you are right.
Colin
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
05-10-2011, 05:50 PM
Ernest Doub
Unity ROCKS not!!!
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Colin Law <clanlaw@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 10 May 2011 08:54, Chris Jones <jonesc@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>> ...
>> 31 mpg for a 2010 4-cylinder 2010 car. Thats terrible. The US could do with
>> catching up with the rest of the world in this area.
>
> Remember that their gallons are smaller than real gallons. *But even
> so, you are right.
>
> Colin
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>
US Gallon = 4 quarts
Imperial Gallon = 5 quarts
Mileage in Imperial Gallons = 38.75
How does that contrast with current european[real world] mileage?
--
"Paper money has had the effect in your state that it will ever have,
to ruin commerce, oppress the honest, and open the door to every
species of fraud and injustice." -GEORGE WASHINGTON, in letter to J.
Bowen, Rhode Island, Jan. 9, 1787
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
05-10-2011, 05:54 PM
Liam Proven
Unity ROCKS not!!!
On 10 May 2011 06:58, Doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> wrote:
> On 05/10/2011 01:06 AM, Ernest Doub wrote:
>
> /snip/
>>>
>>> But then, there's a whole bunch of stuff Mac OS X doesn't do that
>>> Windows does, any yet, it's an entirely usable OS.
>>
>> /snip/
>
> I've seen a number of more-or-less appreciative comments here relative
> to the Mac gui, and apparently Ubuntu is aiming in that direction. Â*It
> should be remembered that the Mac is aimed at a specific audience,
> which it admittedly serves very well: Â*that is the writing and publishing
> industry, with its corollaries layout and print design. Â*I am not a Mac
> user, so there may be other things that it does fairly well, but I don't
> ever remember hearing of any scientific applications designed for it.
> Where is the AutoCad, the Pro-E, the Agilent EEsof, etc.? Â*I suppose it must
> have a spreadsheet--it has the Microsoft Office suite--but that's almost
> a second thought. Â*And have you ever heard of anyone seriously writing
> code on a Mac? Â*Or using one as a digital controller? Â*Or a server? Sure,
> Linux
> has to catch up with some of these types of things, but it has not painted
> itself into a corner, like Mac seems to have. If the Mac were anywhere near
> as versatile as Windows, it wouldn't be sitting with only 10% or so of the
> market. Â*So why is Ubuntu trying so hard to emulate Mac? Huh?
Well, there are several points here.
Firstly, Apple is doing /very/ well these days, and is popular in all
sorts of sectors, not just print/repro/graphic design. The only place
it is not yet achieving a lot of traction is big-enterprise corporate
networking.
So the GUI is /not/ designed solely to be easy for those users. It's
designed to be easy, period.
Why copy it instead of Windows?
Well:
[1] because it is a successful model, with most of its customers
coming across from Windows and not being fazed by the the new system &
indeed becoming fans of it, and
[2] because Apple isn't threatening to sue anyone, and probably won't, because:
[a] much of its OS is based on FOSS code anyway
[b] Mac OS X is based on NeXTstep anyway, not classic MacOS, and
NeXTstep had already been widely licensed (e.g. to Sun and IBM) and
copied (e.g. by WindowMaker and GNUstep) and Apple has been fine to
let these continue for years now.
Yes, Mac OS X is widely used by coders, engineers, scientists,
designers, and other hardcore tecnical users. They like it, as someone
else has already observed, because it's Unix. Real actual licensed
Unix(TM).
And yes, Macs are widely used as servers, partly because Mac OS X
Server is very easy, partly because it's cheap - the single standard
basic edition comes with unlimited user licences. Again, because it is
actually mostly based on FOSS code.
So you're basing your arguments on misunderstandings, I'm afraid.
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
05-10-2011, 05:56 PM
Liam Proven
Unity ROCKS not!!!
On 10 May 2011 07:36, Jordon Bedwell <jordon@envygeeks.com> wrote:
> On 5/10/2011 12:58 AM, Doug wrote:
>> If the Mac were anywhere near as versatile as Windows,
>> it wouldn't be sitting with only 10% or so of the
>> market. Â*So why is Ubuntu trying so hard to emulate Mac? Huh?
