unusual bike designs ect

[avag...@gmail.com]

more. I was looking for the rarest bike made from IFORGETTIAM but lost it

here's what pops up..

http://sodapic.com/40-rare-iconic-bike-designs-ever-collected/

[Frank Krygowski]

Some very weird stuff there. I'd have liked more information, especially on what the designers were trying to achieve. A few seemed to be merely the type of design exercises that emerge from "modern design" curricula, good only for attracting brief attention. But many were doubtlessly serious attempts to achieve ... something.

The problem for someone wanting to design a radically improved bike is that ordinary bikes are really quite good. Most radical ideas become evolutionary dead ends.

- Frank Krygowski

[avag...@gmail.com]

welders...

farther back away from world communications, the stranger the exercises for grinding your point of view.

and heavy !

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 17:26:58 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 6:14:04 PM UTC-5, avag...@gmail.com wrote:
>> more. I was looking for the rarest bike made from IFORGETTIAM but lost it
>>
>> here's what pops up..
>> http://sodapic.com/40-rare-iconic-bike-designs-ever-collected/

>Some very weird stuff there. I'd have liked more information, especially
>on what the designers were trying to achieve.

I prefer "What problem are they trying to solve"? The two questions
are similar, but not quite identical.

>A few seemed to be merely the type of design exercises that emerge
>from "modern design" curricula, good only for attracting brief attention.
>But many were doubtlessly serious attempts to achieve ... something.

If there is no obvious problem being addressed, then it's likely that
it's a "concept" bicycle, which is more an artistic exercise, than an
engineering study. The problem is that (as I previously ranted), any
major changes to one part of a bicycle, requires changes to almost
every connecting component. The final result may look radical or
strange, but if you look carefully, they are side effect type changes
necessitated by whatever it was that "solved" the problem.

For example, the Moulton short wheelbase and small diameter wheels
necessitate an articulated hinged frame, with a rubber shock absorber
hocky puck because the smaller frame and spoke lengths are too stiff
to provide a comfortable ride. (There's a YouTube video on the topic,
but of course I can't find it when I need it).

There are also various molded plastic frames, that don't lend
themselves easily to cylindrical tube type geometries. These usually
result in a rib reinforced, futuristic looking frame.

If you really want to know what problem they were trying to solve,
it's easy enough to reverse engineer the 40 machines back to whatever
change necessitated a strange looking design. I went down the list of
all 40 and think I could probable guess about half without much
difficulty. A fair number seem to be attempting:
1. A more aerodynamic (i.e. horizontal) riding position without going
to a true recumbent design.
2. Higher crank and pedal ground clearance.
3. New materials.
4. Aero frames.
5. Compact folding sizes at the expense of riding efficiency and
comfort.
6. Failures to understand frame geometry strength, stress risers, and
the use of trusses.

>The problem for someone wanting to design a radically improved bike
>is that ordinary bikes are really quite good. Most radical ideas
>become evolutionary dead ends.

I beg to differ. Dig out photos of concept automobiles from 10-20
years ago, and you'll see parts and pieces that are currently grafted
onto production models. It's the same with bicycles. Todays weird
looking is tomorrows mundane. For example, the history of aero bars
is far from simple:
<http://triathlon.competitor.com/2010/07/insidetri/was-the-first-aerobar-really-not-the-first_11039>
It came and went in various forms by various individuals, until about
15 years later, it was commercialized. Bicyclists are fundamentally
conservative (or reactionary) and it takes a while for changes to
become acceptable. If someone switches to cable chains, wins a few
races, and gets the product mentioned in the trade press, it would
still take many years for all but the lunatic fringe from accepting
the change.



--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Frank Krygowski]

On Friday, January 17, 2014 9:58:56 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 17:26:58 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
> >The problem for someone wanting to design a radically improved bike
> >is that ordinary bikes are really quite good. Most radical ideas
> >become evolutionary dead ends.
>
> I beg to differ. Dig out photos of concept automobiles from 10-20
> years ago, and you'll see parts and pieces that are currently grafted
> onto production models. It's the same with bicycles. Todays weird
> looking is tomorrows mundane.

It might be interesting to list all the previous weird things that are on today's mundane bicycles. (Understand, I'm not talking about racing bikes.) I think disk brakes qualify, but what else?

> For example, the history of aero bars
> is far from simple:
>
> <http://triathlon.competitor.com/2010/07/insidetri/was-the-first-aerobar-really-not-the-first_11039>

That history isn't much different from many other inventions. There are patent and history disputes regarding hundreds of inventions.

> It came and went in various forms by various individuals, until about
> 15 years later, it was commercialized. Bicyclists are fundamentally
> conservative (or reactionary) and it takes a while for changes to
> become acceptable. If someone switches to cable chains, wins a few
> races, and gets the product mentioned in the trade press, it would
> still take many years for all but the lunatic fringe from accepting
> the change.

I didn't quite follow your final sentence structure. But the question is this: Is bike design conservative because cyclists don't like change? Or is it conservative because what we have is really very good for most purposes?

I think it's the latter. Big improvements are hard to achieve, because people have been trying every possible idea for improvement for many generations, and what works is what's being used. Any transformative changes will require something that's not quite a bicycle - either auxiliary power or a velomobile, or both.

We'll see, of course, if we live long enough.

- Frank Krygowski

[Joe Riel]

It isn't the spoke length, per se, that makes the difference, but
rather the diameter of the wheel. A smaller wheel has a greater
vertical acceleration when encountering a bump in the road.

--
Joe Riel

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 21:28:58 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, January 17, 2014 9:58:56 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 17:26:58 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>
>> >The problem for someone wanting to design a radically improved bike
>> >is that ordinary bikes are really quite good. Most radical ideas
>> >become evolutionary dead ends.
>>
>> I beg to differ. Dig out photos of concept automobiles from 10-20
>> years ago, and you'll see parts and pieces that are currently grafted
>> onto production models. It's the same with bicycles. Todays weird
>> looking is tomorrows mundane.
>
>It might be interesting to list all the previous weird things that
>are on today's mundane bicycles. (Understand, I'm not talking about
>racing bikes.) I think disk brakes qualify, but what else?

Well, I'll keep it fairly recent such as the last 50 odd years. If I
go back any further, the list might be too large. I think I can
safely say that if it's in the Nashbar catalog, it's mundane.

- Articulated suspension, hinges, springs and shocks inherited from
the downhill racers and dragged to ridiculous extremes for no
obvious benefit.
- Knobby tires, inherited from the mountain bikes and now found on
even kids bicycles. On pavement, good for minimizing traction.
- Side lighting. I'm seeing more and more night riders with LED side
lighting on the frame and wheels instead of the usual reflectors.
- Indexed shifters instead of friction shifters.
- Fixie machines, inherited from track bikes that became lost and
somehow ended up on the city streets.
- Detangler handlebars that do a full 360 without getting snagged on
the brake cable. I've seen a few of those riding around non-BMX
bikes. Useful for demonstrating spectacular spills and displaying
acrobatic feats of impressive stupidity.
- Bikes without brakes (I forgot what they're called). Borrowed from
BMX acrobats, where brake cables interfere with the stunts. Useful
for producing road rash, broken bones, automobile collisions, etc.
- Elaborate color paint patterns. Prior to about 1960, bicycles were
painted in mostly solid colors. Since then, computerized paint
systems have allowed impressively complex patterns.
- Maximum discomfort saddles. Possibly inherited from racing, these
saddles look sleek, aerodynamic, minimalist, light, and very
uncomfortable.
- Bolt on bar ends. A poor mans aero bar, which allegedly offer
several more riding contortions but really just simulate the
horns of a mad bull. Mostly useful for falling backwards on
hill climbs.
- Seat post quick release. Borrowed from the mountain bike racers,
where resetting one's center of gravity on the uphill and decent
is important, they're most useful on mundane bicycles for making
it easier to steal the seat tube and saddle.

>> For example, the history of aero bars
>> is far from simple:
>>
>> <http://triathlon.competitor.com/2010/07/insidetri/was-the-first-aerobar-really-not-the-first_11039>

>That history isn't much different from many other inventions.
>There are patent and history disputes regarding hundreds of inventions.

Only successful inventors get sued. The rest don't have any money.

I wasn't so much referring to the patents, disputes, and invention
claims. Just the long delay between initial experiments and
widespread adoption.

>> It came and went in various forms by various individuals, until about
>> 15 years later, it was commercialized. Bicyclists are fundamentally
>> conservative (or reactionary) and it takes a while for changes to
>> become acceptable. If someone switches to cable chains, wins a few
>> races, and gets the product mentioned in the trade press, it would
>> still take many years for all but the lunatic fringe from accepting
>> the change.

>I didn't quite follow your final sentence structure.

Now that I've re-read what I wrote, I don't follow it either. I'm
munching on a sea salt dark chocolate bar, loaded with caffeine. Brain
is currently offline.

What I think I meant to say was that it really doesn't matter how good
an idea might be. It still takes a long time to convince the GUM
(great unwashed masses) that it's what a bicycle should look like.
Note that it's not whether the idea is good or beneficial. It's
whether the common perception that this is what a "good" bicycle
should be. If you look carefully at kids bicycles, and then roll
forward a dozen years, you'll probably see oversized versions of
bicycles that they rode around on as kids. Well, there will be a
small delay while the parents perception of what a bicycle should look
like is played out, but eventually, it will revert back to the
childhood bicycle. It gets worse as the riders are older, where they
will complain that a new frame geometry, new riding position, or new
handlebar, saddle, or shifter location are somehow "un-natural" or
uncomfortable.

>But the question is this: Is bike design conservative because
>cyclists don't like change? Or is it conservative because what
>we have is really very good for most purposes?

