@Greg818: It's only huge if you are continually writing to the drive to consume that 3 watts. You act like an SSD is going to be continuously writing and consuming power that quickly, it doesn't happen that way. That's writing at maximum speed, no SSD is going to do that continuously, and the background stuff is absolutely trivial compared to the chart I linked to. There is literally no one that continuously hits their SSD with maximum write at all time enough to burn that much power, and on the off chance they are they are probably plugged into the wall anyway. And the difference is 3 watts between the highest and lowest power consumer. At the write speeds they are capable of, that's not that huge of a gap because there's not much you're going to be writing for long enough to make a huge dent. I don't know what your issue with other drives are, but my OWC drive performs equal to Intel drives in it's class just fine. It get over 6 hours of light use out of my MBP with a 1tb WD spinning drive where the ODD used to be. Your example is completely irrelevant to the question posed by the OP anyway. He wants to have both an SSD and a HDD in his MacBook, you had no HDD. I don't know why you're making a case for a situation that is irrelevant to the topic. Yes, having just an SSD would make a massive difference in battery life, but that's not what was asked here.
Intel drives are among the middle performers and falling further down the charts. They don't even use their own controller anymore, and the only other maker that does is Samsung. Lo and behold, they are at the top of the heap now, and they have a reliability track record equal to Intel. Now that Intel is relying on partners for their controller, that are neither the fastest or have the stellar reliability track record that Intel has, I'm not buying one of their drives. They aren't the fastest, the most power efficient, and their suppliers reliability is in question now. No thanks, I'll stay away from them.
Now on the hardware note, if you care at all about battery life, I think you should steer clear of OWC, or any brand that advertises crazy speed for that matter, as their first concern IS speed, and not power saving.
There's where you made the comparison between speed and power consumption of an SSD. The difference in that chart on AnandTech between the highest and lowest power consumption is a whopping 3 watts. Not nearly enough to worry about because that's under full load (read/write), and no workload on a laptop is going to be hitting the SSD that hard all the time. Ever. Switching from a spinning drive to an SSD is a great increase in battery life, but the difference between SSDs as far as power consumption is only noticeable in benchmarking, not real world use. I wouldn't doubt for a second that there would be no real difference between my Sandforce OWC drive and any other drive because it's going to be idling 90% of the time anyway, and even then it's drawing fractions of a watt between all of them. Intel drives are no longer king of the hill, they are often at the middle or the bottom in almost all useful metrics.
Now on the hardware note, if you care at all about battery life, I think you should steer clear of OWC, or any brand that advertises crazy speed for that matter, as their first concern IS speed, and not power saving. The two brands I would recommend would be Intel and WD, as they both have very decent speeds and very good power usage (Intel being the best on this, it seems). That is not to say that other brands are bad, but just less adapted for mobile use in my opinion (I place battery life pretty high on the priority list for a laptop).
This is utterly wrong. The battery life hit on even the most piss poor performing SSDs is negligible. I don't know where you are getting your information from, but it's completely wrong. An SSD will never come close to pulling what a HDD will even under full load, and will have almost no impact on battery life. I've used an OWC SSD for two years in conjunction with a WD HDD and lost maybe 20 minutes of battery life total, and that's easily within testing error correction. Speed has absolutely no correlation with power consumption. You need to get new sources because they are steering you in the wrong direction.
@Greg818: Not really. I swapped out the speedo gear to correct for the tires and I added some smaller things like tow hooks and saddlebags, but nothing major.
Taking it down some weekend trails is tempting, no question. I've definitely thought about it, but man. Maybe when it's paid off!
@HKZ: One of the first things I did after I bought it was put on a set of larger tires. The stock tires at 28" look ridiculous on a Wrangler so I put on a set of 31" BFG Rugged Terrain T/As. I was expecting a drop in mileage but nope, it stayed pretty much the same.
@Greg818: Thanks! It's got the 42RLE trans which has 2.84, 1.57, 1.00, and 0.69. The rear axle is 3.73.
Nope, I don't do off-roading. I'd like to, but that is an expensive hobby and I wouldn't use my daily driver to do it anyway. I was hoping to keep my old Cherokee around to play with after I bought the Wrangler but it had a main bearing go bad. The best I can hope for right now is for the upcoming winter to be absolutely wicked. I love it when the snow keeps everyone home and I can drive around the nearly empty roads.
@frytup: I thought they had confirmed that the new lightening connected has line out support, so no reason to believe it won't connect to your car stereo even through the adaptor.
@Greg818: I've used a few 3rd party cables/plugs/adaptors to charge and sync iDevices and never really had an issue, the only one that i've had is the iPad using a classic low power usb wall plug, but i knew that wouldn't work due to the power draw.
but i do like you idea of admitting that something was the best, no longer is. I'm sure looking back people will still defend their old phones, Nokia 3210 and Sony Errikson C905s.
@Greg818: with the amount of dust collected the last few times I apply a screen protector, I don't think taking it apart for cleaning is a wise decision for me.
I heard that it's possible to some kind of suction on the glass would be able to relocate the dust within the screen. But I'm not sure if that would effect the display performance.
@PillClinton: I do agree with all of this, the one thing I would add is also jealousy. A few people I know had been trashing Apple for a while, the day the could afford an Apple device, all of the sudden, Apple became the best thing in the world.
@episcopo: I would suggest you to learn a bit about the asymmetric dominance effect. Displays aren't representative of sales, but designed to steer you somewhere.
I would suggest you get off your high horse and stop acting like a condescending a-hole in the forums here. But go and cry like a little fucking faggot if you want.
@Greg818Since I put the post up I did a little more digging. It seems anything that turns up is a concept, such as the RE-35. There was also a cartridge called Silicon Film that was a reality till it couldn't sustain funding according to this press release. I think a Digital 35mm film cartridge is still a pipe dream at this point. I can understand the market for something like this would be small when there are plenty of decent DSLRs out there. For me right now I'm looking for a new camera, and I don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on a camera that replicates all the feeling of analog mechanical control when I already have one that is the real thing.
@thabigred: Ha, Awesome! I was kind of just linking it as a "pics or it didn't happen", since it's already funded. But I'll take every backer I can get! Glad you like it!
@Greg818: Yeah, I come back to the idea every year or so since I graduation. Frankly, a Bachelors of Fine Arts doesn't leave you too prepared for business. But my time with startups, freelancing, and my current job in marketing? I might dig into it late this year/early next.
It's tricky, because I don't want to give up my current job, and designing/printing/fulfillment is something I'd have to squeeze in my free time. Also, the margins on this little experiment? SUPER slim. I'd have to find a way to make it worthwhile.
@Rallier: I know! It's awesome. I haven't even spread flyers around town yet (people here vote primarily democratic, and eat up local projects like candy). I kind of expected to barely eke by, but now I might have to actually find a decent pint-glass solution.
@Greg818: I like it!
(Sorry, was busy working on my own projects for a bit there)
Not that I'm remotely in charge of what gets picked, but how can we take the George Lucas approach to this? how can we make this better, faster, more intense? Is it enough to have a car with an engine? When it comes to propulsion, do we need an excessive amount of overkill? Do we want to go with a crazier power source?
Do we want to look at wheels, and find something that has the least surface contact while still stable? Do we want thin wheels, or take inspiration from the video, and use spheres? Is there a way to have a few ball-bearings in an enclosure, acting as the wheels on the front? Or is that just the dumbest thing ever?
Unrelated: Part of me wants something as simple as a diet-coke+mentos derby car. But that is a) so goddamn played out and b) messy for everyone else who has to use/is near the track.
Edit: Here's a quick and dirty mock-up of what I'm talking about, regarding ball-bearings. http://i.imgur.com/lGr0J.png
So nothing on the side of the track, and instead it's resting on the top of the median. Depending on how big the enclosure is, or how many bearings used, they'd touch the top of the car, one-to-two of the edges of the enclosure, the bottom of the track, and (assuming the straightness of the track, and only two bearings instead of the three in the picture) probably never each other.
I haven't taken physics in a while, so I don't know if that many points of contact--despite how little surface area is touching each point--would actually be better.
Both the enclosure and the bearings would have to be polished up real nice, though.
@Greg818: Aye I might give it a bash when I get home! Been thinking about it a bit, worth a shot anywho!
@Greg818 Hopefully when the lads are back they'll be able to let you know what they have in stock...Maybe Adam will let them borrow stuff from his man cave?
I know the perfectionist feeling, I'm a bit like that myself! Can't wait to see what everyone comes up with though =)
@Greg818: Sorry I should have said short car but wide, my brain was thinking long width wise...like a car turned sideways on the track to accommodate the gyros and of course I typed the wrong thing!
I'm not very experienced with this kind of thing, but I get what you're saying, i never thought of the track itself not being perfectly straight either. Prob best to start with the cheap and then try squeeze it into something elegant after.
@Greg818: Thanks for the info about the Intel graphics; I had a feeling they wouldn't cut it. As for the TV as a monitor, it would be my only monitor, and based on your logic, that would be a worse option. I don't really need it right now, but I was also curious on whether the option would be cheaper. From what I've looked up so far, both monitor and TV prices are around the same for similar sizes. I may be wrong, though, so any help in that area would be useful.
This may be a side note, but would you happen to know much about home servers? I wanted to make a machine that could store all of the digital movies and ripped digital copies of the old DVDs I have on there so I could watch them on my TV without having to put in the disks. I also wanted to have a small server to test out a Wordpress site I've been working on. I know I could purchase a small virtual server on-line, but my broadband connection falls off more often then not, and I want to be able to test it whenever.
@Greg818: It's the police version, 2005 model. The previous owner installed seats from a Mercury, which is nice because the standard police seats are usually pretty beaten up by the time they get sold off at auction. I like the fact that in order to access the trunk, you need the key in the ignition because the latch is electronic, and the rear seats do not fold down. It's a nice extra bit of security.
I typically spend 4 or 5 hours per day driving. Distance ranges daily from 30 to 150 miles depending on where I have to go.
@Greg818: My only concern about those cars would be vs the steepness of a hill, can you imagine them coming up to a speedbump? it would need to be low enough to be low vs high enough and maybe short enough to go over the humps quickly, a long car might get stuck. Will and Norm may need to build a test ramp!
I see what you mean about the gyro making it flip,not sure about the best place, but you also don't want to put too much pressure or weight on top or pulling at the sides to pull it down to cause it to slow down but they'd prob be light enough and batteries for the motors could be kept in car it would look like a 2 propeller drone which I think should win an award for falling with style!
Actually.... if you build a car that was short, but long over the sides (without hitting anyone elses), with the two gyros, keeping low to the track it's weight should help it speed up a bit... In my head that works really well anyway, but my imagination doesn't always conform to real world physics.
@Greg818: Yes. Ford Crown Victoria, 4.6L V8. In terms of mileage, I'm probably doing 50/50 city/highway. Tons of time spent idling in traffic though, which really hurts. I drive mostly for my job, where I do get compensation for travel. Unfortunately, it's on a per-distance basis, so I can really get screwed by sitting in traffic. So now I'm thinking of getting another car, probably something with 4 cylinders, since getting ~25 MPG would make a huge difference (probably saving $300-$400 per month).
@Greg818: Regular 87 octane. I have never seen an E85 pump around here, and my car can't handle it either.
@Conmused: Well, got a design sort of figured out, with components and stuff...
Heh. Pics or it didn't happen. Er.. links to pics. Since pictures aren't working yet.
(This is the maker thread, after all. Discussions about not making stuff go elsewhere. :P )