lorductape
Nov 29, 02:44 PM
Maybe the iTV can zap the MPAA and all those movie execs into white dust :D
rihanna 2011 photoshoot.
Rihanna+hot+pink+dress
rihanna 2011 style.
rihanna 2011 nba all star game
JML42691
Feb 21, 06:11 PM
Nice office Agaetis Byrjun, and you weren't lying about the wire thing, very well hidden!
Object-X
Nov 28, 03:25 AM
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
shawnce
Jul 19, 04:23 PM
I see a little confusion on numbers, for the straight facts review the two PDFs provided by Apple (data summary is a good one to understand unit volumes)...
Q306 Data Summary (http://images.apple.com/pr/pdf/q306data_sum.pdf)
Q306 Financial Statements (http://images.apple.com/pr/pdf/q306fin_statements.pdf)
Q306 Data Summary (http://images.apple.com/pr/pdf/q306data_sum.pdf)
Q306 Financial Statements (http://images.apple.com/pr/pdf/q306fin_statements.pdf)
skiltrip
Oct 11, 08:37 PM
I just received the Belkin Grip Vue (Tint) from belkin.com. It's structurally exactly the same as the Grip Vue cases from Best Buy, without the extremely bright and obnoxious colors. The (Tint) is translucent, so you can see your iPod logo thru the back. But it's slightly frosted on the inside, so you get NO watermarking, and it makes the back look really nice. I got the black one, which is basically a really dark smoke color. Really subtle and nice case.
One very noticeable improvement over the Best Buy Grip Vues is that the volume buttons are way easier to press. I have been using my Best Buy Grip Vue for a week, and the buttons have broken in a little and have become easier. But the buttons on the Grip Vue (Tint) right out of the box are easier to press. Maybe the clearer material is just inherently a little bit softer.
Download Rihanna 1440×900
Rihanna - Only Girl (In The
rihanna hot wallpaper.
rihanna loud wallpaper
rihanna 2011 hair.
taylor swift wallpaper
Rihanna iPhone Wallpaper
Rihanna hot Wallpaper
Rihanna in GQ Magazine PSP
Rihanna on a red sofa hd
pic of justin bieber 2011,
feb rihanna, hot wallpaper
rihanna 2011 pics. rihanna
rihanna 2011 pics. rihanna
One very noticeable improvement over the Best Buy Grip Vues is that the volume buttons are way easier to press. I have been using my Best Buy Grip Vue for a week, and the buttons have broken in a little and have become easier. But the buttons on the Grip Vue (Tint) right out of the box are easier to press. Maybe the clearer material is just inherently a little bit softer.
Slix
May 2, 07:28 PM
Also forgot to say, isn't the Library folder hidden by default in Lion? For the standard user, why would you want to delete the files that you don't even know that are there?
SciFrog
Mar 23, 08:11 AM
33 mins per frame with the iMac i7? That seems awfully fast. 25k PPD. That looks like the time of a 3Ghz 8 core previous generation Mac Pro.
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
cube
Mar 25, 12:53 PM
It doesn't mean anything, as I've noted about three times already.
That's not the correct answer. The possible answers concerning the documented hardware capabilities are:
- That's not enough for any OpenCL
- That's enough for OpenCL 1.0
- That's enough for OpenCL 1.1
That's not the correct answer. The possible answers concerning the documented hardware capabilities are:
- That's not enough for any OpenCL
- That's enough for OpenCL 1.0
- That's enough for OpenCL 1.1
dreamsburnred
Mar 24, 11:04 PM
A refresh is expected soon...
kellen
Apr 10, 06:00 PM
Yeah. Being a guy I was raised that it comes with being a male.
Kind of sucks because none of my friends know how to drive a manual, so if my car was taken for the night no one else could drive. Ditto for long car rides.
I feel that coupes should be manual and the rest autos, except for 2 door suvs (wrangler, D90). Just my opinion.
Kind of sucks because none of my friends know how to drive a manual, so if my car was taken for the night no one else could drive. Ditto for long car rides.
I feel that coupes should be manual and the rest autos, except for 2 door suvs (wrangler, D90). Just my opinion.
arkitect
Mar 22, 12:41 PM
Our Founding Fathers believed in God, proof alone is the pledge of allegiance "under god". Yes our country was founded on christian belief. Hate to say it, but it's true!
As for the invisible man in the sky I have no clue to what you are referring.
Which you will find with even the most cursory search was added in … wait for it… 1954.
Now, my USA history might be a tad rusty, but founding fathers that late? Uh huh?
