Tesla stock surged 6% Monday on higher than anticipated sales figures giving the company a market value of about $48 billion. Ford stock dropped about 4% on lower than anticipated sales leaving it with a market value of about $45 billion.
There is no way that Tesla is worth more than Ford. They sold 25,000 cars, generated about $7 billion in gross revenue, and lost nearly a billion last year. They have only had 2 quarters in the history of the company they didn't lose money. By contrast last year Ford sold more than 617,000 cars, had more than $151 billion in revenue, and turned a profit of more than $1.5 billion. What the fuck is wrong with our stock market?
Ford is Shit nowadays, so that doesn't surprise me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erjvvgeUwAY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB2g7-HgE_g
Isn't not terribly surprising that Tesla is doing better than Ford right now.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on April 04, 2017, 07:55:08 AMThere is no way that Tesla is worth more than Ford. They sold 25,000 cars, generated about $7 billion in gross revenue, and lost nearly a billion last year. They have only had 2 quarters in the history of the company they didn't lose money. By contrast last year Ford sold more than 617,000 cars, had more than $151 billion in revenue, and turned a profit of more than $1.5 billion. What the fuck is wrong with our stock market?
One word: investors (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/03/business/tesla-ford-general-motors-stock-market.html)
Sorry. I left a number off of the Ford sales figure. Ford sold 2,617,000 vehicles last year. Not 617,000.
Quote from: Shiranu on April 04, 2017, 08:27:37 AM
Ford is Shit nowadays, so that doesn't surprise me.
Certainly explains why Ford's F-150 pickup has been the best selling vehicle in the US for 35 straight years...
Look, I'm not trying to knock Tesla or pump up Ford. I've never owned a Ford. I probably never will, but I won't completely rule out the possibility of owning a Ford truck or an old Mustang one day. By contrast the new Tesla X (if they ever get around to making the damn thing) is definitely worth considering. But Ford's 2016 financial report lists $240 billion in assets and $143 billion in debts. Tesla's lists $8 billion in assets and $4 billion in debts. How the hell is a company that's never turned an annual profit worth more than a profitable company with more than 20 times the annual sales and net assets?
Quote from: Hydra009 on April 04, 2017, 11:11:44 AM
One word: investors (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/03/business/tesla-ford-general-motors-stock-market.html)
It's not investors. That would be you and me. It's fund managers gambling with our money.
Tesla and electric are the future, Ford isn't. That's not much of a gamble, just common sense when you look at the big picture and the future.
Best selling really doesn't mean much though when your brand image drops because of quality... eventually you can't sell on brand name alone. And iirc correctly the head office is a mess, as well as the traditional American autos just not being able to put out as great of product as foreign competitors. They had a good run, but they are taking a seat behind the Japanese and I don't see that changing any time soon.
And I say that as a Ford owner from generations of Ford only owners. It's not like I have anything against their older products.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on April 04, 2017, 11:46:42 AM
It's not investors. That would be you and me. It's fund managers gambling with our money.
And direct government subsidy, same as Amazon (Bezos is nearly the world's richest man), same as MIC ... anyone can be brilliant if they get free taxpayer money. Tesla has lost money on every unit they produce. And a private rocket to the moon, will never break even either. Tax payer subsidized megalomaniacs. Subsidized MIC is necessary, because no consumer will pay for war voluntarily. But extending this model to the rest of the economy is lunacy.
Quote from: Shiranu on April 04, 2017, 12:42:18 PM
Tesla and electric are the future, Ford isn't. That's not much of a gamble, just common sense when you look at the big picture and the future.
Best selling really doesn't mean much though when your brand image drops because of quality... eventually you can't sell on brand name alone. And iirc correctly the head office is a mess, as well as the traditional American autos just not being able to put out as great of product as foreign competitors. They had a good run, but they are taking a seat behind the Japanese and I don't see that changing any time soon.
And I say that as a Ford owner from generations of Ford only owners. It's not like I have anything against their older products.
Tesla and electric cars only work, if you have cheap to free electricity, and have it available nearly everywhere. That isn't likely to happen, without fusion power ... which will come online any day now. Solar and Wind won't provide the right power at the right places at the right time.
