The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the Auto Industry and stated:
"If GM had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has,
we would all be driving $25 cars that get 1,000 miles to the gallon".
In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating:
If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving
cars with the following characteristics:
1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day
2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.
4. Occasionally, executing a manoeuvre such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.
6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation" warning light.
7. The airbag system would ask "Are you sure?" before deploying.
8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
10. You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off.
"If GM had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has,
we would all be driving $25 cars that get 1,000 miles to the gallon".
In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating:
If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving
cars with the following characteristics:
1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day
2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.
4. Occasionally, executing a manoeuvre such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.
6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation" warning light.
7. The airbag system would ask "Are you sure?" before deploying.
8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
10. You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off.
Page:
Top score wrote:
> Unbeliever is just jealous that I get a lot of replies to my topics
> and he gets none because he's as dull as the topics he posts.
This post started out as a comedy pop at Microsoft (albeit borrowed). But good ol' Top score can't leave it at that! he has to come blundering in with childish comments to turn this into yet another fanboy squabble thread.
Great
> Unbeliever is just jealous that I get a lot of replies to my topics
> and he gets none because he's as dull as the topics he posts.
This post started out as a comedy pop at Microsoft (albeit borrowed). But good ol' Top score can't leave it at that! he has to come blundering in with childish comments to turn this into yet another fanboy squabble thread.
Great
What's this? Coming from a windowlicker like you, that's rich.
Your reality check just bounced, Top Spore.
It's a pity there are no lifeguards for the "gene pool" - yours would have been fished out a long time ago.
Your reality check just bounced, Top Spore.
It's a pity there are no lifeguards for the "gene pool" - yours would have been fished out a long time ago.
I'm impressed Unbeliever must have been an early developer in his family, I wouldn't have thought he could have read a year ago let alone open an e-mail.
There's a clever little retard.
There's a clever little retard.
Updated wrote:
> Surprised that "in this day and age" you can do better than
> the ones designed for the car. Due to the high tolerances now, the
> difference between the various cylinders can only be a matter of
> microns.
It's not that you can do better than the ones designed for the car (you can, but this is a gaming site, not a car site so I'll shut up), it's the fact that though the designs go down to nanometres, the mass production of them cannot operate at that standard, and losses can be had from such a small amount in something as complicated as an engine. Blueprinting uses standard pistons from the factory, but they choose the ones which the manufacturing inadequecy matches precicely the manufacturing inadequecy of the cylinders.
> Surprised that "in this day and age" you can do better than
> the ones designed for the car. Due to the high tolerances now, the
> difference between the various cylinders can only be a matter of
> microns.
It's not that you can do better than the ones designed for the car (you can, but this is a gaming site, not a car site so I'll shut up), it's the fact that though the designs go down to nanometres, the mass production of them cannot operate at that standard, and losses can be had from such a small amount in something as complicated as an engine. Blueprinting uses standard pistons from the factory, but they choose the ones which the manufacturing inadequecy matches precicely the manufacturing inadequecy of the cylinders.
You have just set yourself up for an almost too easy comeback...
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Ever heard the expression "Quality over quantity"?
Quantity is something you sadly lack when it comes to brain cells.
> Ever heard the expression "Quality over quantity"?
Quantity is something you sadly lack when it comes to brain cells.
Top score wrote:
> Unbeliever is just jealous that I get a lot of replies to my topics
> and he gets none because he's as dull as the topics he posts.
Jealous of you? Pah!
It's the simple truth, that's all. Something you seem to have a hard time grasping. I saw this as an e-mail sent to me over a year ago.
> Unbeliever is just jealous that I get a lot of replies to my topics
> and he gets none because he's as dull as the topics he posts.
Jealous of you? Pah!
It's the simple truth, that's all. Something you seem to have a hard time grasping. I saw this as an e-mail sent to me over a year ago.
Ever heard the expression "Quality over quantity"?
Unbeliever is just jealous that I get a lot of replies to my topics and he gets none because he's as dull as the topics he posts.
Slaveunit wrote:
> Insane Bartender wrote:
> Of course, conspiracy theorists would say that the technology
> exists,
> but introducing it would destroy the oil industry...
>
> The technology almost exists. There is an annual event where teams
> from around the world design cars to go as far as they can on one pint
> of fuel, and i cant remember how well they do but it's an eye
> opener.
>
> Also, current engines are designed with far greater efficiency than
> the ones that actually get to the roads, because of the loss in
> quality over manufacture. Go to a reputable car tuners and ask for
> Blueprint Pistons. They measure your cylinders, and then go to 100 or
> so pistons and choose out the ones that match each individual
> cylinder. I've done this on my escort and my motorbile, and in the car
> I get another 30 odd miles out of a tank, and the bike puts out
> another 4bhp.
Surprised that "in this day and age" you can do better than the ones designed for the car. Due to the high tolerances now, the difference between the various cylinders can only be a matter of microns.
> Insane Bartender wrote:
> Of course, conspiracy theorists would say that the technology
> exists,
> but introducing it would destroy the oil industry...
>
> The technology almost exists. There is an annual event where teams
> from around the world design cars to go as far as they can on one pint
> of fuel, and i cant remember how well they do but it's an eye
> opener.
>
> Also, current engines are designed with far greater efficiency than
> the ones that actually get to the roads, because of the loss in
> quality over manufacture. Go to a reputable car tuners and ask for
> Blueprint Pistons. They measure your cylinders, and then go to 100 or
> so pistons and choose out the ones that match each individual
> cylinder. I've done this on my escort and my motorbile, and in the car
> I get another 30 odd miles out of a tank, and the bike puts out
> another 4bhp.
Surprised that "in this day and age" you can do better than the ones designed for the car. Due to the high tolerances now, the difference between the various cylinders can only be a matter of microns.
Page: