Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Hype? (Score 1) 286

My guess is that it will be a change in the GPS software to show the battery usage required for a destination and better integrating the superchargers into the GPS. Last week the loaner P85+ I drove while my car was having its annual service had beta software on it and I noticed this in the GPS.

Comment Re:Good job Mr. Musk... apk (Score 1) 286

Actually it's not 4x the price in the market the model S is in. It's actually fairly comparible and in some cases a bargain when compared to the other luxury cars it's competing against. Right now they have 28% margins on the model S. As for profitability Tesla is doing the right thing and is spending their money on growth which is exactly what they should be doing. They're not an old established company like GM or Ford so they have to spend a lot of money investing in the infrastructure they need for the future (i.e. the gigafactory, R&D for more models, superchargers, more manufacturing capability, etc.) Once they're out of the huge expansion phase then they should be profitable.

Comment Re:Can't help but think of (Score 1) 286

I don't know of any electric that gets 35eMPG. My model S is rated at 89MPGe. A leaf is even better. Also, the model S is not a sports car but a sedan. And we buy them because it beats the hell out of driving a Prius (my previous car). Hell, an electric can go 30 miles using just the energy required to refine a gallon of gasoline.

Comment Re:Predictive behavior and minor User Input (Score 1) 286

There's a web site I use that is pretty good at estimating range. It takes into account the destination, change in elevation, type of tires, speed, temperature and wind conditions. Last week when I had my annual service the loaner car I drove (A P85+) had beta software running on it. The GPS showed an estimate of how much battery would be used for the trip. I know they're working on better integrating the charging and battery support into the GPS.

Comment Re:The answer has been known for over 100 years. (Score 1) 286

I'd love to see a gas car take 1-3 minutes. It's typically longer than that. Even without a supercharger I spend less of my time charging than I did filling up my car. I spend 5 seconds plugging in at night and 5 seconds unplugging in the morning. The time spent actually charging is irrelivant in most cases except during long trips.

Comment Re:The answer has been known for over 100 years. (Score 1) 286

Actually a full tank does not take "hours". For long distance travel a full tank takes 75 minutes using the superchargers. If the battery is completely empty it takes around 40 minutes to charge to 80% with over 200 miles of range. Usually I spend around 30 minutes charging instead of the "hours". Usually the amount of time is irrelivant since it takes me 5 seconds to plug in at night and 5 seconds to unplug in the morning.

Comment Re:The answer has been known for over 100 years. (Score 1) 286

Currently I can get an 80% charge in 40 minutes with over 200 miles of range. A "full tanke" takes around 75 minutes. The thing is that usually the charging time doesn't matter. When I come home at night it takes me 5 seconds to plug in (yes, that fast) and it takes me 5 seconds to unplug in the morning to a full tank. I only need to plug in every few days if I want to. In that way, the charging time is usually irrelivant and only comes into play during long trips. Contrast that to my ICE car where every week or so I would have to wait in line and spend 5 minutes filling up the car.

Comment Re:The answer has been known for over 100 years. (Score 1) 286

Even at high torque at low speed they are far more efficient than an ICE. As for more expensive controllers, the controllers for an induction motor are no more complicated than that of a synchronous motor. A synchronous motor needs to know the position of the motor, an induction motor needs to know the speed. In terms of complexity, they're not all that different. Also, usually you're not running at peak power. In terms of average power usage, say on a freeway, an induction motor may be more efficient than a brushless motor. See http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/induction-versus-dc-brushless-motors for a good discussion.

Comment Re:The answer has been known for over 10000 years. (Score 1) 286

Actually, even if the electricity is generated from coal the pollution is less. I can drive around 30 miles in my model S using the energy used to just refine one gallon of gasoline. Also, as time goes by, the pollution from an EV goes down, especially as the utilities move more and more towards natural gas and renewable energy sources, natural gas now being cheaper than coal for electricity generation. Gasoline and deisel, by comparison, become more and more energy intense to extract and produce, especially when sources like the Alberta tar sands are used.

Also, in countries like China and India their ICE vehicles tend to lack the pollution controls that are present in western countries.

