rasmasyean
Mar 20, 07:22 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
I'm very pleased about this- many countries working together following a proper UN resolution. Using air support and missiles but not troops.
This also seems like a good example of cooporation, even though any country with a decent airforce could go it alone against Libyia right now! All sorts of countries involved, with France, UK and US doing most at the moment.
I actually think having troops is better. "Firing missles and bombing" from great distances has a "disconnect" between people. When you have actual people fighting and even dying alongside you, both the citizens and the warriors appreciated it more and form more of a bond between people and cultures. It builds a "comraderee" of sorts and helps secure a pschological future between peoples....whereas, in this case, perhaps the only interaction we really have with Lybians is that the generals and politicians might go to meetings. Something the masses never experience for themselves.
After something like this is over without them actually "enduring victory and suffering" with Westerners hugging them, many Lybians will still think...oh yeah, those are the infidels that helped us get Quadafi with their big guns. :p
And even in the eyes of the opposition, it can have a negative effect in that you don't see them face to face when you kill them. It can be seen as a sign of "weakness" and "chickeness". This is what happened with Clinton shooting tomahawks at Bin Laden and then walking away brushing his hands. When you look in their eyes and shoot them, they know you mean business and respect and fear you as a warrior. Then they might think twice before they try to blow up your buildings when you're not looking. ;)
I'm very pleased about this- many countries working together following a proper UN resolution. Using air support and missiles but not troops.
This also seems like a good example of cooporation, even though any country with a decent airforce could go it alone against Libyia right now! All sorts of countries involved, with France, UK and US doing most at the moment.
I actually think having troops is better. "Firing missles and bombing" from great distances has a "disconnect" between people. When you have actual people fighting and even dying alongside you, both the citizens and the warriors appreciated it more and form more of a bond between people and cultures. It builds a "comraderee" of sorts and helps secure a pschological future between peoples....whereas, in this case, perhaps the only interaction we really have with Lybians is that the generals and politicians might go to meetings. Something the masses never experience for themselves.
After something like this is over without them actually "enduring victory and suffering" with Westerners hugging them, many Lybians will still think...oh yeah, those are the infidels that helped us get Quadafi with their big guns. :p
And even in the eyes of the opposition, it can have a negative effect in that you don't see them face to face when you kill them. It can be seen as a sign of "weakness" and "chickeness". This is what happened with Clinton shooting tomahawks at Bin Laden and then walking away brushing his hands. When you look in their eyes and shoot them, they know you mean business and respect and fear you as a warrior. Then they might think twice before they try to blow up your buildings when you're not looking. ;)
BJonson
Apr 26, 01:02 PM
trademarking app store. How pompous. What's next, trademarking computer store, book store, pet store? LOL.
SeaFox
Dec 28, 01:52 AM
anything is possible minus 1 thing: the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
tablo13
Sep 24, 05:22 PM
Something I noticed about my Grip Vue today. The back seems to be collecting quite a bit of germs (dirt, etc.). For those of you who use a Mighty Mouse, think about how that collects dirt, but on a case.
Does it affect the iPod touch itself?
Does it affect the iPod touch itself?
wolfboy
Oct 1, 12:17 AM
I saw a youtube video of someone having that same problem. His tip was to use a very small pinch of baby powder and put it on your finger. Then rub it thoroughly all over the back of the iPod. Once you put on the case the watermarks should disappear.
Actually I just wiped the inside of the case a bit with sandpaper and the watermarks are mostly eliminated. It basically looks like I brush metaled the iPod without actually doing so. It'll probably scratch the hell out of my iPod if I leave in for too long but I figure I'm never rocking this thing naked anyway so might as well.
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/8225/crw3095.jpg
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/2222/crw3097.jpg
Those clear cases are pretty bad. They don't fit my iPod Touches at all. Shame I wasted $6 on them ($3 x 2). Any recommendation guys?
Yeah they're not that great, but it does keep it pretty safe for a cheap temporary case. Its very hard to squeeze into when you first get it, but once you do, the case loosens. A little too loose actually.
Actually I just wiped the inside of the case a bit with sandpaper and the watermarks are mostly eliminated. It basically looks like I brush metaled the iPod without actually doing so. It'll probably scratch the hell out of my iPod if I leave in for too long but I figure I'm never rocking this thing naked anyway so might as well.
