Time Less
Mar 25, 03:41 PM
Can the new GPU even do 1080p?
i would think so since apple says the ipad 2 will output 1080p to a tv. only 720p for iphone 4.
i would think so since apple says the ipad 2 will output 1080p to a tv. only 720p for iphone 4.
carlos700
Oct 23, 11:36 PM
Intel Core 2 Duo T7600 Processor at NewEgg.com can be had for a little bit over $650.
gugy
Nov 28, 11:24 AM
Is anybody surprise by this?
Seriously we knew this all along.
Plus, what surprises me is that Microsoft did no TV advertising for the Zune at all. So many people out there have no idea it even exists.
Zune has no chance until they have an integration like ipod and itunes have. Maybe in Vista they will have a chance to get that but my feeling is too late for them.
Apple will not let down and I am pretty sure before spring we'll see updates across the ipod line and maybe finally the widescreen ipod.
Seriously we knew this all along.
Plus, what surprises me is that Microsoft did no TV advertising for the Zune at all. So many people out there have no idea it even exists.
Zune has no chance until they have an integration like ipod and itunes have. Maybe in Vista they will have a chance to get that but my feeling is too late for them.
Apple will not let down and I am pretty sure before spring we'll see updates across the ipod line and maybe finally the widescreen ipod.
blevins321
Mar 22, 04:32 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Not just songs. Could be used with a media dock for movies and TV shows too. And don't say Apple TV2. I mean away from your home.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Not just songs. Could be used with a media dock for movies and TV shows too. And don't say Apple TV2. I mean away from your home.
tkermit
Apr 3, 11:32 AM
Kind of interesting to now look back at Steve Jobs's introductory speech (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmG9jzCHtSQ) for Chiat/Day's 'Think Different' campaign, about core values and Apple's approach to marketing.
gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
Crigger540
Sep 14, 06:14 AM
Belkin - Grip Vue Case for Apple� iPod� touch - Rooftop Green
$24.99 BestBuy
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/7438/dscf6393.th.jpg (http://img215.imageshack.us/i/dscf6393.jpg/)
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/467/dscf6392.th.jpg (http://img5.imageshack.us/i/dscf6392.jpg/)
$24.99 BestBuy
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/7438/dscf6393.th.jpg (http://img215.imageshack.us/i/dscf6393.jpg/)
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/467/dscf6392.th.jpg (http://img5.imageshack.us/i/dscf6392.jpg/)
twoodcc
Apr 20, 11:15 AM
so i hit 5 million points on jan 27, and i hit 6 million points today. so that last million took me 49 days. not my best so far, but hopefully once i get back to my apartment next month i'll be back in business
so i hit 6 million on 17 mar, and today (20 apr) i hit 7 million! that's about 34 days. much better than my last million, but still not as good as it could be. hopefully i'll get everything worked out and going smoothly
so i hit 6 million on 17 mar, and today (20 apr) i hit 7 million! that's about 34 days. much better than my last million, but still not as good as it could be. hopefully i'll get everything worked out and going smoothly
Cygnus311
Sep 1, 12:38 PM
I couldn't disagree with you more.
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
A 23" home theater screen? Umm.......
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
A 23" home theater screen? Umm.......
rezenclowd3
Jan 10, 03:53 PM
Pretty fly zmmer with nice rims! Not tempted to squeeze 17/18s on? (Assuming it won't **** up the running gear/handling)
Nope, I will only go with 16's max if I do. I do not want to add more unsprung/rotating weight. Besides, it would not look period correct. I like the look of some sidewall. DD comfort would also be too negatively impacted with less sidewall due to the M3 springs and Biltstein dampers. It also has a 2.93 Diff mated to a ZF M3 tranny, so it doesn't have the pickup and go for Auto X, so heavier wheels would just be terrible. A 3.4x-3.7x lsd will be on its way for racing duty.
Nope, I will only go with 16's max if I do. I do not want to add more unsprung/rotating weight. Besides, it would not look period correct. I like the look of some sidewall. DD comfort would also be too negatively impacted with less sidewall due to the M3 springs and Biltstein dampers. It also has a 2.93 Diff mated to a ZF M3 tranny, so it doesn't have the pickup and go for Auto X, so heavier wheels would just be terrible. A 3.4x-3.7x lsd will be on its way for racing duty.
aafuss1
Sep 6, 06:06 PM
Bet the combo and Superdrives are all unchanged-the suppliers the same as February's model. And all Core Duo makes sense.