>
> I want to meet the people they did their research with. Â*I want to know
> which idiot decided it was more ergonomic to force everything to the
> left instead of the right. Even though humans look left to right they
> favor moving right to left. Apparently it's more ergonomic and fitting
> to move the mouse more to action a menu on the left than to action a
> menu on the right.
Very simple. Scrollbars generally go on the right. Put the dock there
and it keeps popping up when you go for the scrollbar.
Reading direction is immaterial - remember that these OSs are widely
used by people whose languages read right-to-left and I would not be
entirely surprised top-to-bottom, bottom-to-top or boustrephodon (look
it up).
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
05-10-2011, 06:03 PM
Liam Proven
Unity ROCKS not!!!
On 10 May 2011 18:50, Ernest Doub <hideserted@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Colin Law <clanlaw@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On 10 May 2011 08:54, Chris Jones <jonesc@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> 31 mpg for a 2010 4-cylinder 2010 car. Thats terrible. The US could do with
>>> catching up with the rest of the world in this area.
>>
>> Remember that their gallons are smaller than real gallons. Â*But even
>> so, you are right.
>>
>> Colin
>
> US Gallon = 4 quarts
> Imperial Gallon = 5 quarts
> Mileage in Imperial Gallons = 38.75
> How does that contrast with current european[real world] mileage?
Your "quart" is different, too.
Imperial quarts are 4 imperial pints.
Which is why in the civilised world - i.e, everywhere except the USA -
we all use metric now.
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
05-10-2011, 06:06 PM
Nils Kassube
Unity ROCKS not!!!
Ernest Doub wrote:
> US Gallon = 4 quarts
> Imperial Gallon = 5 quarts
> Mileage in Imperial Gallons = 38.75
> How does that contrast with current european[real world] mileage?
In the real world there are neither gallons nor miles.
Nils
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
05-10-2011, 06:09 PM
Ernest Doub
Unity ROCKS not!!!
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Liam Proven <lproven@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10 May 2011 18:50, Ernest Doub <hideserted@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Colin Law <clanlaw@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> On 10 May 2011 08:54, Chris Jones <jonesc@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> 31 mpg for a 2010 4-cylinder 2010 car. Thats terrible. The US could do with
>>>> catching up with the rest of the world in this area.
>>>
>>> Remember that their gallons are smaller than real gallons. Â*But even
>>> so, you are right.
>>>
>>> Colin
>>
>> US Gallon = 4 quarts
>> Imperial Gallon = 5 quarts
>> Mileage in Imperial Gallons = 38.75
>> How does that contrast with current european[real world] mileage?
>
> Your "quart" is different, too.
>
> Imperial quarts are 4 imperial pints.
>
> Which is why in the civilised world - i.e, everywhere except the USA -
> we all use metric now.
>
>
> --
> Liam Proven • Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
> Email: lproven@cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven@gmail.com
> Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
> AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lproven@hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>
USA is gradually being dragged, clawing and screaming, into the metric system.
More and more products use metric standard fittings so metric measure
is being used to relate to those items.
Weight and volume measure are a whole 'nother story though. 8^(
Still curious as to how the above related US mileage compares to
comparable sized European automobile.
--
"Paper money has had the effect in your state that it will ever have,
to ruin commerce, oppress the honest, and open the door to every
species of fraud and injustice." -GEORGE WASHINGTON, in letter to J.
Bowen, Rhode Island, Jan. 9, 1787
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
05-10-2011, 06:11 PM
Ernest Doub
Unity ROCKS not!!!
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Nils Kassube <kassube@gmx.net> wrote:
> Ernest Doub wrote:
>> US Gallon = 4 quarts
>> Imperial Gallon = 5 quarts
>> Mileage in Imperial Gallons = 38.75
>> How does that contrast with current european[real world] mileage?
>
> In the real world there are neither gallons nor miles.
>
>
> Nils
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>
Definition:
real world; what people actually experience as opposed to
govt rating; the carefully manufactured figures used to satisfy the
mandated standards of bureaucrats who haven't got a clue.
--
"Paper money has had the effect in your state that it will ever have,
to ruin commerce, oppress the honest, and open the door to every
species of fraud and injustice." -GEORGE WASHINGTON, in letter to J.
Bowen, Rhode Island, Jan. 9, 1787
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Unity ROCKS not!!!
