reply to discussion
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 97
  1. #1
    Larry
    Guest
    http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i9000_galaxy_s-3115.php

    I took a microSD full of DivX, FLAC, OGG, XviD, WMV, WMA, H.xxx, etc.,
    media to the mall this morning where the new phones are being shown off.

    Droid X is a beautiful phone, a MANLY phone, but it's TOO DAMNED HEAVY! If
    you had it in your pocket banging against your leg all day, you'd have a
    sore leg by nightfall. Great phone, TOO HEAVY....

    Samsung I9000 Galaxy S played everything except OGG and Realmedia files.
    The DivX movies on the 480x800 pixel AMOLED screen directly off
    alt.binaries.movies.divx WITHOUT resizing the movie to fit the little
    screen or squeezing it down IS SIMPLY BEAUTIFUL! Very bright and extremely
    fine detailed picture....it's a real winner, EXCEPT for the damned MIRROR
    you have to look through to see it, like all of them. No attempt was made
    to make the screen non-reflective....nuts!

    And, most of all, Samsung i9000 Galaxy S WEIGHS NOTHING! It feels like
    you're holding one of those demo phones that have no guts in them! It's
    THAT light!.....even with its FM radio playing....

    Too bad it's on t-Mobile's tiny footprint....another thing that will DOOM
    it.



    --
    iPhone 4 is to cellular technology what the Titanic is to cruise ships.

    Larry




    See More: A new winner!...amazing.




  2. #2
    Allodoxaphobia
    Guest

    Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 20:29:57 +0000, Larry wrote:
    >
    > And, most of all, Samsung i9000 Galaxy S WEIGHS NOTHING! It feels like
    > you're holding one of those demo phones that have no guts in them!
    > It's THAT light!.....even with its FM radio playing....


    Operaing an FM radio increases the weigh of an apparatus? :-)




  3. #3
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
    says...


    > Too bad it's on t-Mobile's tiny footprint....another thing that will DOOM
    > it.


    In spite of the fact that T-Mo has a small footprint, I still want that
    phone.

    (T-Mo works where I want it to work, and I've been a customer since 2005
    and have found their customer service to be consistently better than the
    other carriers I've used, so I'm not switching.)

    The only problem (for me) is that they will require a data plan to
    activate the phone, which costs extra money that I don't have right now.



    --
    Steve Sobol, Victorville, California, USA
    [email protected]



  4. #4
    Larry
    Guest

    Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    Steve Sobol <[email protected]> wrote in news:MPG.26a92f4f374f73769899b1
    @news.justthe.net:

    > The only problem (for me) is that they will require a data plan to
    > activate the phone, which costs extra money that I don't have right now.
    >
    >
    >
    >


    Me, either. I just paid $10,000 for a Smart Car....(c;]


    --
    iPhone 4 is to cellular technology what the Titanic is to cruise ships.

    Larry




  5. #5
    Your Name
    Guest

    Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    In article <[email protected]>, Larry
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Steve Sobol <[email protected]> wrote in news:MPG.26a92f4f374f73769899b1
    > @news.justthe.net:
    >
    > > The only problem (for me) is that they will require a data plan to
    > > activate the phone, which costs extra money that I don't have right now.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Me, either. I just paid $10,000 for a Smart Car....(c;]


    Moron!



  6. #6
    Wes Groleau
    Guest

    Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    On 07-15-2010 18:45, Steve Sobol wrote:
    > and have found their customer service to be consistently better than the
    > other carriers I've used, so I'm not switching.)


    YMMV. I found it abysmal. But then I only had Sprint to compare to,
    and they also sucked.

    --
    Wes Groleau

    Third World Comes to the U.S.
    http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/russell?itemid=1505



  7. #7
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    OT Smart cars, was Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
    says...
    >
    > Steve Sobol <[email protected]> wrote in news:MPG.26a92f4f374f73769899b1
    > @news.justthe.net:
    >
    > > The only problem (for me) is that they will require a data plan to
    > > activate the phone, which costs extra money that I don't have right now.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Me, either. I just paid $10,000 for a Smart Car....(c;]



    Did you? How do you like it?