Quote from: Baruch on April 04, 2017, 12:52:56 PMTesla and electric cars only work, if you have cheap to free electricity, and have it available nearly everywhere.
Electric cars already offer significant refueling savings (https://energy.gov/maps/egallon) given existing electrical prices (so the cheap/free part is pure bullshit). And charging stations are already widely available across the country (https://www.plugshare.com/), not to mention residential charging.
Just fyi, given your track record, I'm just going to assume from here on out that you're talking complete nonsense unless you start providing good sources to back up your argument.
Quote from: Hydra009 on April 04, 2017, 01:11:51 PM
Electric cars already offer significant refueling savings (https://energy.gov/maps/egallon) given existing electrical prices (so the cheap/free part is pure bullshit). And charging stations are already widely available across the country (https://www.plugshare.com/), not to mention residential charging.
Just fyi, given your track record, I'm just going to assume from here on out that you're talking complete nonsense unless you start providing good sources to back up your argument.
Go into the average gas station here ... and plug in, nut job? Your economic spreadsheet dynamics ... are just white collar fraud (not you, that crook Elon). Now there may be, in a large metro near you, some access ... as there is for compressed natural gas powered government vehicles. Just please, stay in the big city ... your extension cord will be too embarrassing.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on April 04, 2017, 07:55:08 AM
Tesla stock surged 6% Monday on higher than anticipated sales figures giving the company a market value of about $48 billion. Ford stock dropped about 4% on lower than anticipated sales leaving it with a market value of about $45 billion.
There is no way that Tesla is worth more than Ford. They sold 25,000 cars, generated about $7 billion in gross revenue, and lost nearly a billion last year. They have only had 2 quarters in the history of the company they didn't lose money. By contrast last year Ford sold more than 617,000 cars, had more than $151 billion in revenue, and turned a profit of more than $1.5 billion. What the fuck is wrong with our stock market?
Optimism is the basis of stock trades. Reality is irrelevant.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 12, 2017, 03:07:44 AM
Optimism is the basis of stock trades. Reality is irrelevant.
Couple of days ago they passed GM too...
I read a short article yesterday. If I understand it correctly, which is a big if, this is certainly true on paper that Tesla outvalues GM, but only when looking at how the companies are valued in a limited number of ways. It seems like a function of what happens with stock trading, which now seems to be what the government bases most of its assessment of the economy, but less with what actually happens in Corporations. I dunno. It depends much on how we decide to value certain aspects of the economy.
Quote from: SGOS on April 12, 2017, 10:07:48 AM
I read a short article yesterday. If I understand it correctly, which is a big if, this is certainly true on paper that Tesla outvalues GM, but only when looking at how the companies are valued in a limited number of ways. It seems like a function of what happens with stock trading, which now seems to be what the government bases most of its assessment of the economy, but less with what actually happens in Corporations. I dunno. It depends much on how we decide to value certain aspects of the economy.
That was the whole point of the OP. At it's current price Tesla's stock is now worth more than either Ford or GM. But if you compare the actual companies there is no comparison. Ford and GM are both profitable companies. Tesla is not. Ford and GM's assets dwarf Tesla's. Actual sales numbers aren't even on the same planet.
People are betting heavily that Tesla's model X is going to be a huge success. Unfortunately the model X doesn't even have to fail for Tesla's stock to tank. Just lower than anticipated sales could do it. If that happens a lot of people including me are going to lose money we can't afford to lose. Many of the people paying these astronomical prices for the stock are the fund managers that control our IRA's and 401K's.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on April 12, 2017, 10:31:45 AM
That was the whole point of the OP. At it's current price Tesla's stock is now worth more than either Ford or GM. But if you compare the actual companies there is no comparison. Ford and GM are both profitable companies. Tesla is not. Ford and GM's assets dwarf Tesla's. Actual sales numbers aren't even on the same planet.
