• latest news
  • Car tech
  • Cell phones and smartphones
  • Computers and hardware
  • Digital photo and video
  • Gadgets
  • Gaming
  • Green tech
  • Home theater
  • MP3 and portable video players
  • Televisions
• awards
  • Best of CES
  • People's voice
• video
• photos

About me

My posting summary

1 to 10 of 36

My comments

• Ecotony somewhat touched on it, but I think it needs to be brought more to light, per say.
  
  This company wants to put solar panels on people's PRIVATE homes, and then charge them for it over twenty years. Okay, I can live with that. What happens after twenty years though? Does the electric company turn over the device to the owner of the home and let the person use the power generated from it without cost? Doesn't sound like it to me.
  
  Also, will the power company assist in paying the extra fees associated with re-roofing the house? You're supposed to re-roof once every ten years or so. With a big solar panel in the way, no doubt it will cost extra, and I doubt that the power company will want to subsidize this.
  
  These companies are starting to run scared because green energy is catching on. I can put my own solar panels on my roof, and a couple of small wind turbines built from a kit. That puts me off the grid entirely, and the excess energy I can sell back to the power company for MY profit. Why would I want them to come in and get to bank off of my land? In reply to: "Utilities move on distributed solar power plants"

  May 12, 2009

  2 replies

• Motorola really needs to start working on AT&T/T-Mobile phones again. Some of their latest phones have all been CDMA and not GSM. Including the one I really want. I've been a Motorola loyalist for 4 years now. Ignoring AT&T by stocking garbage phones no one wants is just annoying. I'm still enjoy my ROKR Z6, but this summer I think I'll have to move to Apple's iPhone. In reply to: "Rumor: Motorola readying first Android phone"

  April 30, 2009

  0 replies

• Pfft! I love FiOS's bandwidth offerings, but AT&T U-Verse has been offering this for quite a bit longer!
  
  If U-Verse can get their buts in gear and ramp up their UL/DL offerings then they have the potential to destroy cable in the markets they are in. In reply to: "Verizon intros on-the-go DVR programming"

  January 7, 2009

  0 replies

• All I can say is, "Don't do it AT&T!!!"
  
  I dropped Comcast and went to AT&T U-Verse once I heard there were no bandwidth limitations. I broadcast a live 24/7 webcam (soon to be multiple) from home, and use a legal distributed computing project called Majestic-12. I can use the 10mbps/1.5mbps I have at full capacity and tear through 150GBs in no time flat.
  
  I seriously hope this gets called off. It's going to suck if I have to pay for a T1 or better connection from home. In reply to: "AT&T tests limits on subscribers' Web use"

  November 4, 2008

  0 replies

• Black Holes eat everything in their path. Why exactly would we even wish to create a TINY one here on Earth?
  
  Scientist: "Ohhh look, a tiny black hole. Isn't it a little cuite?"
  *black hole giggles and grins, then proceeds to eat the Scientist's face.* In reply to: "Don't panic: Large Hadron Collider won't spawn voracious black holes"

  September 9, 2008

  5 replies

• I switched to AT&T U-Verse after I recorded a conversation with a rep. saying that their service is UNLIMITED with absolutely NO bandwidth restrictions. I've been gobbling up bandwidth ever since and have yet to hear even 1 complaint from AT&T. I even have the 10mbps/1.5mbps connection and use it at almost 100% capacity 24/7. Legal use only though (distributed web crawler project called Majestic-12).
  
  I was tired of Comcast and their threats to shut me down for legal use on a supposedly unlimited connection. I think they should provide a tool to track bandwidth usage, though, because I used a 3rd party tool that accurately tracked me at 1.3TBs of data transfer in 1 month, whilst Comcast only registered 600GBs of transfer in 1 month.
  
  I'm not sure how they count bandwidth usage, but it's WAY different than some 3rd party apps. In reply to: "Comcast to cap monthly consumer broadband"

  August 29, 2008

  0 replies

• The Kindle in its current state could never be used as a college book replacement. There are, however, Tablet PCs that would be suited for such a task.
  
  And for the comment that says, "Those $150 books are $150 because of content, not printing costs.", that's only half true. If you look at what school's pay initially for a new set of books, you'll see the prices are similar. The school makes the money back by leasing the books out at a certain cost to students.
  
  On the college level, this can't be done because of the fact that the books are updated every year. Unfortunately, it's not usually a mass overhaul because one isn't needed. I had a Sociology class that I had to buy an 8th Edition book to and the only difference between 7th and 8th Editions was 3 pages were added! For those lucky enough to find a 7th Edition, the professor provided copies of the missing pages.
  
  A lot of fat could be trimmed off the price of those books once you eliminate printing costs, packaging, and transport. A lot of jobs would be lost in the process but it seems to be a fair trade off because it helps out the future leaders of this world and helps out the environment. All it would take is one, just one, book publisher to want to present a better image (and hopefully more loyalty from numerous colleges) to get this going into full swing. In reply to: "Report: A Kindle for college kids?"

  August 24, 2008

  0 replies

• When I was in college a few years ago, I wanted to see what it would take to get the major college book publishers on board to produce digital copies of their books to be put on a reader like this.
  
  A lot of updates to college books are just tiny changes year over year and constitutes a whole new "edition" to be released. It's a waste of paper and a waste of cash-strapped college kids' money.
  
  There's no reason that this reader couldn't be used to do just what I was thinking of. Though I always kind of envisioned it being more of a tablet PC so kids could take notes on it and save even more paper. Professors would also be able to "beam" homework assignments to the class via wireless in the room.
  
  College kids could pay $1000 one time for the reader or tablet PC, and then the cost of a book could come down from the $65-$200 per book cost all the way to tens of dollars. In reply to: "Report: A Kindle for college kids?"

  August 23, 2008

  3 replies

• Wait to see how AOL enters the 7th age? AOL is dead. It was great while it lasted and it's definitely a service I'll never forget having. Just a few more years and you'll be seeing it on a VH1's Top 40.
  
  AOL is the next Prodigy. In reply to: "Google sours on $1 billion AOL investment"

  August 8, 2008

  0 replies

• Who is writing the one liners underneath the headline on the main page?!
  
  Seriously? "...will likely be given more than a fight chance"
  
  And on the iPhone 3G upping production article, "...if it can avoiding introducing quality-control..."
  
  CNET, are you outsourcing to India or something? In reply to: "Bumpy start for China's homegrown 3G"

  August 4, 2008

  1 reply