No HDMI or Blu-Ray though (but could jack the price up-so best left for 24" iMac's first revision in 2007)
No HDMI or Blu-Ray though (but could jack the price up-so best left for 24" iMac's first revision in 2007)
Sean7512
Aug 24, 05:42 PM
I hope it happens soon......that new iMac is sounding nice!!! I think it is obviously coming "VERY SOON." What happened to September 5th? Is that the tuesday after labor day, I think it is....
nyprospect
Apr 2, 09:56 PM
Makes me want to buy one.Go figure.
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 02:25 PM
This debate made me think of this. Now that I've thought about it more this is actually really interesting. Reminds me of Kleenex, or Xerox.
This has nothing to do with the current case.
This has nothing to do with the current case.
rhythmac
Nov 27, 04:36 PM
Stop buying things for yourself! 'Tis the season of giving, you know.
but I need so many things! Am I selfish?...well maybe a little, but don't judge!!!!
but I need so many things! Am I selfish?...well maybe a little, but don't judge!!!!
SciFrog
Feb 9, 10:02 AM
million = mio
SuperCachetes
Feb 25, 07:37 PM
I wish there were more affordable Diesels in the States. A Cruze might be a bit "too" affordable, but neither can I step up to a Mercedes. The BMW 330d is sweet, though. I have to rule out VWs based on a personal bias. What to do... :o
I'm really keen to see this system (http://www.greasecar.com/faq) in action. Waste oil as fuel = brilliant.
I'm really keen to see this system (http://www.greasecar.com/faq) in action. Waste oil as fuel = brilliant.
SpookTheHamster
Jan 12, 10:45 AM
Love those BMW's..and that colour is awesome!
At least someone likes the colour. Even I'm not sure about it, but it's definitely unique.
At least someone likes the colour. Even I'm not sure about it, but it's definitely unique.
Chundles
Aug 7, 05:18 AM
Aussie waiters must earn a fortune. My sister in law worked as a waitress in the USA and earned over US$1000 per weekend in wages and tips. So what's it like in Oz?
We don't get tips. The comparison was between minimum wage in Alberta, Canada and regular award wages in NSW (same as minimum wage).
NSW minimum wage for class 3 waiter at age 23: $17ph mon-fri, $20ph sat, $24ph sun.
Alberta minimum wage ~5.90ph regardless of day, level and age.
Mind you this was back in both wages have gone up since.
I earnt over $5000 in about 3 months working 5 nights a week for a max of about 5 hours per shift.
We don't get tips. The comparison was between minimum wage in Alberta, Canada and regular award wages in NSW (same as minimum wage).
NSW minimum wage for class 3 waiter at age 23: $17ph mon-fri, $20ph sat, $24ph sun.
Alberta minimum wage ~5.90ph regardless of day, level and age.
Mind you this was back in both wages have gone up since.
I earnt over $5000 in about 3 months working 5 nights a week for a max of about 5 hours per shift.
yg17
Mar 24, 12:42 PM
You're twisting the argument. Guy + Girl have the possibility to make baby (if they're sterile that's an isolated case). Guy + Guy or Girl + Girl will never be able to have sexual intercourse and have children. Marriage today to most people is nothing more than a loosely binded formal contract, since it can be terminated at any time with little to no repercussions.
If I am sterile and get married to someone of the opposite gender (and know I'm sterile before getting married), there is still no possible way to make a baby. Isolated case? The percentage of the population who are gay and the percentage who are sterile are probably very similar.
If I am sterile and get married to someone of the opposite gender (and know I'm sterile before getting married), there is still no possible way to make a baby. Isolated case? The percentage of the population who are gay and the percentage who are sterile are probably very similar.
*LTD*
Apr 22, 10:09 PM
delete
alfagta
Apr 1, 12:56 PM
Adding a printer has a new interface and you can now display a message on the screen if your screen is locked.
Screenshots please!
Screenshots please!
quagmire
Mar 1, 01:34 PM
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
for it's south american Amarok pick up VW simply took the 2.0 I4 TDI from the golf/jetta and set up the engine slightly different in regards to the power/torque band and ends up with an engine which was very likely cheaper to develop, cheaper to build had less weight and still achieves 400nm of torque
GM had the 4.5 liter Duramax in development for their half-ton trucks, but the economy and their situation canned that. Ford also was working on a baby Powerstroke and Cummins was working on a baby I-6 for Dodge. But, those as well have been canned.
for it's south american Amarok pick up VW simply took the 2.0 I4 TDI from the golf/jetta and set up the engine slightly different in regards to the power/torque band and ends up with an engine which was very likely cheaper to develop, cheaper to build had less weight and still achieves 400nm of torque
GM had the 4.5 liter Duramax in development for their half-ton trucks, but the economy and their situation canned that. Ford also was working on a baby Powerstroke and Cummins was working on a baby I-6 for Dodge. But, those as well have been canned.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario