I think this is a stupid regulation to begin with, but if I was making the regulation, I'd just make sure it stated that the device shouldn't be *able* to draw more than X watts, regardless of driver etc. That is, even with a hacked and supposedly unsupported driver, the device should stay under the ceiling, or not function, otherwise the fault is at the manufacturer. Worse, if the manufacturer itself provides the driver, they should be fined even steeper than if a lone hacker provides it. Feels like if you make regulations, you should make sure to make them work, or just not make regulations.

Don't see why public transit must be the culprit here. If there is good public transit then you might need zero cars. One car is often enough to take TWO people to work. The idea is to live conveniently, relative to work.

I'd rather have microsofts revenue than apples, even if apples is larger. Reason? Apples revenue comes from consumer electronics. That can change overnight if Apple just blows it once with a new release. Microsoft has a huge corporate revenue stream as well as a lot more lock-in from software. To put it another way: microsoft can release vista fiv times over without losing much revenue to e.g. Mac OS. If the iPhone6 is crap and samsung's offering is brilliant then Apple is in trouble. Apple have to deliver continuously, MS not so much.

This is 99% cultural/political i suppose. Unless you haul a dirtbike or sheep *most* of the time when you use the vehicle, you don't need a truck. There is no way all those F150 and similar are actually used to haul things even 10% of the time. It's absolutely imperative that the US govt remove any tax advantages on trucks/SUVs unless they already have. A regular 4x4 with a cheap trailer does the exact same job, but also hauls 5 people and luggage so you don't need a truck AND a car. Here is also a big difference between the EU and the US. We often have a car per family, not person. With a single car, the F150 just isn't as versatile as a full size estate.

I truly hope that A) you can buy apple products and use any carrier you like, and B) you can use at least 2 carriers in most areas of the US. Given this, why then buy a lousy "data plan" from AT&T when it obviously enforces ridiculous restrictions?

If you imagine sitting inside the spaceship, where there would then be an atmosphere, you would be hearing noises produced by the craft itself, even if there is no atmosphere outside.

Am I missing something in this whole timeline-hate thing? Aren't 99.9% of all users spending 99.9% of their time in the "news feed" view of facebook? That didn't change with timeline? For me, a timeline only appears on the profile page, a page I don't really see a point in visiting.

Yes I'm typing on one. It's good as far as laptop keyboards go, but it has the typical short-stroke and cramped button layout of laptop keys, and the smaller versions are missing the numerical keyboard which I'm absolutely dependent on (write scientific applications). Real page up/dn/home/end keys without a required modifier are also an absolute must. Also, since I always use an external mouse (heavy mouse/drawing input in the applications) I don't want the touchpad to be in the way.

I don't know. I'm just picky. Even with what kind of full size desktop keyboard I use. I use it 8 hours a day, so I don't want one button smaller than it needs to be, or one button out of place. I also want a numeric keyboard, something I'd have to get a 17" pro for, which suddenly feels too large as a form factor in a portable.

I wouldn't even use a MacBook Pro keyboard for coding more than a few minutes. Nor would I code on that kind of screen size. Similarly, if I'm writing an email longer than a few sentences, I put my iPad down and reach for the laptop...

I was using 4.3L/100km which is 54 miles per US gallon. This is presumably a manufacturer figure, and not the figure from the article in the link. But my point is that there definitely exists full size estate cars today, with competitive prices, that will do 54 miles to a US gallon. With another test cycle or way of measuring, this figure may vary somewhat, but its not at all too far away (considering we are talking about the average requirement for 2025).

4.3L/100km = 54 miles per US gallon. Don't know if its a newer model or another test cycle that gives the 4.3L, I took that from another article.

No, I actually calculated from a newer number 4.3L/100km which translates to 54 miles per US gallon. Could be a newer model, or another test cycle than the one in the article. Still, its not the US test cycle presumably so "YMMV", literally...

Average per manufacturer, correct? So what volvo needs to do is sell enough of their electrics to offset their SUV:s, while the V70 estates are neutral for them.

No, US gallons actually (4.3L/100km = 54mpg US)