Good question. I don't have a defensible answer. My best guess is
that bicyclists are conservative because they don't see any reason to
change. The same old bicycle that they rode when they were kids is
good enough. Maybe there's a nostalgia factor. My favorite bicycle
is about 40 years old and I plan to keep it forever. Same with my
really beat up Brooks saddle. Why, because they "fit" me (ignoring
that I've gain considerable mass during the same time period).

It's really a no win situation for innovation. We have the
aforementioned conservative cyclist, who is not very interested in
radical changes. He doesn't need these changes because in his mind,
the same old bicycle is "good enough". We also have the same
conservative cyclist who fails to appreciate even minor changes, on
the grounds that such minor changes are not worth the risks, learning
time, potential headaches, added costs, etc. These seem to be quite
common in this newsgroup. So, who's left that will accept either
major or minor changes? The fanatics, the last millisecond racers,
the technology buffs, and those that want the latest, no matter how
good, bad, or expensive. Trickling down from these to the casual
cyclist riding a mundane cycle takes a LONG time.

>I think it's the latter. Big improvements are hard to achieve,
>because people have been trying every possible idea for improvement
>for many generations, and what works is what's being used.
>Any transformative changes will require something that's not
>quite a bicycle - either auxiliary power or a velomobile, or both.

If that were true, we would have exactly one standard bicycle design
that was good for everyone. It would be optimized for the largest
number under the bell curve and benefit greatly from the economics of
large scale production. One size, design, color, and pattern fits all
because there is no room for further improvement.

Obviously, that's not the case. Yet it's also difficult to attribute
the rather wide assortment of variations and mutations of bicycles to
greedy companies looking for product differentiation. More likely,
it's due to individual buyers wanting bicycles more closely configured
and tuned to their needs. In addition, those needs are not constant.
Over my lifetime, I've gone from department store trasher, to street
racer, to mountain bike, and now to comfort bicycle.

What this does to the market is fragment it severely. What that means
is that new innovations will probably NOT be widespread across the
industry, and initially become popular in small specialized corners of
the bicycle market. For example, it's unlikely my plastic bicycle
frame design will ever be sold to racers, off road riders, or
cyclocross riders, but might do well with kids, department stores,
commuters, and anyone that just wants to be different. However, if
the plastic bicycle becomes a sensation in these markets, the racers
et al will either follow with their own adaptation, or the UCI will
ban it in self defense. Either way, it will take a long time to float
to the surface of the bicycle market.

>We'll see, of course, if we live long enough.

True. I've served my time as an evangelist for various unpopular
ideas. I've learned a few lessons, mostly accidentally. One
important one is that even the best ideas must be sold, the best
investors must be convinced, and that the world is full of critics,
but few supporters. I've learned that reputation has more pull than
being right. I've found that it's easier to get big money, than a
little money. I've been amazed that it's much easier to sell the
promise of an idea, than it is a working design. I've discovered that
there are many organizations (and government departments) whos sole
purpose is to prevent or obstruct change. I've learned that nothing
happens unless someone is pushing. I've learned that one must suffer
before enlightenment. I've learned that there's always more to learn.
My only regret will likely be that I won't live long enough to
understand everything.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 22:37:42 -0800, Joe Riel <jo...@san.rr.com> wrote:

>Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> writes:
>> For example, the Moulton short wheelbase and small diameter wheels
>> necessitate an articulated hinged frame, with a rubber shock absorber
>> hocky puck because the smaller frame and spoke lengths are too stiff
>> to provide a comfortable ride. (There's a YouTube video on the topic,
>> but of course I can't find it when I need it).

>It isn't the spoke length, per se, that makes the difference, but
>rather the diameter of the wheel. A smaller wheel has a greater
>vertical acceleration when encountering a bump in the road.

Agreed. I had to cut out a cardboard model to see that the path
followed by front axle with a small diameter wheel, is more radical
than the path followed by the front axle of a large diameter wheel.

However, I still think that spoke flexing does have some effect on
ride comfort. I once borrowed a bicyle with a 700c 24 or 28 spoke
radial laced front wheel. It was a very rough ride and my teeth hurt
from banging together on the bumps.

Incidentally, 20" wheels on a frame with no suspension and all the
springs where the spokes would normally fit:
<http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1205277475/loopwheels-for-a-smoother-more-comfortable-bicycle>

[avag...@gmail.com]

AE6KS ...


WHILE YOUR BACK ENGINEERING, BE Surly's triangulated seatpost/top tube ?

Bike frame tech's family tree has branches away from the road frame where concave development rules. But ugly ideas surface going for a different end, a perceived different end by different folk.

'Let's build a bike for Mars !' uncharted territory or izzit ?

Is if there's no communication abt the canals. Or racism, anti-Semitism...

Off course, ea$ier done in cycles than motor vehicles. Scrap up some tubing from under the bench....

Then there's the 'get attention' problem.

Nbar once had a junk bin of all kinds of cheap goodies from various failed LBS.

hidden in spring house.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Saturday, January 18, 2014 2:39:04 AM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 22:37:42 -0800, Joe Riel <jo...@san.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >It isn't the spoke length, per se, that makes the difference, but
> >rather the diameter of the wheel. A smaller wheel has a greater
> >vertical acceleration when encountering a bump in the road.
>
> Agreed. I had to cut out a cardboard model to see that the path
> followed by front axle with a small diameter wheel, is more radical
> than the path followed by the front axle of a large diameter wheel.

You ought to buy a copy of _Bicycling Science_ by D. Gordon Wilson. I think you'd enjoy reading it, and it covers that point plus a lot of what we discuss here.

- Frank Krygowski

[Jeff Liebermann]

I have both the 2nd and 3rd editions, which are quite different. Good
reading but I didn't see anything on the topic of rider comfort in the
3rd edition. Incidentally, I'm addicted to doing key word searches of
online documents that digging through a printed index or ToC has
become painful. Ah, foundit. The entire chapter on "The Wheel"
disappeared in the 3rd edition. Pg 135 of the 2nd edition has a
drawing of a Moulton bicycle, with a very short description of the
suspension system on Pg 134.

However, Pg 226 of the 3rd edition has a section on "Bicycle tire
diameter and road roughness". However, the main interest is in
rolling resistance, not rider comfort. Did I miss something here?

Incidentally, on Pg 325 of the 3rd edition is a picture of the "SpeedE
flexible drive" from Berg and short discussion of alternative power
transmission systems.

Anyway, I thought it would be more interesting to see how it worked
using cardboard wheels and a simulated road bump (AAA battery). I
hung a piece of graph paper against the side of my computah, shoved a
pen through the axle hole, and traced the path of the axle on the
graph paper as the wheels went over the bump. The vertical distance
was the same for any size wheel, but the slope of the attack and
departure angles were quite different.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Saturday, January 18, 2014 2:06:52 AM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Oh. I thought we were talking about useful design features. I admit, there's no accounting for fashion.

> What I think I meant to say was that it really doesn't matter how good
> an idea might be. It still takes a long time to convince the GUM
> (great unwashed masses) that it's what a bicycle should look like.
> Note that it's not whether the idea is good or beneficial. It's
> whether the common perception that this is what a "good" bicycle
> should be. If you look carefully at kids bicycles, and then roll
> forward a dozen years, you'll probably see oversized versions of
> bicycles that they rode around on as kids. Well, there will be a
> small delay while the parents perception of what a bicycle should look
> like is played out, but eventually, it will revert back to the
> childhood bicycle. It gets worse as the riders are older, where they
> will complain that a new frame geometry, new riding position, or new
> handlebar, saddle, or shifter location are somehow "un-natural" or
> uncomfortable.

Another problem for the innovators is that a bike lasts damned near forever. Like the 1930s antique that's in the attic of my garage. If the zombies attack and destroy every bike that's in my basement (which would take them quite a while), I could still grab that one hidden in the garage attic and ride it to the grocery store. Most Americans have a bike in storage, and if something (their doctor?) urges them to use it, they start with that one, and find it works pretty well. They're not going to be inspired to make a big jump in technology.

As a test case, think about how many of those folks would say "Wow, I forgot how much fun riding is. But I should upgrade. I think I'll get a bike with a Rohloff hub and a cogged belt drive."

> My best guess is
> that bicyclists are conservative because they don't see any reason to
> change.

Yep. Our opinions are converging. Yay, Usenet!

> >I think it's the latter. Big improvements are hard to achieve,
> >because people have been trying every possible idea for improvement
> >for many generations, and what works is what's being used.
> >Any transformative changes will require something that's not
> >quite a bicycle - either auxiliary power or a velomobile, or both.
>
> If that were true, we would have exactly one standard bicycle design
> that was good for everyone. It would be optimized for the largest
> number under the bell curve and benefit greatly from the economics of
> large scale production. One size, design, color, and pattern fits all
> because there is no room for further improvement.

I think that practically speaking, we _now_ have only a handful of standard bicycle designs. Help me here: I can think of mountain bikes, 20" BMX bikes, every-gram-counts racing bikes, and all the rest. (Recumbents, tandems, and folders exist, but in such small numbers that they probably don't make 2% of total sales.)

So in the great big "all the rest" category, what are the differences between bikes? While some vary widely in cost, and some have different handlebars and tire sizes, any bike intended to fit any average male will have almost exactly the same layout and dimensions. _Buycycling_ magazine and we connoisseurs may marvel endlessly about half a degree here or a centimeter there, but a touring bike is a time trial bike is a commuting bike is a shopping bike is a day riding bike. All you have to do is change the accessories.

I happen to be a guy who likes getting the accessories just right for my taste. (Anyone else design and build their own handlebar bags?) But most people seem to find their bikes to be plenty good enough. It's hard to sell them transformative bike technologies, even if such things exist.

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On Saturday, January 18, 2014 8:15:22 AM UTC-5, avag...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Nbar once had a junk bin of all kinds of cheap goodies from various failed LBS.