Comment Not much of a threat (Score 2) 389

I don't see the Apple watch as being much of a threat. A good Swiss watch will work just as well five years later as it did new. It won't go obsolete and it won't need charging after five hours of use.

Within three years the iWatch will probably need a new battery, which probably will not be easily replacable. It will quickly grow obsolete as watches with better battery life and better features come out.

And we all know that you never buy an Apple 1.0 product.

Besides, people would look silly if they treated their watches like a Dick Tracy watch or had to hold their wrist up to their ear to hear Siri.

I wear a watch that is a far better watch than the iWatch. I never have to charge it (solar) and the only time I need to set it is to change the time zone or daylight savings since it sets itself. If it breaks or I lose it I'm not out several hundred dollars and it will last me years. I tend to be hard on watches too. It does a supurb job telling me the time and date. It's water proof and I never have to take it off. I also don't get distracted by it. It doesn't beep or flash messages at me, talk to me or anything else. I don't have to update the firmware or worry about security issues. If I want to pay by phone it takes me 2 seconds to remove my phone from my belt pouch to pay for something. I don't have to turn my wrist into contortions for NFC or for something to read the screen.

Years ago I used to have watches that had features like a calculator or that could store a phone book and other stuff. With a phone I no longer need these features which were awkward to use at best due to the small size of the watch.

If I'm going to make a phone call I'll hold my phone. It will be a lot easier to hear and will be clearer for the person at the other end. If I'm on the phone a lot I'll get a bluetooth headset.

There are a lot of smart watches out there and none of them seem to be taking the world by storm. The iWatch is not all that different than many of the other watches out there other than the fact that it's more expensive and made by Apple. In some cases it's obsurdly expensive. $10,000 for a gold iWatch with well under $1000 worth of gold? It's just asking to be stolen like somebody wearing a Rolex. Unlike a Rolex, though, in 5 years time it will be worth far less. It's not something you'll be able to hand down to your children and grandchildren. It won't last 20+ years like a good watch will.

Comment Re:Well... are we surprised? (Score 1) 156

Some of the knock-offs are actually quite good and very difficult to spot the differences. They're not the $40 ones though. As I have said in other posts, I know someone with some of these fake watches and holding them side by side with the real thing it's impossible to spot the difference. The movement is the same, the same workmanship, everything. Only opening them up can you spot the difference, though the works in the fake "Rolex" were made in Switzerland.

Comment Re:Well... are we surprised? (Score 1) 156

I know someone with a fake Chinese "Rolex" watch and it's a damned good copy. My cousin has a real one. Side by side it was virtually impossible to tell them apart. The fake one even had the same hologram on the back and the movements looked the same. The fake one keeps excellent time as well and the workmanship is top notch. Opening them up one can tell the difference. The wording on the inside of the back looks like they intentionally made it different. The works were made in Switzerland though. This wasn't a cheap fake Rolex, I think he paid under $200 though. He's picked up a number of other "expensive" watches over there as well. The place that sells them keeps their hidden inventory in the ceiling with someone up there who passes down the merchandise when the inspectors aren't around. All the vendors keep a close eye on them and quietly hide stuff when they come around looking for counterfeit goods.

Comment Re:Why is this a surprise? (Score 4, Informative) 156

I know someone who has bought a number of "Rolex" and other expensive watches in China. These aren't the really cheap knock-offs and they're actually of decent quality and keep excellent time. One of my cousins has a real Rolex watch. We put them side by side and it was impossible to tell them apart, right down to the hologram on the back. Of course they were different when you opened them up, but the works in these fake watches were often made in Switzerland or Germany just like the real watches. The writing on the inside of the back of the case also made it obvious that these were fake and this appears to be intentional. From the outside, however, everything seems to be the same, even the smooth movement of the second hand.

Now with the iWatch it should be fairly obvious since they run different operating systems, though I suppose it's possible for a cloned watch to also be able to run iOS just like the real one.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If you want to know what happens to you when you die, go look at some dead stuff." -- Dave Enyeart

Working...