|
I was trying, and failing, to say 'convenience' in the second para above.
|
|
|
'the right price is what some other poor sap will pay'
The person who pays it is, by definition, happy to pay it. Whether they moan or not, they must be happy to pay that much, so I don't think they are either "poor" or "saps".
V
|
|
|
>>the convneic of not having to remove it from the car each time you stop
Personally I'll pay quite a lot for convneic since I value it, but that aside there is rather more to it than that. I'll admit I doub tif it is really £1,000 pounds mroe of value, but nonetheless it is worth quite a lot. I have a Tom Tom in one car and fitted SatNav in the other which was around the £1,500 mark as I recall.
For the more expensive one;
User interface is a million times better and more flexible.
The additional facilties particularly around manipulation or finding of "places of interest" is so much better
Even if it loses the satellites because it is connected to the car and to a compass, it will keep functioing resonably accurately for quite a long time. Such that its never an issue whereas the Tom Tom can sometimes lose the satellites for quite some time. Enough to be difficult in the centre of London for example.
Its ability to store, file, classify and retreive previous destinations is much better.
The ability to zoom in and out and to have a pictorial representation of the next juntion is far advanced.
Its traffic ability is much more advanced than something which dials into the internet from time to time. Its also free from oeprating costs.
Its much more accurate particularly where POI and other scenery is concerned.
And I could go on; Basically it is a lot better.
And I'm not that much of a "sap" or that easy to con.
|
No FM2R wrote: stuff
It is getting ridiculous though, when the upgrade DVD on a Merc (and presumeably others too) costs more than buying a whole TomTom.
|
The solution seems to be obvious. If you think metallic paint is a ripoff, don't specify it.
--
L\'escargot.
|
I don't know if there's an anti-capitalist tendency on here, but whingeing about prices to be rearing its head a great deal recently.
You DON'T HAVE TO BUY ANYTHING YOU DON'T WANT. If something is more than you'd like to pay, don't buy it, whether it's satellite navigation systems, metallic paint, congestion charge or rail fares. That's the joy of capitalism; there are alternatives to all the above (and ref Sat Nav, whatever happened to maps and common sense? I get lost very rarely armed with this pair of navigation aids).
If an item is so highly priced that no-one thinks it's worth buying it, then one of a number of things will happen. The supplier will stop supplying. The supplier will reduce prices. The supplier will market in such a way that people will perceive more value and pay the price. Competitors will set up to provide a cheaper or higher quality alternative. (There are more options, but that's a flavour)
Nowhere in there does it say that you have to buy anything at a price you're not happy with. Stop bleating.
V
|
...whingeing about prices SEEMS to be rearing...
V
|
Thanks Vin.
It's very tempting to forget that "I won't pay that" isn't the same as "that's too expensive". If the latter is true (in supply and demand terms) then one way or another the price is likely to come down.
|
|
|
A lot of manufacturer-installed SatNavs are rather poor. I have used the BMW and GM ones quite extensively and have tried them in parallel with my TomTom 5 in both the UK, Germany and France.
The GM system is really awful. The routing is much poorer than TomTom and the display and interface are cumbersome. Operating the vertically-located controls on a Vectra is ergonomically very poor. The map presentation is very poor (poor graphics) and the screen is not well positioned.
BMW is a bit better, and I'm now quite an experienced I-Drive user. If you are right-handed in a LHD car its not too bad. The snag with the BMW system is that it tends to throw up 'spurious' directions - e.g. you're coming up to a left-hand turn and it will momentarily tell you to turn right and then tell you to turn left just before the junction (this is on a brand new 2006 car, BTW). Also, I cannot understand why the BMW 'Business' system only shows direction arrows and not a map. I much prefer a map display.
Irrespective of what car I am going to be driving I now always used TTN5. I can set it up at home or in the office, prior to the trip, and set up my itineraries and relevant POI's etc. Also it is reasonably 'future proof' at a sensible price. The only serious worry is that it might get stolen.
|
|
|
|
You DON'T HAVE TO BUY ANYTHING YOU DON'T WANT. If something is more than you'd like to pay, don't buy it, whether it's satellite navigation systems, metallic paint, congestion charge or rail fares. That's the joy of capitalism; there are alternatives to all the above
Accordng to some free market theories, that's what happens, at least in what the economists call a "perfect market". The problem is that the "perfect markets" rarely exists, and many of the markets are a long way from perfect.