For real: Nashbar was headquartered here. While they never (AFAIK) had goods from failed bike shops, they did have a small room in their warehouse/office complex, then a local outlet store, that sold goods returned by customers, prototypes they'd gotten from manufacturers, samples they decided not to carry in their catalog, etc., all dirt cheap. It was marvelous browsing for a youngish, financially strapped cyclist.

That was the only way I was able to afford my first triple crank, for example. I'm still riding some of that stuff.

- Frank Krygowski

[Joe Riel]

The index to the book really should be improved. The effect is
mentioned, somewhat in passing, on p. 209.

> Incidentally, on Pg 325 of the 3rd edition is a picture of the "SpeedE
> flexible drive" from Berg and short discussion of alternative power
> transmission systems.
>
> Anyway, I thought it would be more interesting to see how it worked
> using cardboard wheels and a simulated road bump (AAA battery). I
> hung a piece of graph paper against the side of my computah, shoved a
> pen through the axle hole, and traced the path of the axle on the
> graph paper as the wheels went over the bump. The vertical distance
> was the same for any size wheel, but the slope of the attack and
> departure angles were quite different.

Nice test.

--
Joe Riel

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 13:25:52 -0800, Joe Riel <jo...@san.rr.com> wrote:

>The index to the book really should be improved. The effect is
>mentioned, somewhat in passing, on p. 209.

Thanks. I read through that section initially and totally missed it.
Quoting:

"The angle from the axle to the point of impact is more nearly
vertical in the large wheel than in a smaller one, and so a large
wheel can roll over holes and bumps that might completely stop a small
wheel. Greater horizontal travel is required before a bump is crested
by a large wheel, and so vertical accelerations are gentler. Forces
acting to jar the rider are smaller, as are vertical velocities, whos
associated kinetic energy is largely unrecoverable."

>Nice test.

Thanks. Quite easy to do with a pair of scizzors and some box
cardboard.

Drivel: I found this while Googling for something else.
Various bicycle wheel and frame simulations done in Pro/Mechanica:
<http://www.youtube.com/user/jlmcgehee21>
There one of a 3 cross laced bicycle wheel going over a pothole
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mOCRuklC1M>
and the same wheel with radial spokes:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK9bTdondU8>
It sure look (to me) that the spokes are involved in cushioning the
bumps (from rim on ground contact point to axle).

[avag...@gmail.com]

Frank, your perspective on consumer acceptance for innovation ignores the Ipod. $600 GPS, the cell phone tablet revo, and SRAM's rise to top of the heap.

[avag...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:53:20 PM UTC-5, avag...@gmail.com wrote:
> Frank, your perspective on consumer acceptance for innovation ignores the Ipod. $600 GPS, the cell phone tablet revo, and SRAM's rise to top of the heap.

.........

and bikes ? try Surly's entries into various paths in off road geometries. I doahno what's in your basement but those geometries produce different results.

hybrid ? cross... ? try a Wiki....

[avag...@gmail.com]

>
>
>
> "The angle from the axle to the point of impact is more nearly
>
> vertical in the large wheel than in a smaller one, and so a large
>
> wheel can roll over holes and bumps that might completely stop a small
>
> wheel. Greater horizontal travel is required before a bump is crested
>
> by a large wheel, and so vertical accelerations are gentler. Forces
>
> acting to jar the rider are smaller, as are vertical velocities, whos
>
> associated kinetic energy is largely unrecoverable."
>
>

links !

"In comparison with a smaller wheel's spokes, a preponderance of spoke verticalness in a larger wheel directs energy upwards in a vector more likely to carry tire rubber over a ledge/curb/bump/holeside than a smaller diameter carrying energy backwards away from the barrier."

- Ancient Schwalbe Wisdom

[Frank Krygowski]

On Saturday, January 18, 2014 4:25:52 PM UTC-5, JoeRiel wrote:
>
> The index to the book really should be improved.

True of many books! I've got lots of books in which I've penciled my own index entries.

Then there are the many books that have no index at all. What the hell? It should be a law, even for fiction!

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:53:20 PM UTC-5, avag...@gmail.com wrote:

> Frank, your perspective on consumer acceptance for innovation ignores the Ipod. $600 GPS, the cell phone tablet revo, and SRAM's rise to top of the heap.

Well, there's always a market for $20,000 wristwatches, $40,0000 TVs, million dollar homes and the like. I don't understand that, myself. I'd be finding something more useful to put the money into.

But you need a pretty narrow definition of "heap" to claim SRAM is top of the heap. What percentage of the world's bikes have SRAM transmissions? What percentage of America's bikes? What percentage of America's "performance" bikes? What percentage of "performance" bikes sold in 2013 in America?

I think the only way to put SRAM at the top is to define all other contenders off the heap.

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On Saturday, January 18, 2014 4:59:02 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
> Drivel: I found this while Googling for something else.
> Various bicycle wheel and frame simulations done in Pro/Mechanica:
> <http://www.youtube.com/user/jlmcgehee21>
> There one of a 3 cross laced bicycle wheel going over a pothole
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mOCRuklC1M>
> and the same wheel with radial spokes:
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK9bTdondU8>
> It sure look (to me) that the spokes are involved in cushioning the
> bumps (from rim on ground contact point to axle).

I don't think so. Don't be seduced by simulations, especially ones with highly magnified displacements. And especially ones where you can't verify the input parameters.

Spokes are tension members. Those at the bottom will shorten just a few thousandths of an inch under any reasonable load. (If they go slack, you have problems.) And given tire deformations of up to 1/2", I think it's very doubtful anyone can feel differences from tiny variations in spoke deformation.

- Frank Krygowski

[avag...@gmail.com]

- Frank Krygowski,

I leave, you're using unethical discussion ploys
Ipods et al ad nauseum are in an average income families expendable income category.

Sram's gross profit is in the article quoted.

I have Sram links in the toolbox if not equipment systems.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 09:27:52 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Oh. I thought we were talking about useful design features.

Anything that sells is in my never humble opinion considered useful.

>I admit, there's no accounting for fashion.

Perception is everything. Fashion and technology can be programmed.
The innovations I listed are not spectacular changes to the basic
bicycle design. They provide the necessary "product differentiation"
that allows confused buyers and slightly less confused reviewers
declare this or that bicycle to be in some way superior.

I forgot to mention one major change, that is probably the most
important on the list. The angled top tube. In the distant past, the
top tube was always horizontal (on mens bicycles). With full size
wheels, this limited the minimum size of the frame because when the
top tube met the down tube, there's very little room left for the head
tube. By angling the top tube, and thus compromising some frame
strength, a shorter wheelbase could be built that still allowed using
full size wheels for short or young riders. Of course, like any good
idea, one the designer was given the freedom to modify the traditional
frame geometry, it immediately morphed into a ridiculous extreme with
all manner of bizarre structural pretzels. Many were in places where
it made little sense, but did make the frame look different (or cool)
which was the real purpose. Still, I believe it's a major innovation.

>Another problem for the innovators is that a bike lasts damned near
>forever.

Yeah, that's a problem. Like electronics, it would be nice to be able
to design to a specific lifetime, and then select components and
design parameters that would produce a similar predicted lifetime.
Anything that accidentally lasts longer than the predicted lifetime,
would be subsequently cost reduced to the desired level of
un-reliability.

Unfortunately, bicycles can't be designed like that. The problem is
that commodity machines have perhaps a 4x to 10x safety margin on most
components. You would not want a child's bicycle to pop welds when
they hop their first curve, or ride down the skool steps. You would
also not want the ultralite racing machine to fall apart when it hits
a pothole. So, we have safety margins to allow the machine to handle
such peak loads and stresses. Unfortunately, that tends to increase
the ruggedness of the bicycle, which by implication, increases its
useful life.

I could probably do something about the excessive lifetime by using an
automotive trick. People do not purchase a new car because of
mechanical problems or component failures. These are considered
normal, at least on American built vehicles. The GUM (great unwashed
masses) buy new cards because the car eventually starts to look like a
rolling junk pile. The upholstery becomes shredded, the dashboard
vinyl starts to crack, the paint fades, the chrome rots, the plastic
bumpers fall off due to weak fasteners, etc. Again, perception is
everything, and the perception of such a rolling junk pile is
sufficient to inspire buying a replacement[1].

>Like the 1930s antique that's in the attic of my garage. If the
>zombies attack and destroy every bike that's in my basement
>(which would take them quite a while), I could still grab that
>one hidden in the garage attic and ride it to the grocery store.

I also have something like that. It's my 1970's Miyata 610, which I
really like, but rarely ride. Last summer, I decided to take it on a
spin. Instead, I spent a day fixing all thing that had deteriorated
and required replacement. I replaced everything made from rubber or
vinyl, re-greased everything, replaced the rusted chain, tossed the
moth eaten saddle, and replaced the crumbling wires to the lights. If
you dig out your 1930's antique, I would suspect that you'll have the
same problems.

>Most Americans have a bike in storage, and if something (their
>doctor?) urges them to use it, they start with that one, and
>find it works pretty well. They're not going to be inspired
>to make a big jump in technology.

True, but for a different reason. I have 3 doctors and 1 dentist, all
overweight. Somehow, their recommendations of getting more exercise
by cycling doesn't seem to hold much conviction.

What will inspire the purchase of a new bicycle is the cost of
resurrecting a new bicycle. My former ladyfriend decided to do her
good deed for the proverbial little olde lady and get her a bicycle
(because her son stole her bicycle and sold it for drug money). She
found a small bicycle for a few dollars at a garage sale, and had a
mechanic clean it up, add some necessary parts, and in general make it
rideable. When I saw the price tag, I was disgusted. She could have
gone to a department store and purchased a brand new equivalent
bicycle for only slightly more than what she paid to fix the old
bicycle.

So it will be with the aforementioned old bicycle owner. He'll get an
estimate for resurrecting his old bicycle, and with more than a little
encouragement from the LBS, probably buy a new machine.

>As a test case, think about how many of those folks would say
>"Wow, I forgot how much fun riding is. But I should upgrade.
>I think I'll get a bike with a Rohloff hub and a cogged belt drive."

Permit me to amend that slightly. "Wow, this old bicycle is painful
to ride. The aerodynamic posture is hurting my back. How much will
something that's more comfortable cost?"

In my case, the purchase of new technology is largely based on
borrowing a similar machine and riding for a few miles. Incidentally,
I'm looking at a new machine with a gear hub and drive belt, but I
need to get rid of a few of my other machines first.
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/>

>> My best guess is
>> that bicyclists are conservative because they don't see any reason to
>> change.
>
>Yep. Our opinions are converging. Yay, Usenet!

I just hate it when that happens. Discussions are so much more
interesting when we disagree.

>I think that practically speaking, we _now_ have only a handful of
>standard bicycle designs. Help me here: I can think of mountain bikes,
>20" BMX bikes, every-gram-counts racing bikes, and all the rest.
>(Recumbents, tandems, and folders exist, but in such small numbers
>that they probably don't make 2% of total sales.)

I like to classify them by the type of riding. Some have multiple
frame geometries in a single class. Off the top of my head:
- Casual rider (department store or mail order machine, comfort bike).
- Road racing (road bike)
- Mud and dirt (Cyclocross and Mtn bike)
- To/from skool, work, party, etc. (utility bikes)
- Touring (long wheelbase, some recumbents, Mixte)
- Travel Tourist (folding)
- Club events and century rides (almost anything that moves)
- Triathlon (road bike)
- Track racing and time trial (track bike, single gear)
- Stunt riding (BMX and Mtn bikes with suspensions)
- Downhill kamikaze (Mtn bike)
- Exercise machine (Fixie)
- Conglomerations (tandems, trailers, booze-cycle, utility)

Probably some more that I missed as well as borderline machines. I
tried to put them in order by number, starting with the most common.

>So in the great big "all the rest" category, what are the differences
>between bikes?

Usage. I've noticed that for those with multiple machines, each one
has a very specific and different use from the others. In my case, I
have an office bicycle for doing quick errands, a touring bicycle for
long rides, and two strange machines on which I run experiments. I
also have a fast road bike, but it's too small for me now. Three of
these are generally considered mountain bikes, but the uses are very
different. Again, it's not the style. It's the use.

>While some vary widely in cost, and some have different handlebars
>and tire sizes, any bike intended to fit any average male will have
>almost exactly the same layout and dimensions. _Buycycling_ magazine
>and we connoisseurs may marvel endlessly about half a degree here
>or a centimeter there, but a touring bike is a time trial bike is
>a commuting bike is a shopping bike is a day riding bike. All you
>have to do is change the accessories.

Very true, but it's those accessories, bolt-ons, options, and gadgets
that differentiate various bicycles in the mind of the buyer. I've
watched buyers in a LBS and found that nobody really looks at the
major parts of the bicycle. Instead, they look at the gizmos and
gadgets that they can play with while riding (just like any toy).

>I happen to be a guy who likes getting the accessories just right
>for my taste. (Anyone else design and build their own handlebar
>bags?)

Does a canvas shopping bag with shoulder and waist straps qualify?
It's somewhat like a back pack but without all the pockets and
compartments. It's really ugly, but it's the only design that will
hold both a laptop and some groceries at the same time.

You're just proving my point. Accessories are VERY important and can
easily be what makes or breaks the sale. In your case, it's unlikely
that you're going to be adjusting the frame geometry with a saw and
brazing torch, but accessories are well within everyones capabilities.
I think I'm on my 4th set of brake levers and 3rd set of folding
pedals.

>But most people seem to find their bikes to be plenty good enough.
>It's hard to sell them transformative bike technologies, even if
>such things exist.

Welcome to the wonderful world of marketing. Let's start a campaign
of designed obsolescence in bicycle design. Every few years we add
fins, wide tires, narrow tires, aerodynamic accouterments,
instrumentation, air brakes, parachutes, seat belts, XM radio, water
filled saddles, garish colors, and whatever else is needed to make
existing bicycle owner think that they're riding machine is obsolete
or out of fashion. In other words, make riders unhappy with what they
own. This is not so far fetched as it seems. In the hybrid
automobile market, manufacturers were having a difficult time
convincing customers to pay the high prices and accept the marginal
cost savings. Instead, they emphasized that the customer knows all
this but is making a statement for ecology, conservation, and saving
the environment. That could easily be transplanted to cycling as the
crusade to improve national fitness, save gasoline, reduce air
pollution, fight global warming, etc. Perhaps we should attach
automobile style smog stickers to bicycles that offer ratings in
"pounds of CO2 saved per mile" to make the buyers feel better about
the purchase.



[1] Incidentally, that's a trick that I also use in my computah
repairs. I always spend the time cleaning the machine, even if I
can't fix it. The customer will not believe that it is fixed unless
it looks almost like new.

[avag...@gmail.com]

AE6KS -

MAYBE. But the bike market is small with many types selling to many types making the small smaller...narrow.

SMALL ? right, subtract Walmart. Subtract whatever's bolted to RV.

Buyers, if not accurate matching need to acquisition, try as they do know.

The LBS people sell to match for a happy customer...maybe.

trying bike people as refrigerator people is unfair.

Angled top tubes delete steel/Al fab costs for the addition of a seat tube. add that.

The less is more....a larger 'fishing' boat.....underlies carbon tubing paranoia. and unreported failures.

Of curiosity is the Volvo/Toyota longevity phenomena....my 544 is 50 years old...ascribed to tribal pride and peer group pressure.

[Clive George]

On 19/01/2014 04:58, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> - To/from skool, work, party, etc. (utility bikes)

...
> - Travel Tourist (folding)

Interesting - over here folders are bought for commuting, and there's
quite a lot of them about. (because folders are allowed on trains).

[avag...@gmail.com]

AE6KS -

YOU TRIED settling the fluid then ?

an example I went thru last week.....'bikepacker'....'mountainadventure' comparing my steel Redline cyclocrosser with that 6 year old market's longish trail and chain stays to the development of a specific frame

http://surlybikes.com/bikes/ogre

geometry more refined to purpose than the longish cyclocrosser, divergent from the land on your face hybrid geometry.

and within the group specific geometries...have you viewed the epic Emigrant Trail bikepack thru Goodyear I posted last week ?

The propeonudts and disactivists entrenched, throwing rocks and ice balls at arrives suggesting panniers.

Ima gonna file up another set of dropout spacers.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Sunday, January 19, 2014 8:16:12 AM UTC-5, Clive George wrote:
>
> Interesting - over here folders are bought for commuting, and there's
> quite a lot of them about. (because folders are allowed on trains).

One of the things I like most about traveling is noting the different types of bikes. I remember being in Manchester UK and noting quite a few folders, many being models I'd never seen before.

As for folding bikes in America: my wife and I are the only people we know who own folding bikes, with one interesting exception.

We have a friend, a young lady, who drives long-haul tractor trailer rigs. She was complaining that when she drives to (say) Sheridan, Wyoming with a load, she has no way to explore the town. She spends the night in her truck's sleeper cab out in some distant truck stop. So I loaned her my old folding bike for a few months, and she liked the concept so well she bought a nicer one of her own.

Anyway, outside of the northeast corridor from Washington DC to Boston, there's very little commuting by rail in the U.S. (There's even less commuting by bike, despite breathless claims of "50% increase in five years!" or whatever. Increasing from 0.2% to 0.3% really means little.)

Over here, well over 90% of people drive alone in their cars to get to work. Unfortunately, that's how our society has been built. See
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2013/10/us-cities-where-fewest-commuters-get-work-car/7390/

- Frank Krygowski

[David Scheidt]

Frank Krygowski <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

:Anyway, outside of the northeast corridor from Washington DC to Boston,

there's very little commuting by rail in the U.S. (There's even less
commuting by bike, despite breathless claims of "50% increase in five
years!" or whatever. Increasing from 0.2% to 0.3% really means little.)

Hit the return key once in a while!

There are cities not on the east coast with active rail commuters.
Chicago, for instance.


--
sig 92

[Frank Krygowski]

On Sunday, January 19, 2014 11:10:57 AM UTC-5, David Scheidt wrote:

> Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
> :Anyway, outside of the northeast corridor from Washington DC to Boston,
> there's very little commuting by rail in the U.S. (There's even less
> commuting by bike, despite breathless claims of "50% increase in five
> years!" or whatever. Increasing from 0.2% to 0.3% really means little.)
>
> Hit the return key once in a while!

?? Four lines is too much for you??

> There are cities not on the east coast with active rail commuters.
> Chicago, for instance.

Sure. And my statement stands, still correct. Look at national data.

- Frank Krygowski

[David Scheidt]

Frank Krygowski <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

:On Sunday, January 19, 2014 11:10:57 AM UTC-5, David Scheidt wrote:
:> Frank Krygowski wrote:
:>
:> :Anyway, outside of the northeast corridor from Washington DC to Boston,
:> there's very little commuting by rail in the U.S. (There's even less
:> commuting by bike, despite breathless claims of "50% increase in five
:> years!" or whatever. Increasing from 0.2% to 0.3% really means little.)
:>
:> Hit the return key once in a while!

:?? Four lines is too much for you??

It was one line, before I refolded it.

:
:> There are cities not on the east coast with active rail commuters.

:> Chicago, for instance.

:Sure. And my statement stands, still correct. Look at national data.

Sure, but there are lots of folder commuters in chicago. Take the
train into the city, zip across town.

--
sig 19

[jbeattie]

You should go out and test ride some bikes. Compare this http://surlybikes.com/bikes/pugsley with this http://www.pinarello.com/en/bike2014/road/dogma-65.1/833-giallo-nero I'm sure you could win the local crit on either bike. Both make excellent touring bikes, too -- at least with a few accessories. I'm buying a rack and some panniers for my track bike, along with some other accessories, like a double crank, derailleurs, brakes, etc., etc.

-- Jay Beattie.

[avag...@gmail.com]

>
> There are cities not on the east coast with active rail commuters.
>
> Chicago, for instance.

? WHO WOULD KNOW ?

[avag...@gmail.com]

OK here's the scoop

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=BICYCLE%20COMMUTING%20CHICAGO&sm=12

[avag...@gmail.com]

yawl doin the contra ala Brandt ?

good grief tour on a Pugsley ?

I saw one coupla moths ago parked down at the super duper with a mmmmmm forget but sim exotica.

Maybe off the Rockies....

[Dan]

Frank Krygowski <frkr...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sunday, January 19, 2014 11:10:57 AM UTC-5, David Scheidt wrote:
>> Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>
>> :Anyway, outside of the northeast corridor from Washington DC to Boston,
>> there's very little commuting by rail in the U.S. (There's even less
>> commuting by bike, despite breathless claims of "50% increase in five
>> years!" or whatever. Increasing from 0.2% to 0.3% really means little.)
>>
>> Hit the return key once in a while!
>
> ?? Four lines is too much for you??
>

No, one line is too few for the number of characters on it.

>> There are cities not on the east coast with active rail commuters.
>> Chicago, for instance.

And Portland.

>
> Sure. And my statement stands, still correct. Look at national data.
>

(Guess I'll have to "scroll up" to see what this has to do
with "unusual bike designs".)

[Frank Krygowski]

On Sunday, January 19, 2014 4:41:40 PM UTC-5, David Scheidt wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <wrote:
>
> :On Sunday, January 19, 2014 11:10:57 AM UTC-5, David Scheidt wrote:
>
> :>
>

> :> Hit the return key once in a while!
>
> :?? Four lines is too much for you??
>
> It was one line, before I refolded it.

Well, sorry. It looks fine on my system.

Admittedly, I'm now using Google Groups for various reasons.
But it also looked fine when I was using GG part time
and Thunderbird part time.

FWIW, I occasionally used to get the same problem with certain people's emails
- that is, their paragraphs displayed as one long line.
The problem appeared only sporadically, and in the email of just one or two guys.
It gradually went away with no action on my part, and I haven't seen it
for at least a year now.

Perhaps someone else can offer you advice.

- Frank Krygowski

- Frank Krygowski

[davethedave]

Dear Mr K.,

Get a decent news reader!

GG does not wrap text properly! It never has. It probably never will as
Google as a web company in love with http give not a care to the nntp
world of plain text.

The fact that you can read it using broken software does not mean that
the rest of the world can be arsed to scroll 3km to the right to read
what you are posting. The problem is VERY MUCH in your court.

SORT IT!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Usenet_newsreaders

Pick one.
--
davethedave

[avag...@gmail.com]

long lines ? ....power off/power on.

amazing Wiki....reading, sorting, understanding....???

[Frank Krygowski]

Before I go through the trouble of picking other software to
work on three different machines with three different OSs
in three or four different locations,
I'd like to know how big this problem really is.

So far I have only one person complaining about long, unwrapped lines.
If no others have problems, perhaps it's not me that needs a different system.

Anyone else see my (other) posts as long unwrapped lines?

- Frank Krygowski

[Joe Riel]

They show up here as one long line. To read them I have to manually
wrap them (a single command, so it isn't too painful, but slightly
annoying).

--
Joe Riel

[davethedave]

Compare and contrast.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Usenet_newsreaders

Find yourself a windows client which uses a newsrc file. Store this file
online somewhere. Tell your linux client and other client to use this
newsrc stored online.

Jobs a good 'n'

It's all googles fault. Lines should wrap at 72 characters but they
don't. Because google mostly deal with html which is dealt with in a
different manner and was designed for a different purpose.
--
davethedave

[Dan]

[TV game show incorrect answer buzzer sound]

> If no others have problems, perhaps it's not me that needs a different system.
>
> Anyone else see my (other) posts as long unwrapped lines?
>

Yes. I told you this before and you gave the same basic
blow off "Frank is right and fuck the rest of you must
be incompetent".

That said, how big of a problem it is depends on how readable
you want your messages to be and how much of a clueless dork
you want them to reflect.

[Sir Ridesalot]

Just curious. Do my posts wrap properly?

Thanks and cheers

[Joe Riel]

It would have been better if you asked that with a long enough post to
verify. Checking a previous post, I'd say no, they don't wrap properly.
I'm sure that if I spent some effort, I could configure my reader (gnus)
to auto-wrap them, however, currently it isn't worth it so I just wrap
them on an as-needed basis.

--
Joe Riel

[Radey Shouman]

Yes. They're obnoxious.
--

[Sir Ridesalot]

On Monday, January 20, 2014 5:24:35 PM UTC-5, JoeRiel wrote:

> Sir Ridesalot <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> writes:
>

>
> > Just curious. Do my posts wrap properly?
>
> >
>
> > Thanks and cheers
>
>
>
> It would have been better if you asked that with a long enough post to
>
> verify. Checking a previous post, I'd say no, they don't wrap properly.
>
> I'm sure that if I spent some effort, I could configure my reader (gnus)
>
> to auto-wrap them, however, currently it isn't worth it so I just wrap
>
> them on an as-needed basis.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Joe Riel

Thanks. I'll look into getting a better news reader.

Cheers

[AMuzi]

I read a lot of email besides newsgroups and this is an
every day phenomenon.
To read a long one-line message, click 'reply'. The display
changes to normal line breaks. Then either reply or delete.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Frank Krygowski]

On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:01:37 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>
> I read a lot of email besides newsgroups and this is an
> every day phenomenon.
> To read a long one-line message, click 'reply'. The display
> changes to normal line breaks. Then either reply or delete.

Sounds like a good tip.

In my case, my ISP doesn't give a Usenet feed. Neither do the ISPs at the
other places I sometimes access r.b.tech. Then there are the three different
operating systems, with the complication that brings.

I'm going to try to remember hitting return occasionally, but I'll likely slip
up from time to time.

- Frank Krygowski

[James]

On 22/01/14 03:40, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:01:37 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> I read a lot of email besides newsgroups and this is an
>> every day phenomenon.
>> To read a long one-line message, click 'reply'. The display
>> changes to normal line breaks. Then either reply or delete.
>
> Sounds like a good tip.

Because it doesn't require *you* to change the way you do things for
many other peoples convenience?

> In my case, my ISP doesn't give a Usenet feed. Neither do the ISPs at the
> other places I sometimes access r.b.tech. Then there are the three different
> operating systems, with the complication that brings.

A free Usenet provider is a separate entity from your ISP. I use the
same Usenet server at home and the office and other people's offices -
regardless of the ISP in use at the time.

Perhaps you could try http://portableapps.com/ ?

Doesn't MAC have a way of running windows apps?

On Linux, just use Thunderbird - it's pretty much a standard desktop app
these days.

> I'm going to try to remember hitting return occasionally, but I'll likely slip
> up from time to time.
>

Control yourself.

--
JS

[Frank Krygowski]

On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 4:50:35 PM UTC-5, James wrote:
> On 22/01/14 03:40, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:01:37 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> I read a lot of email besides newsgroups and this is an
> >> every day phenomenon.
> >> To read a long one-line message, click 'reply'. The display
> >> changes to normal line breaks. Then either reply or delete.
>
> > Sounds like a good tip.
>
> Because it doesn't require *you* to change the way you do things for
> many other peoples convenience?
>
> > In my case, my ISP doesn't give a Usenet feed. Neither do the ISPs at the
> > other places I sometimes access r.b.tech. Then there are the three different
> > operating systems, with the complication that brings.
>
> A free Usenet provider is a separate entity from your ISP.

So what do you use?

> I use the
> same Usenet server at home and the office and other people's offices -
> regardless of the ISP in use at the time.
>
> Perhaps you could try http://portableapps.com/ ?
>
> Doesn't MAC have a way of running windows apps?

Maybe so, but I don't use a Mac.

> On Linux, just use Thunderbird - it's pretty much a standard desktop app
> these days.

FWIW, I used Thunderbird with Eternal September for a while, but I was
never able to get it to work on Linux. Admittedly, I'm not extremely
skilled at such things; but a very good friend who is quite skilled was
also baffled. He has the same Linux computer I have, and at the time he was
running the same flavor of Linux. He and I attempted to copy all settings
from my XP machine (on which ES & T'bird worked) to no avail.

This guy is not only an old hand at Linux, but an EE and computer specialist
who once said "I had the flu and it was terrible. I didn't have the energy
to do anything but build another computer."

Unfortunately, I eventually came up with problems on Eternal September as
well, which neither I nor he could solve. I could try opening another
ES account and trying again. But for now it seems easier to hit the return
key.

Let me know if it's not working. Obviously, what I type looks perfect on
all my screens.

- Frank Krygowski

[avag...@gmail.com]

Frank, volunteer as moderator.