    My '09 Kia Rio gets 37-38 highway mpg. That's not the EPA estimate; the
    EPA estimate is only 35. That's what I actually get (when I'm careful
    not to mash the gas pedal, and the AC is turned off).

    I bet I could do better in a Smart fortwo, but I like that my car
    actually has interior room, since I drive a lot.

    (19,080 miles on the odometer, and the car is only 9 months old.)


    --
    Steve Sobol, Victorville, California, USA
    [email protected]



  8. #8
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] says...
    >
    > On 07-15-2010 18:45, Steve Sobol wrote:
    > > and have found their customer service to be consistently better than the
    > > other carriers I've used, so I'm not switching.)

    >
    > YMMV. I found it abysmal. But then I only had Sprint to compare to,
    > and they also sucked.


    Sprint was great, pre-merger. Post-merger, they sucked donkey nads,
    although I understand they're making some improvements.

    As for T-Mo, yes, my M definitely does V. But in general, they seem
    to do well in customer service surveys.

    --
    Steve Sobol, Victorville, California, USA
    [email protected]



  9. #9
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: OT Smart cars, was Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    On 16/07/10 1:46 AM, Steve Sobol wrote:

    <snip>

    > I bet I could do better in a Smart fortwo, but I like that my car
    > actually has interior room, since I drive a lot.
    >
    > (19,080 miles on the odometer, and the car is only 9 months old.)
    >
    >


    The logic of the Smart Car, other than the low initial price, escapes
    me. The Smart is rated 41 highway, 33 city, not nearly as good as the
    Prius or Civic hybrid.

    If you're going to be driving a gazillion miles then you'll save money
    with the Prius over the Smart Car. If you're not going to be driving a
    tremendous amount of miles then something like the Toyota Yaris (36/29),
    Hyundai Accent (36/27), or Kia Forte (36/27) or Rio (36/27) is still
    very inexpensive and offers much more room.

    I assume that the actual mpg scales similarly for all the vehicles, and
    is higher than the EPA rating. The new EPA rating system was intended to
    be more realistic, but I find the estimates to be quite low. We average
    42 MPG highway in a Camry hybrid which is rated at 34 highway, and
    that's not driving at 55 MPH. The MPG graphs also really teach you to
    drive more efficiently in city driving as the feedback is immediate.



  10. #10
    danny burstein
    Guest

    Re: OT Smart cars, was Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    In <[email protected]> SMS <[email protected]> writes:

    >The logic of the Smart Car, other than the low initial price, escapes
    >me. The Smart is rated 41 highway, 33 city, not nearly as good as the
    >Prius or Civic hybrid.


    If you're in an area where parking is difficult, such as NYC,
    el Schmarrrt lets you park in quite a few places that other
    car drivers have to bypass...


    --
    _____________________________________________________
    Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
    [email protected]
    [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]



  11. #11
    Jolly Roger
    Guest

    Re: OT Smart cars, was Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    In article <[email protected]>,
    SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

    > On 16/07/10 1:46 AM, Steve Sobol wrote:
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > > I bet I could do better in a Smart fortwo, but I like that my car
    > > actually has interior room, since I drive a lot.
    > >
    > > (19,080 miles on the odometer, and the car is only 9 months old.)
    > >
    > >

    >
    > The logic of the Smart Car, other than the low initial price, escapes
    > me. The Smart is rated 41 highway, 33 city, not nearly as good as the
    > Prius or Civic hybrid.
    >
    > If you're going to be driving a gazillion miles then you'll save money
    > with the Prius over the Smart Car. If you're not going to be driving a
    > tremendous amount of miles then something like the Toyota Yaris (36/29),
    > Hyundai Accent (36/27), or Kia Forte (36/27) or Rio (36/27) is still
    > very inexpensive and offers much more room.
    >
    > I assume that the actual mpg scales similarly for all the vehicles, and
    > is higher than the EPA rating. The new EPA rating system was intended to
    > be more realistic, but I find the estimates to be quite low. We average
    > 42 MPG highway in a Camry hybrid which is rated at 34 highway, and
    > that's not driving at 55 MPH. The MPG graphs also really teach you to
    > drive more efficiently in city driving as the feedback is immediate.


    I couldn't care less about initial cost and miles per ****ing gallon if
    the piece of **** is a literal death trap.