Don't like the fact that it costs £170 to travel from Bradford to London by train for a 9am meeting? The alternatives are not good.
Drive: only if you have a car (or spend lottsa money hiring one) . And if you do, you'll have to leave earlier, and arrive in London after 4 hours driving, not the best way to start a day's work.
Fly: that'll cost even more
Bus: there's no bus that'll get you there in time
Travel the night before: not a huge lot cheaper once you've paid for a hotel, and may not be practical.
So, surely the market should provide alternatives? Fine in theory, but in practice it doesn't happen,because the costs of entry into that market are so high.
|
So, surely the market should provide alternatives? Fine in theory, but in practice it doesn't happen,because the costs of entry into that market are so high.
You've listed all the alternatives! And your conclusion is that the train is the most convenient / cost effective!! The only problem is that you still don't like how much it costs.
|
|
|
... So, surely the market should provide alternatives? ..
ah, meetings. waste of time and money.
as for alternatives:
if you must have meetings, do them via video conference. or use your msn (or alternative) messenger, msn videocam or skype whatever if you really want it cheap.
|
|
|
NowWheels said "So, surely the market should provide alternatives?" You've given FOUR! Is that not enough?
You've been a little disingenuous. Free market economics does *not* say there will always be a cheaper way, otherwise everything would end up costing a penny. Clearly ludicrous. Given that you've managed to quote five ways of doing it, I would say:
1. The market has come up with alternatives.
2. It's quite possible that £170 from Bradford to London is a reasonable price, given there are five alternatives in your list (but see point 3 below).
3. Your style is, as usual, to be selective in your facts. Five minutes of research gives:
a. Car hire is not "lottsa money". Hire from Monday evening to Weds morning (lots of time to return) for a Vectra is £72 from 1car1 in Leeds West (I don't know your geography well enough to comment, but they have always been prepared to deliver to me). Add in £50 of fuel and £8 CC and you're at £130. Cheaper. You may choose not to set off at 5am, but you do have the choice.
b. Plane. Leeds Bradford to London. First test date was £108.20 - add in tube, etc. - admittedly, you would need to know the meeting was planned in advance, but why shouldn't you? Cheaper.
c. Bus and overnight stay in Hotel. Coach £18 plus hotel at £70 (One I stay in that is very nice). Cheaper. You might not want to do this, but you have the choice.
Looks to me like the market's done pretty well.
V
|
|
|
|
|
|
A man came to my works today with his knuckles all bruised and cust on his forearms - someone had leaned into his van yesterday to rip out his TomTommy type thing and he'd resorted to some "non-diplomatic means" to get his property back.
Is it worth getting a kicking ? I think not.
mabye another persuader to go the factory fit route.
MTC
|
mabye another persuader to go the factory fit route.
or to close the window and switch on the aircon
|
Here's another good example
My Mondeo LX has the bulbholders for the Ghia model's footwell lighting, but they "disable" it on my poverty spec model by simply not including the bulbs.
|
|
|
or to close the window and switch on the aircon
a few more details for you. it was a Transit van and as the driver walked around the back of the van to the side door, thr thieving toerag scumbag came around to the drivers door, leant in and tried to pull it from the windscreen.
MTC
|
|
|
>>or to close the window and switch on the aircon
Hey NW thats not a very green comment from you. Using aircon uses up more fuel than having a window open. It would also depend whether aircon was fitted (some new cars are still built without aircon).
--
Roger
I read frequently, but only post when I have something useful to say.
|
Transit van - no air con option available due to refrigeration unit taking up the drive from the alternator.
MTC
|
|
|
>>or to close the window and switch on the aircon Hey NW thats not a very green comment from you.
True! I was being facetious, and should included a smiley (or better still, not posted!)
Using aircon uses up more fuel than having a window open.
Not on the mway, it doesn't (or so I'm told), but this don't sound like it happened on the motorway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