[James]

On 22/01/14 13:29, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 4:50:35 PM UTC-5, James wrote:
>> On 22/01/14 03:40, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:01:37 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> I read a lot of email besides newsgroups and this is an
>>>> every day phenomenon.
>>>> To read a long one-line message, click 'reply'. The display
>>>> changes to normal line breaks. Then either reply or delete.
>>
>>> Sounds like a good tip.
>>
>> Because it doesn't require *you* to change the way you do things for
>> many other peoples convenience?
>>
>>> In my case, my ISP doesn't give a Usenet feed. Neither do the ISPs at the
>>> other places I sometimes access r.b.tech. Then there are the three different
>>> operating systems, with the complication that brings.
>>
>> A free Usenet provider is a separate entity from your ISP.
>
> So what do you use?

http://www.eternal-september.org/

>> I use the
>> same Usenet server at home and the office and other people's offices -
>> regardless of the ISP in use at the time.
>>
>> Perhaps you could try http://portableapps.com/ ?
>>
>> Doesn't MAC have a way of running windows apps?
>
> Maybe so, but I don't use a Mac.

Then what are your 3 different operating systems, if not Windows,
GNU/Linux and MAC?

>> On Linux, just use Thunderbird - it's pretty much a standard desktop app
>> these days.
>
> FWIW, I used Thunderbird with Eternal September for a while, but I was
> never able to get it to work on Linux. Admittedly, I'm not extremely
> skilled at such things; but a very good friend who is quite skilled was
> also baffled. He has the same Linux computer I have, and at the time he was
> running the same flavor of Linux. He and I attempted to copy all settings
> from my XP machine (on which ES & T'bird worked) to no avail.
>
> This guy is not only an old hand at Linux, but an EE and computer specialist
> who once said "I had the flu and it was terrible. I didn't have the energy
> to do anything but build another computer."
>
> Unfortunately, I eventually came up with problems on Eternal September as
> well, which neither I nor he could solve. I could try opening another
> ES account and trying again. But for now it seems easier to hit the return
> key.
>
> Let me know if it's not working. Obviously, what I type looks perfect on
> all my screens.
>

Hitting the enter key is certainly an improvement.

--
JS

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 18:29:29 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Let me know if it's not working. Obviously, what I type looks perfect on
>all my screens.
>- Frank Krygowski

Looks good to me now. I'm using Forte Agent 5.00 (old) on Windoze XP
via Supernews with autowrap turned off. In the past, when you posted
via Goggle Groups, all the quoted text appeared double spaced. If you
quoted a quoted article, quadruple spaced. It was an ugly mess. Now,
it's properly simgle spaced, which is much easier on my eyes and mouse
scroll finger. Whatever you did, please don't change it.

For Linux, I recommend Pan:
<http://pan.rebelbase.com/screenshots/>
Most Linux mutations include Pan in the distribution. Pan was
originally conceived as a Forte Agent clone, but has gone it's own
direction. The user interface is still fairly similar to Forte Agent,
which I've found to be handy. Also runs on OS/X.

--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Frank Krygowski]

On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 9:40:15 PM UTC-5, James wrote:
> On 22/01/14 13:29, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>

> > ... I don't use a Mac.

>
> Then what are your 3 different operating systems, if not Windows,
> GNU/Linux and MAC?

I probably should have said I rarely use a Mac. But the three OSs I was
referring to were Linux (two different editions of Ubuntu), XP and Vista.

> > Let me know if it's not working. Obviously, what I type looks perfect on
> > all my screens.
>
> Hitting the enter key is certainly an improvement.

I'll try to remember.

- Frank Krygowski

[Dan]

Frank Krygowski <frkr...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 9:40:15 PM UTC-5, James wrote:
>> On 22/01/14 13:29, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>
>> > ... I don't use a Mac.
>>
>> Then what are your 3 different operating systems, if not Windows,
>> GNU/Linux and MAC?
>
> I probably should have said I rarely use a Mac. But the three OSs I was
> referring to were Linux (two different editions of Ubuntu), XP and Vista.
>
>> > Let me know if it's not working. Obviously, what I type looks perfect on
>> > all my screens.

FYI: You've exceeded your allocated ration of uses of the
the word "obviously", and it's meaning has been suspended.

[John B.]

Assuming that the three different operating systems are Windows, Linux
and Apple, whatever they call it this week, you can run many windows
applications on Linux. So for the Windows - Linux you could run (I
would suggest) Forte Agent, they even have a free version, and I
believe that the Apple system already has a USENET reader, so the
problem is not insurmountable. In fact it is not even difficult.

You can even read USENET on smart phones these days.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[avag...@gmail.com]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/22/worst-password-year-goes-123456/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS

[Duane]

Well you can run any OS on pretty much any OS. I have 3 different Linux
flavors running on my Windows 7 box.

https://www.virtualbox.org/

Firefox using eternal-september.org works on all 4 with no real issues
aside for the usual linux things.

> You can even read USENET on smart phones these days.

NewsTapLite is a free app for 1 server and pretty cheap for the full
version. It can also connect using eternal september.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:55:14 +0000, Phil W Lee <ph...@lee-family.me.uk>
wrote:

>Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> considered Tue, 21 Jan 2014

>19:04:53 -0800 the perfect time to write:
>
>>On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 18:29:29 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
>><frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Let me know if it's not working. Obviously, what I type looks perfect on
>>>all my screens.
>>>- Frank Krygowski
>>
>>Looks good to me now. I'm using Forte Agent 5.00 (old) on Windoze XP
>>via Supernews with autowrap turned off. In the past, when you posted
>>via Goggle Groups, all the quoted text appeared double spaced. If you
>>quoted a quoted article, quadruple spaced. It was an ugly mess. Now,
>>it's properly simgle spaced, which is much easier on my eyes and mouse
>>scroll finger. Whatever you did, please don't change it.
>>
>>For Linux, I recommend Pan:
>><http://pan.rebelbase.com/screenshots/>
>>Most Linux mutations include Pan in the distribution. Pan was
>>originally conceived as a Forte Agent clone, but has gone it's own
>>direction. The user interface is still fairly similar to Forte Agent,
>>which I've found to be handy. Also runs on OS/X.

>Or for complete consistency, run Agent under wine on the Ubuntu
>systems and natively on the microsoft ones.
>It's even possible to direct it to store it's data files in a location
>of your choice, which could be a USB flashdrive on a keyring.
>That way, whichever machine is being used, the same data is being
>worked on.

I tried that many years ago and failed, which is why I run Pan on
Linux. However, I just did some Googling and it looks like someone
has succeeded in running Forte Agent on a portable (USB) drive:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent/xSlAv7K226I>
No warranty expressed or implied but I might try again. Pan has a few
quirks that bother me.

I also tried Wine, years ago, which works but had a few problems. All
they have is an attempt to get the OS/X version running:
<http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=19628>
I guess I should try again.

>I even still have a copy of Agent (or rather the installation file for
>it) which will run as FreeAgent without registration - I believe it
>may even run from a USB memory stick entirely, so would be totally
>portable, as long as there's a windows like environment to run it from
>(and wine should qualify).

[Frank Krygowski]

On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 4:55:14 PM UTC-5, Phil W Lee wrote:
>
> Or for complete consistency, run Agent under wine on the Ubuntu
> systems and natively on the microsoft ones.
> It's even possible to direct it to store it's data files in a location
> of your choice, which could be a USB flashdrive on a keyring.
> That way, whichever machine is being used, the same data is being
> worked on.
>

> I even still have a copy of Agent (or rather the installation file for
> it) which will run as FreeAgent without registration - I believe it
> may even run from a USB memory stick entirely, so would be totally
> portable, as long as there's a windows like environment to run it from
> (and wine should qualify).

The main problem here is that I would have a much easier time rebuilding
an STI shifter than figuring all this out.

I plan to keep hitting the "Enter" key. Forgive me if I forget.

- Frank Krygowski

[avag...@gmail.com]

%%%%%%%%%%%%%

itsno big deal. there's X time for your interests. If playing with the software doesn't drag you in....? Try one of the Dummies books, wander thru the software text sh elves.

lot is what could be...

I have a new Dell with discount for Windows 8. A dog with touch screen but quick n easy without. I'm told 8's touchscreen is for children. SAH I couldn't relearn and get to the end product without grinding my teeth down to sharp points.

SH****(*&^ I'm 6 years behind as it is.

[John B.]

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 08:02:28 -0500, Duane <duane....@group-upc.com>
wrote:

>On 1/22/2014 7:15 AM, John B. wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 08:40:25 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:01:37 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I read a lot of email besides newsgroups and this is an
>>>> every day phenomenon.
>>>> To read a long one-line message, click 'reply'. The display
>>>> changes to normal line breaks. Then either reply or delete.
>>>
>>> Sounds like a good tip.
>>>
>>> In my case, my ISP doesn't give a Usenet feed. Neither do the ISPs at the
>>> other places I sometimes access r.b.tech. Then there are the three different
>>> operating systems, with the complication that brings.
>>>
>>> I'm going to try to remember hitting return occasionally, but I'll likely slip
>>> up from time to time.
>>>
>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>
>> Assuming that the three different operating systems are Windows, Linux
>> and Apple, whatever they call it this week, you can run many windows
>> applications on Linux. So for the Windows - Linux you could run (I
>> would suggest) Forte Agent, they even have a free version, and I
>> believe that the Apple system already has a USENET reader, so the
>> problem is not insurmountable. In fact it is not even difficult.
>>
>
>
>Well you can run any OS on pretty much any OS. I have 3 different Linux
>flavors running on my Windows 7 box.
>
>https://www.virtualbox.org/
>

I've often seen mention of various folks having a number of different
Linux' running on one computer and wondered, why?

Do you actually use the three different versions or are you just
trying them out to see which one you like best?

>Firefox using eternal-september.org works on all 4 with no real issues
>aside for the usual linux things.
>
>
>
>> You can even read USENET on smart phones these days.
>
>NewsTapLite is a free app for 1 server and pretty cheap for the full
>version. It can also connect using eternal september.
>

--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 14:08:26 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

Well, Rome, it is said, was not built in a day, and neither was Wine.
The early versions did have idiosyncrasies but in the past couple of
years I've found Wine to perform flawlessly, at least with the windows
Apps I use.