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/8225/crw3095.jpg
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/2222/crw3097.jpg
Those clear cases are pretty bad. They don't fit my iPod Touches at all. Shame I wasted $6 on them ($3 x 2). Any recommendation guys?
Yeah they're not that great, but it does keep it pretty safe for a cheap temporary case. Its very hard to squeeze into when you first get it, but once you do, the case loosens. A little too loose actually.
OdduWon
Dec 12, 09:29 PM
zune is so crappy that they have to put cardboard models out so people don't get frustrated and smash the huge brown booger on the floor. went to target the other day and they don't even have a working model. how am i supposed to see if i like the new gigabeat... i mean zune if i cant play with it? plus what the eff is with the menu button??? On my ipod i can get to my geners without even looking. Just push menu like 5 times and then one click and a quater scroll. one more click and scroll to the bottom. then bam reggae:cool: with the zune if you push the menu...or back..or what ever the hell it is called, when your in the main menu it goes back to the last thing you were doing. i got stuck in a fm/main screen loop which made me laugh at first but the i just got fed up and walked away. how the hell is someone supposed to drive and listen to this thing? I like the "ooooohh, shinnnny" feel of the os but it's lack of organization and usefullness quickly subvert this inital feeling.
lol if i had one i would have this as my screen saver http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r75/odduwon/Picture5.png PC: " ooooow it's sooo blue." :D
it's funny how much using a zune is like the design of the logo. so comlicated just to make a little square man with a cheezy graident paint job pat his head and rub his belly. ;) http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r75/odduwon/zunelogo1.jpg:
lol if i had one i would have this as my screen saver http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r75/odduwon/Picture5.png PC: " ooooow it's sooo blue." :D
it's funny how much using a zune is like the design of the logo. so comlicated just to make a little square man with a cheezy graident paint job pat his head and rub his belly. ;) http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r75/odduwon/zunelogo1.jpg:
baddj
Mar 31, 06:37 AM
Urgh, new iCal really is horrible.
Can you post a screenshot?
Can you post a screenshot?
archer75
Apr 19, 11:45 AM
It was rumored just prior to the macbook pro refresh that they might come with a small 16gb SSD drive just for the OS. Wouldn't surprise me to see that make it's way into an imac. Large SSD's are just too expensive and often times not big enough. And you only get a finite number of writes on them before they're garbage.
ann713
Feb 24, 01:08 AM
^Holy timg!
balamw
Sep 6, 07:07 PM
Honestly though, am I the only one who thinks they should change/add/replace iTunes and just keep it for music, and make a separate app for videos & films? The "iTunes Movie Store"? That sounds like the "Home Depot Car Dealership & Laser Tag Center".
:p I concur. iTunes is getting too busy with Music/Audiobooks/Podcasts/TV Shows and Video already...
As some have suggested perhaps "Showtime" refers to something like a new app...
B
:p I concur. iTunes is getting too busy with Music/Audiobooks/Podcasts/TV Shows and Video already...
As some have suggested perhaps "Showtime" refers to something like a new app...
B
flottenheimer
May 2, 04:22 PM
I wonder if it's as good as AppCleaner.
Probably not.
Probably not.
batmccoy
Jun 24, 01:03 PM
I think people are getting confused with an iMac and "workhorse". The iMac was always intended to be a consumer-level device and the consumer desktop segment may be evolving to apps that are touch-friendly (kitchen/TV). Essentially an even larger screen iPad. It also makes sense that the touch capability would help characterize/define the iMac line as different from the Pro line. Even though I'm a professional designer, choosing an iMac over a Pro has been a somewhat confusing decision. Making all the iMacs touch-enabled, would clarify that.
Pro users/developers who generally don't use iMacs, would still make use of a non-touch desktop system.
Pro users/developers who generally don't use iMacs, would still make use of a non-touch desktop system.
totoum
Mar 22, 03:54 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
As mentioned above,some people want to listen to their songs uncompressed.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
As mentioned above,some people want to listen to their songs uncompressed.
CIA
Apr 12, 09:02 PM
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/10/22/timeline-tweak-returns-imovie-11-to-old-school/
That's actually pretty funny.