People are betting heavily that Tesla's model X is going to be a huge success. Unfortunately the model X doesn't even have to fail for Tesla's stock to tank. Just lower than anticipated sales could do it. If that happens a lot of people including me are going to lose money we can't afford to lose. Many of the people paying these astronomical prices for the stock are the fund managers that control our IRA's and 401K's.
I also suspect the reason for the media attention on this interpretation of the statistics, is for the paradoxical interest (everyone loves a paradox to the point that people gravitate to a paradox, even when it's inherently false, if not simply of no consequence). Political ideologies love paradoxes, and love it when, true or false, they support the ideology. Put a paradox in a headline, and people read the article. Call it click bait. Write a false paradox and people will believe it on the grounds that it's just too paradoxical not to be true. It's a corollary of the "tell a lie big enough and people will believe it" principle of propaganda. That's what makes this revelation by the media interesting.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on April 12, 2017, 10:31:45 AM
That was the whole point of the OP. At it's current price Tesla's stock is now worth more than either Ford or GM. But if you compare the actual companies there is no comparison. Ford and GM are both profitable companies. Tesla is not. Ford and GM's assets dwarf Tesla's. Actual sales numbers aren't even on the same planet.
True. But investors are looking for future growth, not past/current numbers. Investors see articles like this (http://investorplace.com/2017/01/tsla-stock-tesla-motors-inc-gigafactory/) and probably salivate while reading.
Tesla has one great thing going for it: PR. Tesla's going to change the industry and the world. Ford, not so much. At least, that's the perception.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on April 04, 2017, 11:44:17 AM
Sorry. I left a number off of the Ford sales figure. Ford sold 2,617,000 vehicles last year. Not 617,000.
Certainly explains why Ford's F-150 pickup has been the best selling vehicle in the US for 35 straight years...
Look, I'm not trying to knock Tesla or pump up Ford. I've never owned a Ford. I probably never will, but I won't completely rule out the possibility of owning a Ford truck or an old Mustang one day. By contrast the new Tesla X (if they ever get around to making the damn thing) is definitely worth considering. But Ford's 2016 financial report lists $240 billion in assets and $143 billion in debts. Tesla's lists $8 billion in assets and $4 billion in debts. How the hell is a company that's never turned an annual profit worth more than a profitable company with more than 20 times the annual sales and net assets?
You don't understand finance, with fake FR money. Without fake FR money the last several US administrations would have had to turn off the lights in DC and go home.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on April 12, 2017, 10:31:45 AM
That was the whole point of the OP. At it's current price Tesla's stock is now worth more than either Ford or GM. But if you compare the actual companies there is no comparison. Ford and GM are both profitable companies. Tesla is not. Ford and GM's assets dwarf Tesla's. Actual sales numbers aren't even on the same planet.
People are betting heavily that Tesla's model X is going to be a huge success. Unfortunately the model X doesn't even have to fail for Tesla's stock to tank. Just lower than anticipated sales could do it. If that happens a lot of people including me are going to lose money we can't afford to lose. Many of the people paying these astronomical prices for the stock are the fund managers that control our IRA's and 401K's.
Tesla is worth more, because they get unlimited free money from the Feds, just like Amazon, just like the rest of the MIC. Tesla and Amazon are part of the MIC. Ford and GM are not. You can't compete with another company ... if they get free money, and you don't.
Quote from: Hydra009 on April 12, 2017, 11:52:36 AM
True. But investors are looking for future growth, not past/current numbers. Investors see articles like this (http://investorplace.com/2017/01/tsla-stock-tesla-motors-inc-gigafactory/) and probably salivate while reading.
Tesla has one great thing going for it: PR. Tesla's going to change the industry and the world. Ford, not so much. At least, that's the perception.
Financlal arbitrage is, depending on how you invest, you can make money if a company succeeds, or if it fails. Same for countries. The people shorting Germany or the US ... stand to make infinite money. Hence their desire to intervene, to bring about their desired financial result (like the guys who died making winning trades in Tower 2 as Tower 1 was burning).