>>I even still have a copy of Agent (or rather the installation file for
>>it) which will run as FreeAgent without registration - I believe it
>>may even run from a USB memory stick entirely, so would be totally
>>portable, as long as there's a windows like environment to run it from
>>(and wine should qualify).
--

Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

Apparently unlike the inability to understand esoteric posts, for
which advanced education is advocated, the inability to understand
computers is something to brag about.

--
Cheers,

John B.

[Duane]

+1


--
duane

[Duane]

Some of our software runs on several platforms so I need to test that it
installs and works on those. I'm lucky as one of my colleagues has to do
the same with a couple versions of WinCE.

> Do you actually use the three different versions or are you just
> trying them out to see which one you like best?
>

I tend to use Windows and Fedora mostly. We develop with Visual Studio for
Windows only clients and Qt Creator for the multi-platform projects. The
other two are optimized to run on small controllers I have tested Firefox
on both but it's too tedious to get any work done on them.

>> Firefox using eternal-september.org works on all 4 with no real issues
>> aside for the usual linux things.
>>
>>
>>
>>> You can even read USENET on smart phones these days.
>>
>> NewsTapLite is a free app for 1 server and pretty cheap for the full
>> version. It can also connect using eternal september.
>>


--

duane

[avag...@gmail.com]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


undertsaning comuters ? or fooling with jigsaw puzzles ?

[sms]

On 1/18/2014 8:58 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

<snip>

> I could probably do something about the excessive lifetime by using an
> automotive trick. People do not purchase a new car because of
> mechanical problems or component failures. These are considered
> normal, at least on American built vehicles.

Perhaps in your circles that's true, but when I look at my friends and
extended family the only reason a car gets replaced is when mechanical
failures necessitate very expensive repairs, especially when design
flaws mean that the repairs may not last all that long.

For example, Honda has had a history of transmission failures and a
replacement transmission is not going to last any longer than the
original.
<http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/honda-transmission-problems-seem-to-persist/>.
I'm sure everyone here knows someone with a failed Honda transmission.
In some cases Honda paid for the first replacement, but they don't pay
for subsequent replacements and few owners are going to want to spend
several thousand dollars every few years.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 6:59:35 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>

> Apparently unlike the inability to understand esoteric posts, for
> which advanced education is advocated, the inability to understand
> computers is something to brag about.

I'm not bragging.

As mentioned, I've used alternatives to GG in
the past. (Evidence is in the archives.) Hell, I was in r.b.*
back when I could access it only on my old Unix account.

But as time went by, various systems and accounts died out, newsfeeds
became less available, my life and professional situation changed,
retirement reduced access to lots of technical expertise, and I now
need to access the group from other locations and with other systems.

I don't doubt that the problems are solveable. But one of my rules of
thumb is that if the EE/computer guy I mentioned can't readily solve a
problem, I'll need a month of study to even make a reasonable attempt.
Sorry, I've got other stuff to do.

That EE guy comes to me for bike advice. I go to him for computer advice.
I'm very much a generalist, but division of labor makes lots of sense
in this case. So does hitting the Enter key.

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 7:54:07 PM UTC-5, sms wrote:
>
> For example, Honda has had a history of transmission failures and a
> replacement transmission is not going to last any longer than the
> original.
>
> <http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/honda-transmission-problems-seem-to-persist/>.

My solution has always been to buy a manual transmission. Never a single
problem, and I've taken several Hondas (including my current 1990) to well
over 100,000 miles.

Then there's the security benefit:
http://jalopnik.com/5940410/once-again-car-thieves-thwarted-by-manual-transmission

- Frank Krygowski

[sms]

On 1/19/2014 5:16 AM, Clive George wrote:
> On 19/01/2014 04:58, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
>> - To/from skool, work, party, etc. (utility bikes)
> ...
>> - Travel Tourist (folding)
>
> Interesting - over here folders are bought for commuting, and there's
> quite a lot of them about. (because folders are allowed on trains).

Well at least on BART and Caltrain (in the San Francisco Bay Area) full
size bicycles are now allowed on all trains at all times (in limited
numbers). But before Caltrain expanded bicycle capacity to up to 48
bicycle per train, folders were popular on Caltrain. And BART used to
ban bicycles during commute hours, in the commute direction and a lot of
people used folders. The other advantage of folders is that employers
generally don't mind a folder in someone's office or cube.

Rail commuting in the U.S. is really limited to major metro areas (San
Francisco, L.A., Chicago, NY, Boston, Atlanta, D.C. etc.), and most of
those get you close enough to your destination that you don't need a
bicycle once you get into the city (and BikeShare programs address that
need now).

In Silicon Valley the problem was that the reverse commute, from San
Francisco to Silicon Valley became very popular as San Francisco began
to become a bedroom community for younger Silicon Valley workers. Since
public transit in Silicon Valley is so poor a lot of people wanted to
bring their bicycles on the train and the train system struggled to keep
up with demand. There were fights and arrests over bicycle capacity (not
between cyclists, but between cyclists and train conductors). Some
people bypassed the whole capacity issue with folders. Increased
capacity and decreased demand solved the problem. The demand went down
because the major employers in Silicon Valley (Apple, Yahoo, Google,
etc.) began providing free bus transportation from San Francisco (which
has created a lot of resentment in San Francisco as housing demands by
tech workers drove rental prices very high)
<http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-san-francisco-approves-new-regulations-for-google-buses-20140121,0,1280462.story>.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 16:54:07 -0800, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

>On 1/18/2014 8:58 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> I could probably do something about the excessive lifetime by using an
>> automotive trick. People do not purchase a new car because of
>> mechanical problems or component failures. These are considered
>> normal, at least on American built vehicles.

>Perhaps in your circles that's true,

It's not universally true. I never suggested that it was. It was
simply one of the methods used to induce drivers that it's time to
purchase a new car. The method would probably work just fine with
bicycles. For example, if the paint falls off in a few years, would
you repaint the bicycle, let it rust, or buy a new machine?

In my circle of friends and family, I have seen every manner of good
and bad excuses to buy a replacement car. Usually, it's the result of
the car being trashed from heavy use. Note that the used car was
probably trashed when they bought it, so this is not a big surprise.
Only one friend and his wife bothered to calculate the present and
future values of a car purchase and compare it to paying continued
maintenance on the old vehicles. When it looked like the tax
advantages of a new car were financially justified, they bought new
cars. I doubt that anyone does that with bicycle purchases.

>but when I look at my friends and
>extended family the only reason a car gets replaced is when mechanical
>failures necessitate very expensive repairs, especially when design
>flaws mean that the repairs may not last all that long.

Yeah, that happens when you buy a lemon. According to my maintenance
log:
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.zonewalker.acar&hl=en>
My total cost of ownership for my 2001 Subaru Forester, over the last
4 years and 9 months is about $6,000 or $0.185/mile with about $1,000
of that in maintenance. Basically nothing major has failed (except
for my clutch master cylinder which I haven't recorded yet). I've
done as well with other vehicles I've purchased. As Frank mentioned,
the trick is to buy a manual transmission. All my vehicles have been
manual transmissions, except the first (1960 Ford Falcon), where I
learned that lesson the hard way. If it moves, it breaks.

>For example, Honda has had a history of transmission failures and a
>replacement transmission is not going to last any longer than the
>original.
><http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/honda-transmission-problems-seem-to-persist/>.
>I'm sure everyone here knows someone with a failed Honda transmission.
>In some cases Honda paid for the first replacement, but they don't pay
>for subsequent replacements and few owners are going to want to spend
>several thousand dollars every few years.

You're proving my point for me. My recommendation was to introduce
some Honda style components, which are prone to premature failure, and
thus inspire the rider to purchase a new bicycle. I proposed an
aesthetic decomposition failure, but a transmission failure will do as
well, as long as there are no associated injuries. If it works for
Honda, it should work for the bicycle builders and manufactories.
Something like the Copenhagen wheel should be suitable, where most of
the value of the bicycle is tied up in the motor, battery, controller,
xmission, hub, tire, and spokes conglomeration. If it fails, it might
be cheaper to replace the bicycle than to pay for the repairs or a new
wheel. It really boils down to what percentage of the replacement
cost of the car or bicycle is the customer willing to pay for a
repairs. My threshold of pain is about 25% for the car per year and
about 15% for a bicycle. Your numbers will surely be different as
much depends on how much one values the car or bicycle as well as the
availability of cash or credit. Ignoring time value of money, that
means at maximum tolerated repair costs, I would need a replacement
car every 4 years and a replacement bicycle every 6.7 years.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 17:21:35 -0800, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

>Well at least on BART and Caltrain (in the San Francisco Bay Area) full
>size bicycles are now allowed on all trains at all times (in limited
>numbers).

I hereby proclaim that folding bicycles are obsolete and will soon be
replaced by inflatable bicycles:
<http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/637460284/2012_inflatable_bicycle_for_advertising/showimage.html>
<http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/564884087/inflatable_bicycle_model.html>
<http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/496267647/Inflatable_cartoon_bicycle.html>

[James]

On 23/01/14 11:30, Duane wrote:

>
> Some of our software runs on several platforms so I need to test that it
> installs and works on those. I'm lucky as one of my colleagues has to do
> the same with a couple versions of WinCE.
>

And wince is what I do whenever I encounter WinCE.

--
JS

[Frank Krygowski]

On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 9:20:39 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
> I hereby proclaim that folding bicycles are obsolete and will soon be
>
> replaced by inflatable bicycles:
>
> <http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/637460284/2012_inflatable_bicycle_for_advertising/showimage.html>
> <http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/564884087/inflatable_bicycle_model.html>
> <http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/496267647/Inflatable_cartoon_bicycle.html>

And for the weight weenies: Hydrogen!