    <http://www.moral-flexibility.net/images/smartcar_accident_01.jpg>

    The Stupid car has horrid safety issues. People obviously have their
    priorities all messed up.

    --
    Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
    E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
    filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
    messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
    Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

    JR



  12. #12
    bj
    Guest

    Re: OT Smart cars, was Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    "danny burstein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > In <[email protected]> SMS
    > <[email protected]> writes:
    >
    >>The logic of the Smart Car, other than the low initial price, escapes
    >>me. The Smart is rated 41 highway, 33 city, not nearly as good as the
    >>Prius or Civic hybrid.

    >
    > If you're in an area where parking is difficult, such as NYC,
    > el Schmarrrt lets you park in quite a few places that other
    > car drivers have to bypass...
    >


    My Dad had an Itallian Isetta 50+ years ago. He got a special assigned
    parking place at work, practically in front of the door! because of it -- he
    could use that little triangle that's left at the end of angled parking. If
    he took the other car he had to use his hunting-license-pass in the regular
    (less convenient) general lot.

    OTOH occasionally he got seriously blocked in if parked on the street &
    someone was parked too close to the front, since this car had the door in
    the front. Often came back to the car to find a curious crowd around it.
    bj





  13. #13
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: OT Smart cars, was Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    On 16/07/10 6:36 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
    > In article<[email protected]>,
    > SMS<[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> On 16/07/10 1:46 AM, Steve Sobol wrote:
    >>
    >> <snip>
    >>
    >>> I bet I could do better in a Smart fortwo, but I like that my car
    >>> actually has interior room, since I drive a lot.
    >>>
    >>> (19,080 miles on the odometer, and the car is only 9 months old.)
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> The logic of the Smart Car, other than the low initial price, escapes
    >> me. The Smart is rated 41 highway, 33 city, not nearly as good as the
    >> Prius or Civic hybrid.
    >>
    >> If you're going to be driving a gazillion miles then you'll save money
    >> with the Prius over the Smart Car. If you're not going to be driving a
    >> tremendous amount of miles then something like the Toyota Yaris (36/29),
    >> Hyundai Accent (36/27), or Kia Forte (36/27) or Rio (36/27) is still
    >> very inexpensive and offers much more room.
    >>
    >> I assume that the actual mpg scales similarly for all the vehicles, and
    >> is higher than the EPA rating. The new EPA rating system was intended to
    >> be more realistic, but I find the estimates to be quite low. We average
    >> 42 MPG highway in a Camry hybrid which is rated at 34 highway, and
    >> that's not driving at 55 MPH. The MPG graphs also really teach you to
    >> drive more efficiently in city driving as the feedback is immediate.

    >
    > I couldn't care less about initial cost and miles per ****ing gallon if
    > the piece of **** is a literal death trap.


    Fortunately, the Smart Car has very good safety ratings.
    "http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr051408.html"



  14. #14
    Jolly Roger
    Guest

    Re: OT Smart cars, was Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    In article <[email protected]>,
    SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

    > On 16/07/10 6:36 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
    > > In article<[email protected]>,
    > > SMS<[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > >> On 16/07/10 1:46 AM, Steve Sobol wrote:
    > >>
    > >> <snip>
    > >>
    > >>> I bet I could do better in a Smart fortwo, but I like that my car
    > >>> actually has interior room, since I drive a lot.
    > >>>
    > >>> (19,080 miles on the odometer, and the car is only 9 months old.)
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>
    > >> The logic of the Smart Car, other than the low initial price, escapes
    > >> me. The Smart is rated 41 highway, 33 city, not nearly as good as the
    > >> Prius or Civic hybrid.
    > >>
    > >> If you're going to be driving a gazillion miles then you'll save money
    > >> with the Prius over the Smart Car. If you're not going to be driving a
    > >> tremendous amount of miles then something like the Toyota Yaris (36/29),
    > >> Hyundai Accent (36/27), or Kia Forte (36/27) or Rio (36/27) is still
    > >> very inexpensive and offers much more room.
    > >>
    > >> I assume that the actual mpg scales similarly for all the vehicles, and
    > >> is higher than the EPA rating. The new EPA rating system was intended to
    > >> be more realistic, but I find the estimates to be quite low. We average
    > >> 42 MPG highway in a Camry hybrid which is rated at 34 highway, and
    > >> that's not driving at 55 MPH. The MPG graphs also really teach you to
    > >> drive more efficiently in city driving as the feedback is immediate.