That's actually pretty funny.
isgoed
Aug 25, 03:02 PM
Ah.... this speculation really brings back the memories of PowerPC rumors. Like when everyone was speculating if we see 3 Ghz G5's. I thought the feeling would be gone now we have intel (and its roadmaps), but debating on wether we might see a Core 2 Duo line-up soon brings the excitement right back. Hope this time the rumors do come true. This eventhough I am completely not in the market for a new Mac (neither was I for a 3 Ghz PowerMac :p)
Exactly so. For everyone's reference, here's a current Intel price chart (per CPU in lots of 1000): http://spamreaper.org/frankie/macintel.html
It makes certain options quite clear. For example:
justin bieber kissing on
pictures of justin bieber
Love justin known for better
Of course, Justin#39;s already
Exactly so. For everyone's reference, here's a current Intel price chart (per CPU in lots of 1000): http://spamreaper.org/frankie/macintel.html
It makes certain options quite clear. For example:
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 03:52 PM
The French get very annoyed about the number hanging around near the tunnel trying to sneak over.
And we all know how much the English enjoy annoying the French. :)
And we all know how much the English enjoy annoying the French. :)
jon08
May 3, 01:37 AM
Meh. Will it at least delete all the associated files too??
ipedro
Apr 12, 08:45 PM
Final Cut express strips out a lot of features people won't need unless they are doing some pretty heavy lifting. I use Final Cut Pro (and have since 1.0) but for the type of editing I do here at work (small TV station) Final Cut Express would work just fine. I just use what they give me 8-).
Pro takes more video formats. It has a few other tools, I think.
It's basically designed so that if you really are a hobbyist with an HDV camcorder you really won't notice a difference between the 2 since the extra things FCP has are things you'd never use anyway.
Pretty sure FCE doesn't support 24fps, which is kinda a problem for film editing, and an increasingly bigger problem for other work as 24fps gets used more. IIRC, it doesn't have stuff like the color scopes or audio mixer either. The main difference is the suite though.
Thanks. It seems to be what I need. I'm a photographer who does the occasional video. I don't want to make video the main part of my business, just a complement. A $1000 suite is overkill. I'd be happy to pay $300 though for just Final Cut Pro or $200 for a new Final Cut Express. Fingers crossed. :)
Pro takes more video formats. It has a few other tools, I think.
It's basically designed so that if you really are a hobbyist with an HDV camcorder you really won't notice a difference between the 2 since the extra things FCP has are things you'd never use anyway.
Pretty sure FCE doesn't support 24fps, which is kinda a problem for film editing, and an increasingly bigger problem for other work as 24fps gets used more. IIRC, it doesn't have stuff like the color scopes or audio mixer either. The main difference is the suite though.
Thanks. It seems to be what I need. I'm a photographer who does the occasional video. I don't want to make video the main part of my business, just a complement. A $1000 suite is overkill. I'd be happy to pay $300 though for just Final Cut Pro or $200 for a new Final Cut Express. Fingers crossed. :)
Surely
Nov 24, 12:41 AM
Not really, The reason I spent the money on Oakleys is because from what I've read and seen, Oakley's are tough and will last you years. But also if I travel and don't wish to wear them I want to put them somewhere where they will not be crushed, or drowned, or broken.
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
Totally overkill for a pair of Oakley's, but hey, that's your choice. They're not our sunglasses.
For the first visit i had to pay 154.00 when i broke my toe 4 weeks ago. This time I had insurance so I don't know how much it will be. i've been going to this guy for 13 years im sure they have me on some discount program hahah.
That just makes me sad.
������
Moar of these:
http://www.singleservecoffee.com/pictures/IMGP3839.jpg x 50
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
Totally overkill for a pair of Oakley's, but hey, that's your choice. They're not our sunglasses.
For the first visit i had to pay 154.00 when i broke my toe 4 weeks ago. This time I had insurance so I don't know how much it will be. i've been going to this guy for 13 years im sure they have me on some discount program hahah.
That just makes me sad.
������
Moar of these:
http://www.singleservecoffee.com/pictures/IMGP3839.jpg x 50
redAPPLE
Aug 7, 01:06 AM
Notice in the banner picture how the PowerMac G5 Tower is showing only it's side?!
Anyone think it's maybe actually a MacPro's side...therefore they wouldn't show its front or back (dual optical drives, reconfigured back)?
actually, i think the mac pro will have the same side, but a slimmer front...
Anyone think it's maybe actually a MacPro's side...therefore they wouldn't show its front or back (dual optical drives, reconfigured back)?
actually, i think the mac pro will have the same side, but a slimmer front...
Clive At Five
Sep 1, 02:35 PM
This basically confirms that Apple will release the "Mac".