- Frank Krygowski

[Clive George]

On 23/01/2014 01:06, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 7:54:07 PM UTC-5, sms wrote:
>>
>> For example, Honda has had a history of transmission failures and a
>> replacement transmission is not going to last any longer than the
>> original.
>>
>> <http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/honda-transmission-problems-seem-to-persist/>.
>
> My solution has always been to buy a manual transmission. Never a single
> problem, and I've taken several Hondas (including my current 1990) to well
> over 100,000 miles.

When I saw that article, manual transmission seemed the really obvious
answer. It's probably why Hondas have a very good reputation over here.

Meanwhile my new (to me) car has 193,000 on the clock, on a brand
notorious for problems. We shall see how it goes over the next few years :-)

(so far : one rear speaker not working, rear anti-sink not working,
missing foglight due to a low speed crash by the previous owner. Ie
nothing to worry about yet).

[sms]

On 1/22/2014 6:12 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> In my circle of friends and family, I have seen every manner of good
> and bad excuses to buy a replacement car. Usually, it's the result of
> the car being trashed from heavy use. Note that the used car was
> probably trashed when they bought it, so this is not a big surprise.
> Only one friend and his wife bothered to calculate the present and
> future values of a car purchase and compare it to paying continued
> maintenance on the old vehicles. When it looked like the tax
> advantages of a new car were financially justified, they bought new
> cars.

A lot of people foolishly buy certain brands of vehicles used when it's
much more financially advantageous to buy them new. The new vehicle has
a warranty, often has a couple of years of prepaid maintenance, and in
the case of brands that hold their value, is not all that more expensive.

> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.zonewalker.acar&hl=en>
> My total cost of ownership for my 2001 Subaru Forester, over the last
> 4 years and 9 months is about $6,000 or $0.185/mile with about $1,000
> of that in maintenance. Basically nothing major has failed (except
> for my clutch master cylinder which I haven't recorded yet). I've
> done as well with other vehicles I've purchased. As Frank mentioned,
> the trick is to buy a manual transmission. All my vehicles have been
> manual transmissions, except the first (1960 Ford Falcon), where I
> learned that lesson the hard way. If it moves, it breaks.

That varies. On a good vehicle the manual transmission is probably going
to require a new clutch or two during its lifetime while the only
maintenance on the automatic will be fluid changes (which many people
neglect to ever have done). Clutch replacements on some vehicles, not
even luxury vehicles, can run $2000--there's no more $199 clutch jobs.
And of course there is no longer an MPG advantage to manual transmissions.

Driving a manual transmission vehicle in San Francisco is a good
learning experience, at least if you don't have Subaru's "hill-holder"
clutch.

[sms]

On 1/22/2014 8:43 PM, Clive George wrote:
> On 23/01/2014 01:06, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 7:54:07 PM UTC-5, sms wrote:
>>>
>>> For example, Honda has had a history of transmission failures and a
>>> replacement transmission is not going to last any longer than the
>>> original.
>>>
>>> <http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/honda-transmission-problems-seem-to-persist/>.
>>>
>>
>> My solution has always been to buy a manual transmission. Never a single
>> problem, and I've taken several Hondas (including my current 1990) to
>> well
>> over 100,000 miles.
>
> When I saw that article, manual transmission seemed the really obvious
> answer. It's probably why Hondas have a very good reputation over here.
>
> Meanwhile my new (to me) car has 193,000 on the clock, on a brand
> notorious for problems. We shall see how it goes over the next few years
> :-)

Maybe Honda had the Japanese mindset that car replacement should occur
after five years. But the average age of vehicles in the U.S. is more
than ten years old. The Honda engines are fine (though one relative's
ten year old Accord has an engine that recently became a three-cylinder)
but the Honda automatic transmission problems are legendary and you
really don't know if they've fixed the problems until it's too late. My
niece's Accord (formerly my sister-in-law's Accord) is on its third
automatic transmission.

I had three VWs, a brand with very low reliability ratings, but they all
lasted a very long time. They have very good engines but a lot of
niggling problems with electrical and AC.

[Duane]

Yeah like I said I'm lucky to be stuck with Linux. Though today I'm working
on rebuilding a tiny core kernel to use some custom keyboard inputs


--
duane

[John B.]

On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 00:30:11 +0000 (UTC), Duane <sp...@flarn.com>
wrote:

I see. I so often read someone with umpteen versions of Linux on a
computer, often with the same Linux but different desktops, and I
always wondered :-)

But you sound like someone who does need it :-)

>
>> Do you actually use the three different versions or are you just
>> trying them out to see which one you like best?
>>
>
>I tend to use Windows and Fedora mostly. We develop with Visual Studio for
>Windows only clients and Qt Creator for the multi-platform projects. The
>other two are optimized to run on small controllers I have tested Firefox
>on both but it's too tedious to get any work done on them.
>

I used to be a Fedora enthusiast but they went further and further to
the extreme, and I do like to listen to music without resorting to
some esoteric file format for my music :-)

>
>>> Firefox using eternal-september.org works on all 4 with no real issues
>>> aside for the usual linux things.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> You can even read USENET on smart phones these days.
>>>
>>> NewsTapLite is a free app for 1 server and pretty cheap for the full
>>> version. It can also connect using eternal september.
>>>
--

Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 16:54:07 -0800, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

No, can't say as I do know anyone with a failed Honda transmission. My
wife has driven Hondas for 21 years now with only one failure - the
rubber cap on the alternator lead came loose and mud and water shorted
the lead to the alternator frame and the alternator burned up, after
some 10 years of driving.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[avag...@gmail.com]

Honda had a remarkable run of excellent body sculpture...super !

Yawl know abt ECOBOOST ? and the aluminum 150 ?

I did not refind the print version ere's video with I assume Porsche metallurgy

http://www.thefordblog.ca/326/2011-ford-f-150-ecoboost-torture-test-episodes-complete-series/

[Jeff Liebermann]

Besides the obvious light weight, I can see other advantages:
1. Saves on storage space. I can store the bicycle on the ceiling or
park it in the air on the end of a string.
2. As a deterrent to careless drivers, if anyone hits me, we both go
up in a giant ball of hydrogen fueled fire. Think Hindenberg.
3. Attach a small rocket motor to the frame and I have hydrogen
fueled rocket power assist.
4. For bicycle acrobatics, it won't crash, but bounces instead.

[David Scheidt]

Phil W Lee <ph...@lee-family.me.uk> wrote:

:James <james.e...@gmail.com> considered Thu, 23 Jan 2014 14:34:26
:+1100 the perfect time to write:

:You must have come across the integrated windows platform known as
:windows CeMeNT then?
:Dead stable, but not very responsive.

I believe they upgraded the Victoria line to that.

--
sig 68

[John B.]

On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 09:00:30 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 20:22:12 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
><frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 9:20:39 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> I hereby proclaim that folding bicycles are obsolete and will soon be
>>> replaced by inflatable bicycles:
>>>
>>> <http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/637460284/2012_inflatable_bicycle_for_advertising/showimage.html>
>>> <http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/564884087/inflatable_bicycle_model.html>
>>> <http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/496267647/Inflatable_cartoon_bicycle.html>
>
>>And for the weight weenies: Hydrogen!
>>- Frank Krygowski
>
>Besides the obvious light weight, I can see other advantages:
>1. Saves on storage space. I can store the bicycle on the ceiling or
>park it in the air on the end of a string.
>2. As a deterrent to careless drivers, if anyone hits me, we both go
>up in a giant ball of hydrogen fueled fire. Think Hindenberg.
>3. Attach a small rocket motor to the frame and I have hydrogen
>fueled rocket power assist.
>4. For bicycle acrobatics, it won't crash, but bounces instead.

But, if you used slightly larger tubes to make the frame it might even
float through the air (with the greatest of ease, as did the man on
the flying trapeze :-).

Just think of that, floating gently over the maddening crowd. Ignoring
red lights and traffic signs. Cycling Nirvana :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[James]

On 24/01/14 04:26, Phil W Lee wrote:
> James <james.e...@gmail.com> considered Thu, 23 Jan 2014 14:34:26
> +1100 the perfect time to write:
>

> You must have come across the integrated windows platform known as
> windows CeMeNT then?
> Dead stable, but not very responsive.

"Dead" being the operative word.

--
JS

[Radey Shouman]

You do need some oversized tubes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzE2WTEkHeg

--

[James]

On 24/01/14 10:41, John B. wrote:

>
> Just think of that, floating gently over the maddening crowd. Ignoring
> red lights and traffic signs. Cycling Nirvana :-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQq72OvEGcw

--
JS

[Frank Krygowski]

Or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3eAFmU_Cis&feature=player_embedded

found at
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-08/they-said-it-couldnt-be-done

- Frank Krygowski

[avag...@gmail.com]

AE6K

we'll send a wool sweater

[sms]

I just saw a Microsoft booth today at the REAL-TIME & EMBEDDED COMPUTING
CONFERENC in San Jose. They were promoting Windows 8.1 Embedded. Maybe
it's a combination of WinCE, WinRT and XP Embedded. At least Microsoft
is putting on a brave face when it comes to embedded. Kind of like Intel.

[James]

Is it April 1 again already?

--
JS

[avag...@gmail.com]

This eeese on a new Dell 8.1

works perfectly.

back and forth is functional once the touch screen is off.

[Duane]

We have some controllers running Windows 7 embedded. Unlike WinCE you can
build a regular application, WRT libraries and such to run on it. For CE
everything needs to be CE.

We have 2 different versions of Qt for the CE versions. For XPe and W7e the
regular windows programs can pretty much work on them as long as the
resources are sufficient. No special touch screen drivers etc. I have no
idea about windows 8e. It's probably the same as Win7e. But we're moving
all of our embedded stuff to Linux.
--
duane