    > >
    > > I couldn't care less about initial cost and miles per ****ing gallon if
    > > the piece of **** is a literal death trap.

    >
    > Fortunately, the Smart Car has very good safety ratings.
    > "http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr051408.html"


    Bull****. It may have good safety ratings among cars that are _the same
    size_, but it certainly isn't anywhere near as safe as my BMW 335i.
    Pfft! Get real. The article you mentioned even says it outright:

    "Frontal ratings can't be compared across weight classes, meaning a
    small car that earns a good rating isn't safer than a large car that's
    rated less than good."

    Again, some people have their priorities wrong. Those cars are death
    traps, plain and simple.

    --
    Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
    E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
    filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
    messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
    Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

    JR



  15. #15
    Larry
    Guest

    Re: OT Smart cars, was Re: A new winner!...amazing.

    Steve Sobol <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    > Did you? How do you like it?
    >
    > My '09 Kia Rio gets 37-38 highway mpg. That's not the EPA estimate;

    the
    > EPA estimate is only 35. That's what I actually get (when I'm careful
    > not to mash the gas pedal, and the AC is turned off).
    >
    > I bet I could do better in a Smart fortwo, but I like that my car
    > actually has interior room, since I drive a lot.
    >
    > (19,080 miles on the odometer, and the car is only 9 months old.)
    >
    >
    >


    Actually this is only my first week. I've waited 2.5 years for just the
    right combo of features and price in a perfect used one. Paying $18KUS
    isn't an option.

    On my first tank around suburbia, driving it pretty hard because it's
    just so much fun, I only got 41mpg. I'm sure I could do better if I
    wasn't running the AC wide open trying to keep from roasting in the 95F
    summer heat. Shutting down AC is NOT an option in this little
    greenhouse. The windows are huge. The lexan moonroof has a window
    shade on the inside and that's, of course, a bit of a heat source, too.
    The moonroof doesn't open or lift off, unfortunately. Too bad the panel
    doesn't lift out.

    EPA says this is 32 city 41 hwy and I'm getting 41 in the sprawling
    suburbia that's not in dense streets. Very nice, but that's not why I
    bought it. I have no fuel expense on either of my diesel vehicles, a
    Mercedes 300TD wagon or my big Union City Body stepvan with its diesel
    V-8 6.2L monster. They run on veggie oil from 3 Chinese restaurants I
    get free.

    The Rio is a really nice car but has LESS room than the Smart, which is
    VERY deceiving! The difference is I only have two seats and a small
    hatchback rear with liftgate and tailgate. The right front seat does
    fold flat to become a long storage area from the rear gate to the dash.

    The other difference to the Rio is I have NO ENGINE COMPARTMENT sucking
    up the linear length! The "cabin" of a Smart car starts about 12"
    behind the front bumper where there is a little compartment that houses
    all your fluids except engine/transaxle oils, the electric fan forced
    radiator and AC condensor and some ancillary equipment you might want to
    get to. even under that stuff is the forward end of the footwell! A
    6' 6" fat man fits very easily into either front seat in a Smart
    because, like a minivan, your cabin starts right behind the bumper. The
    engine/transmission and all that is UNDER the flat floor of the station
    wagon rear in the back behind the seats, hidden out of the way and
    occupying no linear space between bumpers intruding into the cabin
    space. It's all cabin from bumper to bumper. Look close at the
    windscreen that's almost over the bumper. That plastic panel comes off
    with two levers to access the fluids. The dash in this thing is HUGE!
    There's also many cubbyholes to put your stuff that has fiddles to keep
    it there underway. Sideways, the bucket seats are only about 4" apart
    because the car is narrower than yours. No 3-abreast seating. Parked
    in a parking space in any mall, the car is narrow enough noone should
    ever bang it with their doors, even a 2-door coupe monster with wide
    doors because the line is so far from the dent-proof, replaceable
    plastic panels. Bored with its color? There's a forum of Smart owners
    who will swap panel sets with you of different colors. Cost is only
    shipping, much to the dealers' dismay I'm sure. I've already gotten
    offers from Red and Yellow owners for the silver panels of mine. This
    is soft plastic. The steel girders of the Trition safety cage are
    inside the doors. The panels are just for looks and very pliable....

