JayHmmy

Member since: May 18th, 2009

JayHmmy's Latest Comments

Blog Activity

Blog	# of Comments
Download Squad	2 Comments
Autoblog Green	6 Comments

Recent Comments:

Steve Jobs to porn viewers: "Buy an Android phone." (Download Squad)

Apr 20th 2010 11:36PM You've got to be joking. Jealous of success? Arguing about the semantics of an app vs. a browser doesn't make your opinion any more "right". The simple fact is: to say that Android is a porn provider, because they aren't limiting content to the degree that apple is, is horrifically disingenuous. If Apple was really as concerned as they seem to be about access to porn, then they should do something about that in every part of their platform, not just the app store. Otherwise, don't use such an issue to justify your actions and decisions, and definitely dont' try to "taint" your competition through slander. It is completely unnecessary, and unbecoming.

If you only download one Growl style this year, make it Mono (Download Squad)

Dec 26th 2009 3:31PM Is anyone here experiencing a memory leak with this theme on Growl? I've seen other people are throughout the web, but no solutions.

Tesla moving HQ, building powertrain plant in Palo Alto (Autoblog Green)

Aug 20th 2009 7:07PM "Wrong. As I said, I have no problem with the fact that Tesla makes toys for rich people. I have disdain for the ridiculous theory that Tesla is a green company or an innovator - the cradle to grave carbon footprint of a Tesla is enormous and the technologies in the Tesla Roadster pale next to a Fusion Hybrid for example."

I have never seen any lists with Tesla described as a "green company" relative to other manufacturers, if you're referring to production costs (environmental or otherwise). It would be interesting to see a cradle to grave carbon footprint for a Tesla Roadster and compare it to a gas guzzler and a Fusion Hybrid. I would guess that emissions would be a huge factor in the size of that footprint. It's obvious the Roadster and Fusion would both be better for the environment relative to the gas guzzler. As with any new technology, it will soon be available for the masses. I feel the same way about a Fusion, as well.

"It also indicates the enormous amount of energy and resources put into manufacturing each roadster. And it reminds me of an old saying: "An engineer is someone who can do for a nickel what any idiot can do for a dollar." "

I don't really understand your reasoning here. If price determines the amount of energy and resources put into making a car, then isn't any high end car comparatively worse, since it's emissions also contribute to environmental destruction? Even if Tesla's manufacturing process was just as bad as any other car maker (I haven't seen any figures), then the resources used over the life of the car would tend to neutralize or minimize it's environmental impact. This, being compared to cars on the road today, since there are next to no other major EV's on the road.

"I'm not convinced that Tesla is a significant part of EV development. All of the systems in a Tesla are also in the hybrid synergy drive system sold by Toyota, the similar system sold by Ford, and the Two-mode hybrid system sold by GM, all of which were available before the Tesla Roadster.

The only thing Tesla has added to the mix is a ridiculously expensive battery pack. And they didnt invent the batteries, they simply created a charge/discharge control system for them.

The fact is that Tesla is stealing headlines from the people who are doing the real development work."

So what? Some of the best ideas are the most obvious ones, right? I, for one, don't need an artist to be a singer/songwriter/producer/studio-technician to appreciate what they're putting out there. Tesla is putting it out there that EV's can work and be enjoyable and valid. I think we may have to agree to disagree because from what I can deduce, we're looking at it from two different angles. I appreciate Tesla for what they are doing, and you don't like (or aren't impressed) because of what they aren't doing. Maybe it would help me if you would just mention an EV company with cars on the road that you feel is doing everything and doing it right.

Tesla moving HQ, building powertrain plant in Palo Alto (Autoblog Green)

Aug 19th 2009 5:33PM "They didn't build the car. Lotus did. Tesla built / assembled the drivetrain and auxiliary systems."

What are you talking about?? I'll let Tesla answer this one: "We recently counted how many parts the two cars shared and the total number was under 7% by parts count. If you were to analyze it by parts value, the number would be even smaller.

So you could say that the Tesla is similar to a Lotus Elise, except it has a totally different drivetrain , body panels, aluminum tub, rear sub-frame, brakes, ABS system, HVAC and rear suspension. The Tesla also neglects to carry over the gas tank, emissions equipment and exhaust. If you were to try to convert an Elise to a Tesla and started throwing away parts that aren’t carried over what you would basically be left with a windshield, dashboard (complete with airbags!), front wishbones and a removable soft top.

For comparison, Lamborghini cars share upwards of ten percent of their parts content with Audi cars. I can only guess what the number is between Ford cars and their high end Aston Martin and Jaguar brand."

In other words, a chassis isn't the what I would see as defining a "car". Tesla isn't selling an electric car for it's looks...so to say the differences under the hood negate the innovation that has taken place is completely disingenuous and a weak argument.

"Almost no one. GM built a similar EV with a 200 mile range over a decade ago. They scrapped the program because it was too expensive. Battery technology has advanced considerably in the ensuing years, so it is no surprise that GM's accomplishment could be equalled. But it remains expensive."

Yet under a decade later, GM was not in the forefront of pursuing battery tech vehicles, not trying to use it's weighty influence to drive down the cost of a clean technology, not trying to innovate or be a model for that technology. Save the "weighty influence", Tesla has taken those steps. Simple as that.

"Invalidated? Your comment is meaningless.

The Tesla Roadster continues to be a toy for the rich.

It is still not a viable mainstream alternative.

And nothing you have said shows otherwise.

If GM had built the Tesla Roadster and sold it for $100,000+, they would have gotten nothing but grief for it.

Tesla is doing a fine job of selling expensive toys. And their greenwashed marketing scheme is ingenious. I commend them for it."

I was referring to your obvious disdain for the fact that Tesla does not have a car that cannot be considered mainstream. Obviously, price is a major issue in car sales. To me, and most Tesla fans, the overall potential is greater than the downside of the current price that a Roadster commands. No, the roadster isn't mainstream. Yes, it's sales are spurring the development and production of cheaper cars, and the cycle will repeat itself. The point is, this is above and beyond what any other car company is doing right now. Period. And momentum is building, not subsiding.

Tesla moving HQ, building powertrain plant in Palo Alto (Autoblog Green)

Aug 18th 2009 9:11PM It's comments like Dave's that I would love to frame if I could. Forget the fact that Tesla has done something extraordinary in building a 200 mile range pure electric car that is a pleasure to drive. No one ever doubted for one second that it could be done, right? Forget the plans that are out there for a four door sedan that would be closer to mainstream (but NOT cheap enough and therefore invalidated, as some would say.) I'm willing to bet against Dave because, so far, Tesla done 92/% of what they said they were going to do. And with a government investing in green technology, I have no reason to doubt them.

Seven new Tesla stores will open soon; one Roadster makes it to Yosemite (Autoblog Green)

Jun 5th 2009 5:14PM I'm pretty sure they are building a presence in these places to also make people feel comfortable knowing they're there. The ability to be serviced locally is a major deciding factor in the initial purchase of a Tesla, I'd assume. The Daimler idea sounds great, however, stand alone centers seem pretty consistent with their whole "rethinking the automobile" stance. It could change though!

Obama: CAFE increase is "an historic agreement to help American break its addiction to oil" (Autoblog Green)

May 20th 2009 10:02PM "See, it's about getting what you want. Because you worked hard for it and having it satisfies that "pursuit of happiness" part of the Constitution."

That doesn't apply all the time "individually" when it interferes with the obligation to "promote the general welfare". Heck you could even argue that it "provides for the common defense" when you remember that oil money funds some countries that don't like us too much. There are other parts to the constitution...