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 |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Beware of high tech running amok
On Feb 28, 5:00*pm, (Brent P)
wrote: > In article >, Ed Pirrero wrote: > >> No. I enjoy you adding the very noise you complain about. > > So, you *are* an asshole on purpose. *Not merely reflecting other > > posters, but actually willfully being an asshole. > > How is enjoying your noisy posts make me a willful asshole? You're at > liberty to deny me the entertainment any time you wish. > > > Glad to see, after all this time, that you admit it. > > I'll have to save this thread. *It'll come in handy. > > Too bad you can't read it. I enjoy (seeing) *YOU* adding the the noise you > complain about. Can't control yourself, Ed? lol. > > You post what you complain about and that makes me the asshole? lol.... I > made you do it? lol..... |
Ads |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Beware of high tech running amok
On Feb 28, 11:41*pm, Roger Blake > wrote:
> In article >, Scott in SoCal wrote: > > Yeah, but you could service them yourself with a file and a pair of > > needle-nose pliers. > > It is possible to have the best of both worlds, at least to an extant. One > of my vehicles has a transistorized ignition system that is triggered by > a set of points. They only carry a few milliamps so contact wear is minimal, > but if the electronic circuitry fails you can switch over to points-only mode > in a few seconds. > yes, I believe Prestolite had such a system in the late '60s. I know it was optional on some Studebakers and I presume other cars as well. I'm not sure how well it actually worked, because the failing of the Prestolite distributors was not the points but excessive wear in the advance mechanism. nate |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Beware of high tech running amok
On Feb 25, 4:59*pm, "Ed White" > wrote:
> Beware of high tech running amok > > Some features are nutty, unnecessary or maybe both > > Frank Aukofer > Automotive News > February 25, 2008 - 12:01 am ET > I can't believe that people in general and people that are most involved with cars, i.e. car nuts, shade tree mechanics and hot rodders, don't see what is coming. The writing is on the wall. We will not drive our cars in the future. You will get in and the car will take you to a programmed destination, automatically. Only one of the things that need to be so that the machines, i.e. computers, can control the world. Disston |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Beware of high tech running amok
On Feb 29, 11:17*am, disston > wrote:
> On Feb 25, 4:59*pm, "Ed White" > wrote: > > > Beware of high tech running amok > > > Some features are nutty, unnecessary or maybe both > > > Frank Aukofer > > Automotive News > > February 25, 2008 - 12:01 am ET > > I can't believe that people in general and people that are most > involved with cars, i.e. car nuts, shade tree mechanics and hot > rodders, don't see what is coming. The writing is on the wall. We will > not drive our cars in the future. You will get in and the car will > take you to a programmed destination, automatically. Only one of the > things that need to be so that the machines, i.e. computers, can > control the world. > > Disston Why do you think we're keeping all our old hot rods? Of course we see it coming, and we don't like it. If I had any faith that cars would become more interesting and more desirable in the future, I'd simply save my money instead. nate |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Beware of high tech running amok
In article >,
Brent P > wrote: > >OT crap like the 11 year old ford PATS system has been defeated by some car >theives.... Yeah. black helicopter nonsense that is, car theives have >been able to defeat a decade old anti-theft system. There are several revisions of PATS. I've heard the original with the separate PATS module has been defeated, by injecting an appropriate signal (60Hz is what I recall) in between the module and the engine computer. I haven't heard anything about the later ones (which are integrated into the engine computer), but then, I haven't been paying attention either. -- There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Beware of high tech running amok
In article >,
disston > wrote: >On Feb 25, 4:59=A0pm, "Ed White" > wrote: >> Beware of high tech running amok >> >> Some features are nutty, unnecessary or maybe both >> >> Frank Aukofer >> Automotive News >> February 25, 2008 - 12:01 am ET >> > >I can't believe that people in general and people that are most >involved with cars, i.e. car nuts, shade tree mechanics and hot >rodders, don't see what is coming. The writing is on the wall. We will >not drive our cars in the future. You will get in and the car will >take you to a programmed destination, automatically. Only one of the >things that need to be so that the machines, i.e. computers, can >control the world. I for one welcome our new machine overlords. Provided they're all Summer Glau look-alikes, anyway. -- There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Beware of high tech running amok
On Feb 27, 10:38*pm, "Ed White" > wrote:
> "John S." > wrote in message > > ... > > > Fine information but I think you are missing the point. > > I thought you were equating the author of the commentary to Henry Ford. By > the tone of your comment it seemed *you were implying that Henry Ford was > unwilling to change with the times and you used the Model T as an example of > his intransigence. I was pointing out that the Model T was not as static as > you seemed to indicate (or urban lore would suggest). Further more Henry > Ford was not adverse to innovation, but clearly he did have very firm ideas > of what he thought was important and had a definite stubborn streak. He > certainly continued building the Model T past its useful life. However, once > he realized the Model T was truly obsolete he moved with surprising speed to > introduce the Model A. When that became dated, he introduced mass produced > V-8s. He did things his way. They might not have always worked out, but I > don't think it is fair to say he was a stick in the mud or adverse to > innovations. He (or at least his company) was responsible for implementing > many manufacturing innovations. He was always interested in new processes > and materials. Henry Fords chief goal for the Model T was to make it as > cheaply as possible. Most innovations connected to the Model T were related > to reducing costs, not increasing function (although there were many > functional improvements over the 19 years it was produced). > > So if your point was that the author of the commentary was opposed to > innovation "like Henry Ford," then I think your point is invalid since I > don't think Henry Ford was opposed to innovations. > > Ed Henry Ford was hardly the epitome of innovation. It was only after sales of the seriously outdated Model T tanked that he moved toward a somewhat updated model. |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Beware of high tech running amok
"N8N" > wrote in message ... On Feb 27, 10:38 pm, "Ed White" > wrote: > Actually, he kind of was. There's a reason that Ford was one of the > last mfgrs. to introduce hydraulic brakes, and his name was Henry. Certainly true. But again, this doesn't mean he was adverse to all forms of innovation, just that he had certain preferences. Early hydraulic brakes were problematic and Ford considered mechanical brakes a more reliable and safer alternative, so much so that the final designs were far more expensive than hydraulic systems. [As a side note, at least for farm tractors, I still like mechanical brakes. My 27 year old tractor with mechanical brakes has never had an actuator problem. My 17 year old tractor with hydraulic brakes had had to have the actuating cylinder seals replaced twice.] Another example of Ford's stubbornness was his aversion to 6 cylinder engines. Although early in the history of Ford, the company built a car with an in-line 6 (Model K), Henry didn't like the design. So when it was clear he needed an engine with more cylinder to compete, he came up with a cost effective V-8. Of course H. Ford did not "invent" the V-8, but I think it is reasonable to say he made it cost effective and popular. Just because he was intransigent in some areas, does not mean he was a "stick in the mud." I would agree that in later years, H. Ford was change adverse and his stubbornness did damage to company. However, taken as a whole, Ford's "life's work" included many innovations and he certainly did much to contribute to the growth of the automobile industry. What designer / engineer doesn't have some biases that affect there decisions? Ed |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Beware of high tech running amok
"John S." > wrote in message ... On Feb 27, 10:38 pm, "Ed White" > wrote: > Henry Ford was hardly the epitome of innovation. It was only after > sales of the seriously outdated Model T tanked that he moved toward a > somewhat updated model. Perhaps, but he was hardly a stick in the mud either. Over the course of his career he adopted many innovations. With the Model T his prime motivation was low cost. He single mindedly adopted changes design to reduced the cost of the Model T. When "low cost" was no longer the major selling point it had been, he reluctantly moved on. When introduced the Model A was state of the art for the low cost segment, cost effective, and very popular. It is my opinion that Henry Ford is a poor example of a "stick in the mud" or someone who is against technological innovation. If you want to say he was stubborn, held on to unpopular opinions, or made bad product decision, then I'd agree. But he also adopted many innovations and was an agent of change. Ed |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Beware of high tech running amok
C. E. White wrote:
> "N8N" > wrote in message > ... > On Feb 27, 10:38 pm, "Ed White" > wrote: > >> Actually, he kind of was. There's a reason that Ford was one of the >> last mfgrs. to introduce hydraulic brakes, and his name was Henry. > > Certainly true. But again, this doesn't mean he was adverse to all forms of > innovation, just that he had certain preferences. Many of which were patently irrational, though. Like his feral hatred of six-cylinder engines. > > Just because he was intransigent in some areas, does not mean he was a > "stick in the mud." But highly eccentric, and as I said above, not always rational in his intransigence. > > What designer / engineer doesn't have some biases that affect there > decisions? All do. Some are just more arbitrary than others. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A High-Tech Traffic Cone | javawizard | Technology | 0 | September 20th 07 05:38 PM |
Car makers adding high-tech perks | [email protected] | Technology | 0 | March 5th 07 08:38 AM |
Gone in 60 seconds--the high-tech version | admin | BMW | 2 | May 25th 06 05:01 PM |
Gone in 60 seconds--the high-tech version | Enoch Root | BMW | 0 | May 15th 06 06:33 AM |
running costs + high milers 318 ci | RickH | BMW | 7 | April 20th 05 09:23 PM |