    I'll have to try to find a Rio and compare interior room in the front
    seat. I bet you'll find the Smart has more room in the front seat
    because it's only a 2-seater. Storage is 12 cu ft to the roof. Smart
    is also very TALL compared to say a Mini. A Mini's roof line isn't
    halfway up the driver's window of the Smart. Sitting/exit/enter a Smart
    is like a small minivan, not a sports car or tiny sedan crawling down
    into it. There's lots of headroom for your top hat....(c;]

    Smart's shifting takes some getting used to. It's a STANDARD
    transmission, a 5-speed gearbox with electric clutch. This means it
    feels like someone shifting a STANDARD transmission, even though you're
    not involved. The throttle tells the computer how fast you want to go
    and how hard you want to accellerate. The computer actually drives the
    throttle and shifting for you. You don't need to move your foot, like
    an automatic, but, UNLIKE an automatic, the shift sequence is like a
    STANDARD shift car...downthrottle, declutch, shift, clutch, upthrottle.
    The little guy in the trunk does this shifting and throttling.....Or, if
    you like, you can take some control away from him by moving the shifter
    from D to +/- and use the slapstick to shift it yourself. Bored with
    that, it has paddle shifters on the steering wheel like a Formula 1
    racer. When you click the paddle or slapstick, Werner throttles down,
    declutches, shifts, reclutches, throttle ups for you. He's just
    following your instructions UNLESS YOU DO SOMETHING STUPID, like put it
    in 1st gear at 55 mph, when he simply beeps at you and ignores
    you....saving the drive train from your stupidity...(c;]

    Drift driving is out of the question. Werner, the little shift guy,
    also has his OWN brake pedals....one on each wheel! My Smart has
    Electronic Stability Control and ABS brakes exactly the same technology
    as the Mercedes Benz S-class luxury sedan. It was raining fairly well
    when I was at my friend's pizza shop that has parking lot all the way
    around the building with lots of water on it for good skidding. We were
    turning around the building at 45-50 mph TRYING to make it skid, but
    Werner kept beeping at me every time it started, applied the appropriate
    brake to prevent it and we went zooming around the hard corner, anyways!
    You'd have to be completely out of control before Werner would lose
    control, too. Drift driving it like this isn't gonna happen. We also
    were thrown against the seat belts in a wet-pavement panic stop by the
    excellent Mercedes-designed ABS system. I couldn't slide the 15"
    diameter 60 series radials at all! Werner's pedals override my pedal...

    NOT a good idea to panic stop a Smart in front of some big SUV or
    American sedan. He'll never get stopped in time to NOT rearend you.


    This one is also loaded. The wipers front and rear are automatic, as
    are the projector plus high beam quartz headlights. It starts to get
    dark then you notice Werner has already detected this and the headlights
    are already on.....instead of leaving them on all day, which it doesn't
    do. There's a round bauble behind the rear view center mirror. That
    scans the windscreen for water and keeps an eye on oncoming traffic to
    dim the headlights and move the projector, somehow, out of his eyes.

    Stereo is the biggie. 6 CDs fully capable of playing self-burned MP3
    CDRs with no RIAA permission nonsense. All my MP3 CDs play great in it.
    There's hundreds of songs on each home made CD....days of music! AM/FM
    radio has a REAL outside antenna by the driver's doorpost. Savannah's
    AM station is over 100 miles away and I can hear him clearly at NOON!
    FM reception is superb. Not sure who makes the digital radio beast. It
    just says SMART when you click it on. AC is full climate control. Set
    temp, set 5-speed fan, all automatic. Heated Leather seats and outside
    mirrors that are also powered by the driver's controls in the driver's
    door. Electric windows with one click opening, too.

    Take a Smart for a test drive. You're in for a shock. EVERYONE wants
    to see it....especially the girls....(c;]



    --
    iPhone 4 is to cellular technology what the Titanic is to cruise ships.

    Larry




  • Similar Threads







  • Quick Reply Quick Reply

    If you are already a member, please login above.