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on April 12, 2017, 10:31:45 AM
That was the whole point of the OP. At it's current price Tesla's stock is now worth more than either Ford or GM. But if you compare the actual companies there is no comparison. Ford and GM are both profitable companies. Tesla is not. Ford and GM's assets dwarf Tesla's. Actual sales numbers aren't even on the same planet.
People are betting heavily that Tesla's model X is going to be a huge success. Unfortunately the model X doesn't even have to fail for Tesla's stock to tank. Just lower than anticipated sales could do it. If that happens a lot of people including me are going to lose money we can't afford to lose. Many of the people paying these astronomical prices for the stock are the fund managers that control our IRA's and 401K's.
Ford is making updated versions of the same vehicles they made 35 years ago. Tesla is making preliminary versions of the vehicles everyone will be driving 35 years from now.
Quote from: Johan on April 12, 2017, 07:11:28 PM
Ford is making updated versions of the same vehicles they made 35 years ago. Tesla is making preliminary versions of the vehicles everyone will be driving 35 years from now.
How does Tesla survive, at a loss, year by year, for 35 years ... in the hope it will be profitable in the 36th year? Only Uncle Sugar.
Quote from: Johan on April 12, 2017, 07:11:28 PM
Ford is making updated versions of the same vehicles they made 35 years ago. Tesla is making preliminary versions of the vehicles everyone will be driving 35 years from now.
And GM is the world's leader in the development of fuel cells. A technology that is better suited to many of our transportation needs than Tesla's plug in electrics.
Tesla might actually be worth as much as Ford and GM one day, but right now they aren't. Their exaggerated stock price is a symptom of the speculative market many here bitch and moan about. The rich are getting richer on small movements in prices by buying low and selling high at high volumes. They are doing it at our expense too because the fund managers that control our retirement funds buying it from them with our money when prices are high and selling it to them again when prices drop. The corporations they work for don't care either because they are getting their cut no matter what.
Tesla is now in Taiwan. I saw a new dealership and a big promotional event downtown.
I also saw someone driving one in a Hong Kong neighborhood.
Quote from: Atheon on April 12, 2017, 11:13:02 PM
Tesla is now in Taiwan. I saw a new dealership and a big promotional event downtown.
I also saw someone driving one in a Hong Kong neighborhood.
If you saw someone on a horse ... does that mean we are going back to the Middle Ages?
Meanwhile ... please duck. China may invade Taiwan and Korea in the next week.
Quote from: Baruch on April 12, 2017, 10:11:01 PM
How does Tesla survive, at a loss, year by year, for 35 years ... in the hope it will be profitable in the 36th year? Only Uncle Sugar.
From an accounting standpoint, it doesn't make any difference where the data that goes in the black column comes from. It's all profit, and is figured into the business strategy. I doubt that the banks would have gone on their irresponsible bender, if the biggest corporate bailout in history had not already been part of their business model and listed under expected earnings. Everyone likes to portray the bankers as incompetent fools. Maybe they were that dumb, or maybe they were that smart.
All of the mansions now open and on display to tourists in Newport Rhode Island were built by titans that made their wealth from the government. You want to make a lot of money? Deal with the customer that has the deepest pockets. These guys, while crooked as Hell, at least provided products and service to the government. They were not creative enough to think of ways to profit from the government by losing money. It takes a banker for that. Tesla is one the one wearing the white hat.
Quote from: SGOS on April 13, 2017, 07:43:37 AM
From an accounting standpoint, it doesn't make any difference where the data that goes in the black column comes from. It's all profit, and is figured into the business strategy. I doubt that the banks would have gone on their irresponsible bender, if the biggest corporate bailout in history had not already been part of their business model and listed under expected earnings. Everyone likes to portray the bankers as incompetent fools. Maybe they were that dumb, or maybe they were that smart.
All of the mansions now open and on display to tourists in Newport Rhode Island were built by titans that made their wealth from the government. You want to make a lot of money? Deal with the customer that has the deepest pockets. These guys, while crooked as Hell, at least provided products and service to the government. They were not creative enough to think of ways to profit from the government by losing money. It takes a banker for that. Tesla is one the one wearing the white hat.