:rolleyes:
Edit: Link (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance)
As for the invisible man in the sky I have no clue to what you are referring.
Which you will find with even the most cursory search was added in … wait for it… 1954.
Now, my USA history might be a tad rusty, but founding fathers that late? Uh huh?
:rolleyes:
Edit: Link (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance)
macintel4me
Sep 1, 03:29 PM
Ignore the name Mac Pro, People I give you the 23" iMac!!!
That is soooooooooooooooooooo beautiful!!!!
Except you forgot the FrontRow IR port and that's at 30" and a 23" according to the description. :p
That is soooooooooooooooooooo beautiful!!!!
Except you forgot the FrontRow IR port and that's at 30" and a 23" according to the description. :p
MicroByte
Sep 14, 12:21 PM
I went to BB yesterday and I saw the Grip Vue, but I was disappointed that they only have sharp colors. What happened to the colors from the 2G/3G??
No kidding! You would have thourhg a basic color would have been included in the line up!
I'm tempted by the green now, it would definitely be easier for me to find around the house when I misplace it!
No kidding! You would have thourhg a basic color would have been included in the line up!
I'm tempted by the green now, it would definitely be easier for me to find around the house when I misplace it!
ethernet76
Sep 6, 10:39 AM
And aren't there more new announcements next week on the 12th? I dread to think of what new killer products/updates they are reserving that for!
Yeah I can't wait for an updated iPod Hi-fi.
Yeah I can't wait for an updated iPod Hi-fi.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 21, 03:31 PM
I don't think there will be any conditions: at some point, effective authority will simply be seen to reside with them, rather than Daffy the Duck, and at that point, they will become the de facto recognised representatives.
That is my thinking as well. I wonder what the Arab League's stance on this will be. They certainly have little love for Gaddafi, but they dread revolutions of any kind. The Libyan opposition seem committed to a parlimentary democracy that would be popularly supported, and that is heartening. There is a real opportunity here for a reasonably good outcome from a political standpoint.
That is my thinking as well. I wonder what the Arab League's stance on this will be. They certainly have little love for Gaddafi, but they dread revolutions of any kind. The Libyan opposition seem committed to a parlimentary democracy that would be popularly supported, and that is heartening. There is a real opportunity here for a reasonably good outcome from a political standpoint.
MacRumors
Jan 11, 04:51 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
I've heard various whispers about the new thin MacBook. Here are a few additional tidbits and confirmations about what might be coming from Apple on Tuesday.
- A slim notebook, but not a "sub notebook"
- 13.3" screen
- Not a "Pro" machine
- External Optical Drive
- It will be called the MacBook Air
A reminder, though, that Apple has been known to seed people with false specs/designs, so these whispers may not be accurate... but we believe they are.
Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/06/thin-macbook-specs/)
I've heard various whispers about the new thin MacBook. Here are a few additional tidbits and confirmations about what might be coming from Apple on Tuesday.
- A slim notebook, but not a "sub notebook"
- 13.3" screen
- Not a "Pro" machine
- External Optical Drive
- It will be called the MacBook Air
A reminder, though, that Apple has been known to seed people with false specs/designs, so these whispers may not be accurate... but we believe they are.
Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/06/thin-macbook-specs/)
iMikeT
Aug 24, 10:08 PM
I'll believe it when I see it.
snberk103
Apr 10, 11:05 AM
Both "four on the floor" and "three on the tree". Learned to drive with the "three on the tree" in an old (1968?) Jeep Wagoneer. Big heavy clutch, no power steering. It was brutal in traffic.
However, being able to drive the '3 on the tree' once got me a job at a summer camp - as they had an old Dodge Van (iirc). During the summer I only had to drive that van once (I was the person on the crew who could), and the rest of the time I drove the newer automatic van out and about all over the Catskills of NY, and into NYC as well, picking up and delivering people and stuff.
That was a great summer! If I hadn't been able to drive that standard van, I would've spent the summer cutting grass and weeding the flower beds (which I did enough of as it was ..)
However, being able to drive the '3 on the tree' once got me a job at a summer camp - as they had an old Dodge Van (iirc). During the summer I only had to drive that van once (I was the person on the crew who could), and the rest of the time I drove the newer automatic van out and about all over the Catskills of NY, and into NYC as well, picking up and delivering people and stuff.
