Definitely looks interesting, but highly unpractical for vehicles. After all, you have to keep the metal molten all the time. And that means some heavy-duty insulation, something akin to a Thermos bottle with a large volume. The problem then is the fact, that such bottles are not exactly great when it comes to vibrations, abrupt stops and crashes.
Least common denominator and all that.
By your standard, almost anything would be subjective. Let's go through your line of thinking:
The tester chose an enclosure you probably don't have at home. As such, the card will not demonstrate the same values in your enclosure at home. As a result the tests are "subjective".
Power consumption? Well, you've probably got a different PSU. Subjective.
FPS? You've probably got a different CPU, different OS configuration, motherboard, harddisc... Subjective!
In summary: If the tester uses the same enclosure for every card they test, I don't see how it's subjective. Sone or dB as a unit of loudness are measurable, as is temperature. Or do you want to tell us that, say, the distance to Betelgeuze is subjective just because you don't happen to have the proper equipment to measure it?
Nokia did that just fine (for a pretty while at least). So, branching out doesn't have to spell doom.
I'm all for it - as long as the guys opposing the "normal" cables also pay for the increased costs. Last time I looked DC high voltage cabling was about triple the costs of AC, all things considered (like the need to convert from AC to DC to AC)
Just think of what a boon this kind of thinking would be to the automobile industry!
A new car mandatory after three years.
Wow. Two weeks of paid vacation. A bit more money for working on Sundays?
I shudder to think what non-generous work is, then. Probably "no vacation, ever!" and "overtime compensation? Are you dreaming?"
The problem is, however, that the guys ultimately responsible for the failure of Dominick's won't suffer one bit. On one hand you have 6,000 people losing their jobs, on the other hand you have the managers from Safeway who are ultimately responsible for the failure - and those guys always have their golden parachutes at the ready.
So, because you can't educate your morons, erm, people on the proper way to discard such stuff, we can't replace energy-hungry bulbs?
Good gracious! Better begin lamenting all the other electronic stuff which is already thrown away by such morons. Or did you think that this is a problem exclusive to LED lighting? Seriously? That's your argument?
By that logic you also needn't consider the energy costs to manufacture LEDs. Why don't you rant against the guy who originally brought that up instead of me?
With a 40 W bulb, you won't have much of a shadow...
Damn. That should have read: "more of the simple lighting devices". Because of their limited lifespan, you'll quite simply need an increased number. Not to forget that the energy needs to produce LEDs have gone way down.
Right. And you shouldn't neglect the increased energy needed to manufacture more
Erm, an incadescent bulb also isn't a point source of light. I'm also not quite sure why you'd need sharply defined shadows in a household