I have trouble seeing Tesla as bringing in the revenue of Ford. But that's what IBM said before Microsoft... And I'm not shopping for a Ford these days. Actually, I would like to buy a Delorean SUV hybrid, but you can't buy what they don't sell.
(http://cdn.overclock.net/2/2a/900x900px-LL-2a8371f0_Thread_NecroRD.jpeg)
QuoteTesla stock slid 8% on Tuesday following a string of bad news for the electric car maker, including the National Transportation Safety Board's announcement that it's investigating a fatal crash involving a Tesla vehicle last week in California.
...
A bearish analyst note also dragged down the stock. Citi analysts said their research shows Model 3 competition is heating up and could indicate near-term risk for shares, according to CNBC.
John Thompson, CEO of hedge fund Vilas Capital Management, told MarketWatch on Tuesday that Tesla will be bankrupt within four months unless chief executive Elon Musk "pulls a rabbit out of his hat."
"Companies eventually have to make a profit, and I don't ever see that happening here," Thompson, who has a short position on the stock, told the financial news site. "This is one of the worst income statements I've ever seen and between the story and the financials, the financials will win out in this case."
Moody's downgraded Tesla's rating Tuesday and assigned it a negative outlook due to the significant shortfall in the production rate of the Model 3.
http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/27/technology/tesla-stock-down/index.html
I wonder if Tesla tried to do too much too soon with it's driverless car. It's hard enough building an electric concept car and eventually getting it right. But everyone is aware of the driverless concept and already forming philosophical opinions about the idea long before they've ever ridden in one or seen one. This is a big problem for Tesla. No matter how workable and safe driverless cars will be, they will be scrutinized under a microscope with the media salivating to make it into a controversy. This fatality was going to happen eventually, and Tesla is already straining under philosophical prejudice against driverless cars.
Although, it sounds like Musk may have problems beyond the driverless issue. Well of course he does. He's created a new car that people crave, and mass producing millions of the things is a whole different undertaking than building a one-off in a garage for some billionaire. But then Honda started out during my teens building nothing but crappy motorcycles, and from that grew to producing superior cars to the American big three until they became just another car today. But that took 60 years.
Elon Musk is a genius ... like Wile E Coyote. Don't believe market capitalization numbers anyway, that is just finance BS. And yes, the media, as a pack of wild dogs, is fine as long as they are going after something R people believe in, but irresponsible if going after something D people believe in, because everything has to be about politics and the 2018 midterms, and how Putin/England/Iran are masterminding every little thing.
Quote from: SGOS on April 09, 2018, 08:16:28 AM
I wonder if Tesla tried to do too much too soon with it's driverless car. It's hard enough building an electric concept car and eventually getting it right. But everyone is aware of the driverless concept and already forming philosophical opinions about the idea long before they've ever ridden in one or seen one. This is a big problem for Tesla. No matter how workable and safe driverless cars will be, they will be scrutinized under a microscope with the media salivating to make it into a controversy. This fatality was going to happen eventually, and Tesla is already straining under philosophical prejudice against driverless cars.
Although, it sounds like Musk may have problems beyond the driverless issue. Well of course he does. He's created a new car that people crave, and mass producing millions of the things is a whole different undertaking than building a one-off in a garage for some billionaire. But then Honda started out during my teens building nothing but crappy motorcycles, and from that grew to producing superior cars to the American big three until they became just another car today. But that took 60 years.
It's not a driverless car. It's a car with a cruise control feature.
Honda build some of the best motorcycles around today. I've owned three of them and they are some of the best machines I've ever had between my legs.
Quote from: Jason78 on April 09, 2018, 01:16:04 PM
Honda build some of the best motorcycles around today. I've owned three of them and they are some of the best machines I've ever had between my legs.
I would agree, absolutely. I was talking about the original models starting around 1960 and the metamorphosis into Honda products of today. I was suggesting, possibly incorrectly that Tesla would have a similar metamorphous ahead of it. Hondas first venture into the cycle was the Honda 50, which was cheap, but disposable, and many were disposed of, rather quickly too. About 1965, I bought a Honda 250 scrambler, which was fast enough and great fun when it was running, but keeping it running was a constant problem. I hung with 4 other guys who rode our 250 scramblers in a small pack, and we all had problems. Mine was mostly with carburation.
If I were in the market for a bike today, I would Buy a Honda without even looking at anything else. It might be Honda that drove Harley Davidson into bankruptcy at a time when riding was increasing in popularity by leaps and bounds; A time when Harley should have been riding a wave of growth and financial success it had never before experienced.
This is just speculation on my part. But Honda figured out how to make a good bike. Not to say Tesla isn't a good car. It's just too expensive for the masses.
Don't confuse stock value or revenue with company survivablity. Ford is still WAY more important than Telsa. Ford could make a Telsa-style car and just wipe it off the market. Why they don't suggests that the vehicle is not commercially viable. Though I wouldn't mind a surprise. I really am waiting for a very good fuel cell SUV...
Earlier this week, Goldman Sachs issued a statement saying they did not believe Tesla was going to be able to meet their production goals this quarter. If not they say the company will require another round of financing. They urged their investors to sell their Tesla stock predicting a 30% plus decline in the price.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on April 12, 2018, 08:01:07 AM
Earlier this week, Goldman Sachs issued a statement saying they did not believe Tesla was going to be able to meet their production goals this quarter. If not they say the company will require another round of financing. They urged their investors to sell their Tesla stock predicting a 30% plus decline in the price.
I take it this meant an extraordinarily atypically large amount of financing. Hmmm. I've been so rooting for Tesla too. It doesn't have to be Tesla that becomes the gold standard for electric cars, however. That will make no difference to me when the prices come down and the charge stations become plentiful. Still, I hate to see Tesla fail.
Without Tesla leading the way, both in technology and responding to demand. Car manufactures will just keep doing what they are doing. They did this back in the 70s and 80s, when Japan started innovating, possibly with help from their government, and American manufacturers were too arrogant (or too unaware) to keep up. I'll credit Japan for providing the competition that eventually got Ford and Chevy off their butts and started them engineering better vehicles, instead of just adding fins and changing grills.
Competition is one of the cornerstones of free market economies. It's a mistake to kill off the competitors, and I can't think of a better source of competition than Tesla at the moment. Eventually, they will need to make it on their own without financial assistance, of course, just like big three to do it on their own. <cough cough> However, I'm not sure growth and well being should be left to economics, anymore than the buying and selling of politicians should be left to economics.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on April 12, 2018, 08:01:07 AM
Earlier this week, Goldman Sachs issued a statement saying they did not believe Tesla was going to be able to meet their production goals this quarter. If not they say the company will require another round of financing. They urged their investors to sell their Tesla stock predicting a 30% plus decline in the price.
They are just shouting fire in a crowded theater. If you or I did this, we would be arrested. Not so with stock jobbers.
I encourage the Tesla concept. But the first one into a market is not usually the last one standing.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 12, 2018, 11:07:30 PM
I encourage the Tesla concept. But the first one into a market is not usually the last one standing.
It's hard to get it right the first time you build something from scratch, and you invest a lot of money in research and development. It's cheaper to swipe someone else's idea and make improvements. Just ask Bill Gates.
Quote from: SGOS on April 13, 2018, 07:32:39 AM
It's hard to get it right the first time you build something from scratch, and you invest a lot of money in research and development. It's cheaper to swipe someone else's idea and make improvements. Just ask Bill Gates.
Which, I suppose, is why I'm on a Mac...
Quote from: SGOS on April 13, 2018, 07:32:39 AM
It's hard to get it right the first time you build something from scratch, and you invest a lot of money in research and development. It's cheaper to swipe someone else's idea and make improvements. Just ask Bill Gates.
Gutenberg went bankrupt trying to invent modern printing. The guy who bought his equipment at the bankruptcy auction, was the first financially successful printer.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 13, 2018, 07:49:32 AM
Which, I suppose, is why I'm on a Mac...
You paid too much to spite a billionaire?
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on April 14, 2018, 08:19:45 AM
You paid too much to spite a billionaire?