That was a great summer! If I hadn't been able to drive that standard van, I would've spent the summer cutting grass and weeding the flower beds (which I did enough of as it was ..)
rstansby
Sep 14, 11:48 AM
Does Consumer Reports stop recommending automobile purchases? Because you know if there is an issue with a car, the manufacturer will issue a recall. If you are affected, you have to take it into a dealer where it will be fixed. The onus is on the owner of the car, for crying out loud! The auto manufacturers should go house to house providing the fix for free to all cars, whether their owners report a problem or not!
That is precisely what auto manufacturers do. They send a letter to every owner, and fix the problem, whether or not the owner has reported it.
That is precisely what auto manufacturers do. They send a letter to every owner, and fix the problem, whether or not the owner has reported it.
28monkeys
Mar 22, 08:44 PM
Never abandon your classic. That is company's identity
Lollypop
Aug 7, 04:26 AM
Interesting read but im not sure about system wide Software update. It could be like opening a can of worms - although it wont smell and have soil on it, it could become a weakpoint for hackers/viruses etc. :(
If done the right way I dont see how it could be a problem. For one, the user has to explicitly add the 3rd party product, apple could also act as a intermediary or something, the update will only become available through software update once apple has tested it (can download it youself when released), and even though the update comes from the 3rd parties webserver the hash is stored on apples servers and the update HAS to be verified and compared to the hash.
edit: spelling
If done the right way I dont see how it could be a problem. For one, the user has to explicitly add the 3rd party product, apple could also act as a intermediary or something, the update will only become available through software update once apple has tested it (can download it youself when released), and even though the update comes from the 3rd parties webserver the hash is stored on apples servers and the update HAS to be verified and compared to the hash.
edit: spelling
Porchland
Aug 24, 08:43 PM
Movies are on their way to iTunes...
And Front Row is getting refreshed in Leopard...
I'm still in disbelief that the Mac mini will become a set-top box, but all the pieces are starting to come together.
And Front Row is getting refreshed in Leopard...
I'm still in disbelief that the Mac mini will become a set-top box, but all the pieces are starting to come together.
mattcube64
Feb 7, 06:03 PM
For something creeping up on 15 years old, that thing is in fantastic shape. Mustangs are an odd car for me. I never seem to like them each time a new one is released, but then the older they get, the more I start to like them. A buddy of mine has a '93 Cobra with just a couple thousand miles on it, and I absolutely love it.
I read a story a while back about people and their music tastes. Many people never really get out of their 20's with their favorite bands. The stuff you like around that age is what sticks with you forever as your favorite. I think it might be something similar with cars. I see cars from back in the early-mid 90s, when I was in high school and then into college, and I get all nostalgic and stuff. Fox body 5L Mustangs, FC RX7s, C4 Corvettes, Syclone/Typhoon, etc. The older I get, and the older those cars get, the more I love them. New cars are nice, but some things just stick with you. And those cars are permanently stuck with me.
Treat that Stang nice Puma, because it is certainly a keeper.
I completely agree with the whole "liking what you enjoyed as a youngster forever" theory.
Back when I was six or seven, my dad bought a brand new red '95 Camaro Z28. Quite a few mods were added to it, including a 150hp shot of nitrous and more. I was too young to realize why everyone thought the car was "cool." After some family car purchases, my dad eventually traded the Z28 in for a 2002 SS, again, right off the lot. After all the mods, that car pushed out almost 600HP. He's since moved onto cars much nicer than a Camaro; but for as long as I live, the Camaro will probably be my favorite car on the road. I hope to get a new '11 SS here in the next six months or so.
I read a story a while back about people and their music tastes. Many people never really get out of their 20's with their favorite bands. The stuff you like around that age is what sticks with you forever as your favorite. I think it might be something similar with cars. I see cars from back in the early-mid 90s, when I was in high school and then into college, and I get all nostalgic and stuff. Fox body 5L Mustangs, FC RX7s, C4 Corvettes, Syclone/Typhoon, etc. The older I get, and the older those cars get, the more I love them. New cars are nice, but some things just stick with you. And those cars are permanently stuck with me.
Treat that Stang nice Puma, because it is certainly a keeper.
I completely agree with the whole "liking what you enjoyed as a youngster forever" theory.
Back when I was six or seven, my dad bought a brand new red '95 Camaro Z28. Quite a few mods were added to it, including a 150hp shot of nitrous and more. I was too young to realize why everyone thought the car was "cool." After some family car purchases, my dad eventually traded the Z28 in for a 2002 SS, again, right off the lot. After all the mods, that car pushed out almost 600HP. He's since moved onto cars much nicer than a Camaro; but for as long as I live, the Camaro will probably be my favorite car on the road. I hope to get a new '11 SS here in the next six months or so.
No comments:
Post a Comment