A mini/mid tower with a Conroe, [...]
So you will now have:
Mac Mini - low end machine good for offices as a small server or low end word processing workstation.
iMac - All in one consumer machine - no upgradeability
"Mac" - Prosumer gamer machine - some upgradeablity
Mac Pro - Full fledged workstation for those who need all the power they can get.
It all seems pretty obvious.
It has seemed as obvious at almost every point in Apple's history within the past 4 years. That doesn't change a thing.
Apple had ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS had a noticable gap between its top-of-the-line consumer machine and it's "entry-level" professional machine. As much as I'd love a middle-tier headless Mac, I just don't think it's in the cards.
...then again, Apple finally gave into our whining and gave us a sub $500 PC (and that seems to have turned out alright). Maybe they'll listen to us again... but this is Apple we're talking about.
-Clive
A mini/mid tower with a Conroe, [...]
So you will now have:
Mac Mini - low end machine good for offices as a small server or low end word processing workstation.
iMac - All in one consumer machine - no upgradeability
"Mac" - Prosumer gamer machine - some upgradeablity
Mac Pro - Full fledged workstation for those who need all the power they can get.
It all seems pretty obvious.
It has seemed as obvious at almost every point in Apple's history within the past 4 years. That doesn't change a thing.
Apple had ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS had a noticable gap between its top-of-the-line consumer machine and it's "entry-level" professional machine. As much as I'd love a middle-tier headless Mac, I just don't think it's in the cards.
...then again, Apple finally gave into our whining and gave us a sub $500 PC (and that seems to have turned out alright). Maybe they'll listen to us again... but this is Apple we're talking about.
-Clive
lewis82
Nov 25, 01:27 PM
I could never get enticed into high end, multi-purpose glasses unless they came bundled with OS X and I could navigate through it using just my mind. :)
Especially when you take into account that all designer sunglasses and big brands like Oakley are made in the same factory in Italy...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704518904575365362932852610.html
Especially when you take into account that all designer sunglasses and big brands like Oakley are made in the same factory in Italy...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704518904575365362932852610.html
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 09:09 AM
I disagree with pretty much everything you said here Manic Mouse :D.
I really hope the iPod doesn't go down the line of convergence/frankenstein/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. It's a solid music player and it's main priority should be as such. In my experience with work colleagues and parents/in-laws the iPod is almost bordering on being too difficult as it is just with just music and video. Many never bother with video or podcasts or even firmware updates because they perceive it to be too complex. Adding slide-out keyboards, larger/deeper navigation menus, wifi connections, and email configuration would probably push it over the edge as far as being too technologically intimidating for most. Not to mention the size sacrifice.
Apple may bring something else to the market to compete if there really is a decent market for devices like the Mylo (which I'm personally not too sure there is).
Only if the device was separate from the iPod, which stayed truer to its roots, and more importantly, there was some sort of higher integration. Like the proposed built-in dock the mac mini would have. I still miss that.
I really hope the iPod doesn't go down the line of convergence/frankenstein/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. It's a solid music player and it's main priority should be as such. In my experience with work colleagues and parents/in-laws the iPod is almost bordering on being too difficult as it is just with just music and video. Many never bother with video or podcasts or even firmware updates because they perceive it to be too complex. Adding slide-out keyboards, larger/deeper navigation menus, wifi connections, and email configuration would probably push it over the edge as far as being too technologically intimidating for most. Not to mention the size sacrifice.
Apple may bring something else to the market to compete if there really is a decent market for devices like the Mylo (which I'm personally not too sure there is).
Only if the device was separate from the iPod, which stayed truer to its roots, and more importantly, there was some sort of higher integration. Like the proposed built-in dock the mac mini would have. I still miss that.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 1, 10:09 PM
Wikipedia states the Toyota Prius 3rd Gen gets a combined AFE of 50 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Prius#Third_generation_.28XW30.3B_2009.E2.80.93present.29) mpg (4.7L US gallons) if the diesel Cruze gets 37/48, that would give it a median AFE of 42.5 — 85% of what the Prius gets.
Against this you have to factor in the presumably lower cost of the Cruze, somewhat higher performance, lower cost to maintain, and lack of the battery pack with all it's complexity, carbon footprint, and cost.
Against this you have to factor in the presumably lower cost of the Cruze, somewhat higher performance, lower cost to maintain, and lack of the battery pack with all it's complexity, carbon footprint, and cost.