Showing posts with label brands. Show all posts
Showing posts with label brands. Show all posts

Sunday, June 27, 2010

Automobiles, Thoughts on

  
Cars are many things to many people. For some, it is merely a mode of transportation that ferries them from A to B. Some think of it as an extension to their wardrobe, an empty shell that represents their ‘fashion sense’. Many use cars as instruments to express the depth of their pockets, or their towering heights in the social ladder. Then there are the rare few who buy cars because of the product’s actual performance.


And by “performance” I did not mean 0-60 in four point three seconds. Or four point three one seconds. Not that it matters anyway, since it is unlikely that the vast majority of people who actually care about these things are able to shift gears that quickly to begin with.

Nor are the lap times of a confounded TV-show's test track that does not and will never properly evaluate the “performance” of a car (e.g. the real boys test in Nürburgring and Fiorano). And even at that, it’s not as if 99.9% of car buyers out there are going to race their precious cars in race-tracks every day.

Most would use their cars on the roads to get to work, to pick their kids from school, to live life. And it is in these circumstances that things like NVH and fuel economy, after-sales support and practicality becomes paramount, not what Mr Fuckson said of how fast the car could get round his little circuit.

And thanks to the said arse-head, a horde of other stupid people who think ‘sports‘ is Good, and everything else is Bad, we have manufacturers tune suspension systems so hard and rides so harsh that make these cars (and the people who drive them) a complete joke —outside of Mr Fuckson’s circuit, of course.


Where things count most is where people miss out most: ride, handling, NVH. Nothing is more important than how a car gets you to your destination. People often think that driving/travelling makes them tired, but never have they once stopped and put their “wonderful” car with all the characteristics of a horse cart as the source of their fatigue.

But when they finally do, it wouldn't matter anyhow, since particular non-essential reasons (the vehicle’s excellent fuel economy, *perceived* low maintenance, safety and aesthetic features) outweighs this extremely critical unimportant negative non-issue point.

It’s not as if the 25% savings in fuel costs could pay for the higher priced vehicle to begin with, nor —ironically— cover the cost of the more expensive replacement parts —parts that will have to be replaced someday, either way. Friction, wear and tear, are universal effects that applies to any and every thing. 

Safety is indeed important, and does indeed seem particularly so when airbags explode deploy with metal shrapnels that finishes the driver off when the accident itself did not, while at the same time, so too is low maintenance, especially when the accelerator pedal sinks in on itself, and when the brakes refuse to engage. Pretty hypocritical, don’t you think?

But then again, none of these really have anything to do with the manufacturers in question, since they did have those components sourced from other manufacturers, which brings me to another point: cars these days are just a bundle of parts where no one really makes anything. Everyone makes something. German, Japanese, American, gearboxes, spark plugs, control systems or electronics —you name it. 

Oh sorry, did you actually think car makers made these stuff, and that some make’s “stuff-that-goes-into-the-bonnet-of-said-make’s-car-is-magically-better-than-others”? That somehow, just because it goes into a car from country Y the part lasts longer than the part that went into country X's car? 

Time for a reality check then.


To exchange large sums of cash for a product with it’s make being one of the primary reasons ranks as one of the *MOST* stupid things one could ever do in life. Putting one’s John Thomas in the hands of an insane butcher comes to mind. But then again, I suppose the majority decision is always the right decision, which is why the best argument for democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Majority's choice could never be wrong, now can it?*

I beg to differ.

 

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Unbottling

By now I'm sure all of you have seen the next generation iPhone.

I know almost everyone dislikes it, just as I did the first time I laid eyes on it. 

But now, I absolutely love it.

It is a sheer testament to minimalism, and coherence of industrial design across the entire Apple product lineup. I've always hated the 1st, the 2nd, and the 3rd iPhones. I've always hated the potatoes. I've always hated the "classy" silver/chrome livery. 

I recall a documentary that featured Mr Ive talking about design. I remember him stressing how the things that are not needed, are just simply not there. You see the design philosophy in every inch of a Macbook, every Mac Pro, and every iMac that ships: they're simply devoid of the millions of pulsating LEDs and protruding buttons that adorn the body of every other product on the market you see today. 

I simply love the design of the new iPhone. Those of you who don't? Well, it simply boils down to this: sour grapes (yes all you last-gen users, your potato is now obsolete, hail the new brick).

Friday, June 5, 2009

α Bash

So I was randomly surfing around, and realized that Sony launched three brand (actually, not so) new DSLRS: the α230, α330, and α380.


Sony markets their DSLR line-up under the name "Alpha", and the Greek alphabet "α" is heavily used (along with that lovely orange colour) throughout the packagaing and the actual products themselves.

Each model, differentiated by a triple digit, was suffixed with a capital "a". I have always wondered why. Why not α300 or α100? Why A200?

pfft.

The three new cameras are descendants of the α200, α300 and α350 respectively. So, what are the most notable changes?

New, ugly casings. The α380 gets a new higher resolution sensor.

What hasn't changed? The tiny little flash. 40 segment honeycomb shaped exposure metering (btw all entry-level Nikon DSLRs have 420-segment RGB sensors for metering, the results of which are combined with the distance-to-subject information and compared against a database of 30,000 pictures).


When Sony launched the α350, they equipped it with a live view implementation like.no.other. It wasn't as clumsy as the other DLSRs were when it came to focusing in live view mode. But what Sony never bothered to mention was the optical viewfinder which was also like.no.other before it: its one of the smallest on the market today, solely to make the α350's live view the best.

Question: how many DLSR users you know use live view ONLY? I know of two α350 users, both of them use their tiny optical viewfinders almost exclusively. I'll chuckle in an evil manner now, if you don't mind me.

Also making headlines in the feature list is the new built-in help guide, which can be accessed through the LCD when the camera is on.



Can you see the help button on the camera body and on the display?




And when the button is held down:




Newsflash: this is a camera that was launched in late 2006.


I have an unsettling fear that the Alpha series would dominate the market in a few years time. DSLRs are being made fashion accessories, and are no longer proper tools for photographers. As the mass market of consumers who know nothing of photography (nor have a care for it) 'upgrade' themselves to 'nice looking cameras' with TONS of 'features', you can bet one company will be there for them.