I am using a pad and pen this morning. Cheaper than any of your fancy technology.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on April 14, 2018, 08:19:45 AM
You paid too much to spite a billionaire?
I've been on both platforms and I have one of both. Mac is better. Finder is one of the best things EVER, and Mac gives me total control of organizing and creating folders. Windows fights me about that. And IT wants to control how I organize things. I used to have control of my directory folders on Windows. Now I have to practically beat the software into submission.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 15, 2018, 02:13:42 AM
I've been on both platforms and I have one of both. Mac is better. Finder is one of the best things EVER, and Mac gives me total control of organizing and creating folders. Windows fights me about that. And IT wants to control how I organize things. I used to have control of my directory folders on Windows. Now I have to practically beat the software into submission.
I have both too. I prefer the Mac for home. I have to use Windows at work, but in a highly controlled way (military). Both companies were run by megalomaniacs.
Quote from: Baruch on April 15, 2018, 09:49:08 AM
I have both too. I prefer the Mac for home. I have to use Windows at work, but in a highly controlled way (military). Both companies were run by megalomaniacs.
Who runs the companies is irrelevant. What matters is the usefulness to the user. Everyone I know personally who has tried Mac software is surprised at how much control the user has over the file structure.
On the other hand, Windows Office( Word and Excel) beats Mac Pages and Numbers every way you look at them. So I have a Mac platform but added Windows Office for Mac and get the best of both worlds. Office for Mac isn't totally "Windows Word and Excel " (there are some missing features) but it sure is better overall.
And thank you for a rational post...
Quote from: Cavebear on April 19, 2018, 01:04:22 AM
Who runs the companies is irrelevant. What matters is the usefulness to the user. Everyone I know personally who has tried Mac software is surprised at how much control the user has over the file structure.
On the other hand, Windows Office( Word and Excel) beats Mac Pages and Numbers every way you look at them. So I have a Mac platform but added Windows Office for Mac and get the best of both worlds. Office for Mac isn't totally "Windows Word and Excel " (there are some missing features) but it sure is better overall.
And thank you for a rational post...
Well, computers aren't supernatural ... or are they? Alien technology from 1948 Roswell, if sufficiently advanced, would look like magic, right?
Just loaded latest version of MacOS ... High Sierra. I left Seri turned off. I don't need an invasive help system that can act a Bob from CIA ... keylogger etc.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 15, 2018, 02:13:42 AM
I've been on both platforms and I have one of both. Mac is better. Finder is one of the best things EVER, and Mac gives me total control of organizing and creating folders. Windows fights me about that. And IT wants to control how I organize things. I used to have control of my directory folders on Windows. Now I have to practically beat the software into submission.
At this location we don't let inanimate objects outsmart us.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on April 19, 2018, 12:53:57 PM
At this location we don't let inanimate objects outsmart us.
So what is "This Location"?
Elon's semi truck could be a game changer. If he can get it built. And if its able to hit the projected endurance numbers. And if he's somehow able to get enough shippers and receivers to install change stations on their loading docks.
That's a lot of ifs. But should it come to pass, I know quite a few dinosaur truckers who are going to shit their britches when these electrics leap past them off the line and do it at a fraction of the operating cost.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtOzoqBjTaY
Must automate, to kill all unions, and eventually all employees, yeah!
Quote from: Johan on April 24, 2018, 12:25:59 PM
Elon's semi truck could be a game changer. If he can get it built. And if its able to hit the projected endurance numbers. And if he's somehow able to get enough shippers and receivers to install change stations on their loading docks.
That's a lot of ifs. But should it come to pass, I know quite a few dinosaur truckers who are going to shit their britches when these electrics leap past them off the line and do it at a fraction of the operating cost.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtOzoqBjTaY
Let's just say that driverless trucks will be worse than distracted drivers for a decade. I don't want to be on the road with either.
It is a bad thing to drive your car on the railway tracks. Driverless trucks turn the highways into railways. The endless drive for efficiency, as part of the endless drive for profit ... profits humankind not. This is why multiple trailer trucks are pushing to get even more longer ... only no stinkin' caboose.