And it's still butt ugly!
A mag is a magazine.....
@mr_dude: Those are the cables for the Toronto transit streetcar/tram.
Take a chill pill dude! Some people take life waaaay too seriously. It doesn't look as though he's high five-ing that hard anyhow. Most people he does it to have a sense of humor about it as well...I see more smiles than I do frowns.
@TampaRon:
Seriously, what?!>?? How the hell are they trying to do something right? Perhaps this has nothing to do with the fact that it is an American product, and more with the fact that Chrysler has its collective head up its you know what. The problem that is affecting the big three was never really the look of their cars, it was the TYPE of cars they were (and still are) producing. In other words, oversized, heavy, relatively boring vehicles that aren't especially innovative. And this is mostly true of Chrysler, which continues down the same path. The least any company can do to increase sales or simply to continue NORMAL operations is restyle/redesign their cars and that is part of what ANY company does anyways!!! So why on earth would anyone pat them on the back or congratulate them for doing what regular companies do??! The point was never for them to design more "sexy" cars, or to make slight adjustments to how things look, but to rethink how they do things and the types of vehicles they need to offer. GM has clearly demonstrated this thought process. --> I.E. Disbanding performance vehicles, axing large SUV's, focusing on intelligent use of resources, producing cars that reflect the situation the planet is in.
So, in other words we aren't criticizing Chrysler because it's an American company...that's just dumb. With that kind of reasoning, you can't criticize anything American because that would be unpatriotic and if you do it's not because there's actually something wrong with the product (I guess American products must all be so perfect) but because there is a desire to be anti-American.
Seriously, what?!>?? How the hell are they trying to do something right? Perhaps this has nothing to do with the fact that it is an American product, and more with the fact that Chrysler has its collective head up its you know what. The problem that is affecting the big three was never really the look of their cars, it was the TYPE of cars they were (and still are) producing. In other words, oversized, heavy, relatively boring vehicles that aren't especially innovative. And this is mostly true of Chrysler, which continues down the same path. The least any company can do to increase sales or simply to continue NORMAL operations is restyle/redesign their cars and that is part of what ANY company does anyways!!! So why on earth would anyone pat them on the back or congratulate them for doing what regular companies do??! The point was never for them to design more "sexy" cars, or to make slight adjustments to how things look, but to rethink how they do things and the types of vehicles they need to offer. GM has clearly demonstrated this thought process. --> I.E. Disbanding performance vehicles, axing large SUV's, focusing on intelligent use of resources, producing cars that reflect the situation the planet is in.
So, in other words we aren't criticizing Chrysler because it's an American company...that's just dumb. With that kind of reasoning, you can't criticize anything American because that would be unpatriotic and if you do it's not because there's actually something wrong with the product (I guess American products must all be so perfect) but because there is a desire to be anti-American.
@Mad_Science:
Actually no, Cerberus is NOT Canadian, it is indeed an American company!
Actually no, Cerberus is NOT Canadian, it is indeed an American company!
Bland, boring, ugly, a rectangular prism with wheels and lights, unimaginative, uninspiring, un-revolutionary....
well actually horrible, unfit to exist and so deserving of failure and bankruptcy. How does Chrysler think these vehicles demonstrate any kind of advancement or improvement, or make the case for getting more money? Can't someone disconnect the life support already?
well actually horrible, unfit to exist and so deserving of failure and bankruptcy. How does Chrysler think these vehicles demonstrate any kind of advancement or improvement, or make the case for getting more money? Can't someone disconnect the life support already?
Man oh man, chrysler won't you PLEASE just FAIL already. You SUCK....SUCK SUCK SUCK!!!
F ucking
O ver
R emaining
D evotees
O ver
R emaining
D evotees
@racerx: Most of these pics are taken in the Bathurst and Davenport area stretching out to St. Clair and Dufferin, like someone else mentioned. They're probably not more than 4 or 5 miles apart (at most).
Anyhow, it was definitely exciting to come across the Aston, and there were quite a few other surprises along the way considering I photographed more cars than are pictured here. I'll have to send in the others some time. Too bad the car season is slowly winding down.
Anyhow, it was definitely exciting to come across the Aston, and there were quite a few other surprises along the way considering I photographed more cars than are pictured here. I'll have to send in the others some time. Too bad the car season is slowly winding down.
F'n sick, and not in a good way. Tired of those silly childish scallops/ripples. Grow up Mazda designers, you're not 10 anymore...
Yikes, I think American cars have been some of the most pretentious cars on the planet! And this since the 50's when they were at the height of pretentiousness!
Lets understand what that means for American cars -> styling that tries to make the car appear better than it is, and attempts to distract the owner/buyer into thinking it's a good car despite its horrible engineering and build quality. Styling has always been a way for the American manufacturer to continue to sell horrible cars, which is why we were seeing yearly styling changes at one point in time.
Most people would call a BMW a pretentious car. Wrong, the owner of a BMW is most likely pretentious, but the car is simply well designed, well engineered and high quality (for the most part) which makes it expensive...enter a rich/pretentious buyer who wants to show his wealth by buying an "exceptional" and reputable product (although many buy them because they're truly great driving cars).
American manufacturers have been too wrapped up in styling their cars (albeit poorly) to spend time engineering them properly or building them well. Now they're trying to change, but this is all too little too late.
Lets understand what that means for American cars -> styling that tries to make the car appear better than it is, and attempts to distract the owner/buyer into thinking it's a good car despite its horrible engineering and build quality. Styling has always been a way for the American manufacturer to continue to sell horrible cars, which is why we were seeing yearly styling changes at one point in time.
Most people would call a BMW a pretentious car. Wrong, the owner of a BMW is most likely pretentious, but the car is simply well designed, well engineered and high quality (for the most part) which makes it expensive...enter a rich/pretentious buyer who wants to show his wealth by buying an "exceptional" and reputable product (although many buy them because they're truly great driving cars).
American manufacturers have been too wrapped up in styling their cars (albeit poorly) to spend time engineering them properly or building them well. Now they're trying to change, but this is all too little too late.
Well, I guess I'm probably not adding anything new here that hasn't already been said, but the problem is pretty simple.
Below par quality, design and innovation (when stacked up against the foreign competition) and it has been this way for decades. American manufacturers do trucks and pick ups well, but since people don't want them anymore and there are really no good small American car alternatives then people are going to stop buying domestic.
American manufacturers have been far too complacent, ignorant and and unwilling to change (STUBBORN!) for far too long. I for one have believe the big three are getting exactly what they deserve. Pensions and unions wouldn't be much of a problem if the product they were selling was truly good and worthy of competing against foreign products.
Below par quality, design and innovation (when stacked up against the foreign competition) and it has been this way for decades. American manufacturers do trucks and pick ups well, but since people don't want them anymore and there are really no good small American car alternatives then people are going to stop buying domestic.
American manufacturers have been far too complacent, ignorant and and unwilling to change (STUBBORN!) for far too long. I for one have believe the big three are getting exactly what they deserve. Pensions and unions wouldn't be much of a problem if the product they were selling was truly good and worthy of competing against foreign products.
In any case, should the question not be "do you like it?" as opposed to "what does it resemble?". I think it looks great for the type of car that it is, and the market it's going after. I can see this car being very successful for Kia, and I would certainly not feel embarrassed driving one.
@abgwin: Well said! That's exactly what I was thinking.
It just seems easy to pick on the little guy, which is Kia in this case. But that should be the point, this is a Kia we're talking about and it is indeed light years ahead of where it was not that long ago. In any case, it's easy to say that this copied from other cars, but in fact most if not all cars bear a resemblance to one another...this isn't a shocking revelation...think about it people, that's how design works for the most part! It's not like every manufacturer does something completely new for every new model. They simply tweak shapes and lines progressively, following the direction of their competitors in order to compete against them. Trend setters are few and far in between.
Where does the 8th person sit?
@sashazur:
Design= Form follows function. The colors are obviously chosen to appeal to the eye. Cars would be ugly if looks didn't matter, so not sure what point you're making? Looks, beyond function, are what differentiate products in the same category. This is basic marketing and design, and there's no reason Dyson wouldn't consider these aspects. However, I stress that the form, in this case, is following the function!
@jpech:
Ouch, arguing with you is "utterly" useless. I guess vacuums are not really necessary items, just like cars. After all, you can walk somewhere or run somewhere or bike somewhere. Ha ha ha. I guess I should pick up all the dust particles, cat hair, and all the other things that end up on the floor by hand. Actually the only possibly thing that can get on the floor is chips, but you should pick them up and eat them right away! Man, the world would be a clean place if we all picked up our fallen chips. I guess you lick your carpets clean? Right, anyhow, you must have the intelligence of a 5 year old who doesn't understand the concept of new and better products!
FYI, I am an industrial designer (specializing in automotive) and I know a HECK of a lot more about marketing, design and manufacturing than you! I don't own a Dyson, but if I had to buy a non central vac I would likely buy one for many reasons. By the way, what are you going on about if not about Dyson vacuums? Am I talking to myself?
Ouch, arguing with you is "utterly" useless. I guess vacuums are not really necessary items, just like cars. After all, you can walk somewhere or run somewhere or bike somewhere. Ha ha ha. I guess I should pick up all the dust particles, cat hair, and all the other things that end up on the floor by hand. Actually the only possibly thing that can get on the floor is chips, but you should pick them up and eat them right away! Man, the world would be a clean place if we all picked up our fallen chips. I guess you lick your carpets clean? Right, anyhow, you must have the intelligence of a 5 year old who doesn't understand the concept of new and better products!
FYI, I am an industrial designer (specializing in automotive) and I know a HECK of a lot more about marketing, design and manufacturing than you! I don't own a Dyson, but if I had to buy a non central vac I would likely buy one for many reasons. By the way, what are you going on about if not about Dyson vacuums? Am I talking to myself?
@layabout:
Actually, I just checked it out and it's a 2 year warranty. Funny how some people think that because you defend a product or company you must have some connection to it? Childish. If I insulted your favorite car company, lets say GM for example, and you defended it would that mean you work for them or something? Secondly, I don't think you really know Dyson's story, because you must be kidding about him dumping on people who got him there. That's simply laughable! Secondly, considering how much debt he went into to find some way of realizing his dream, and that it only makes smart business sense, of course he's going to send production overseas. Business is business, unfortunately.
Actually, I just checked it out and it's a 2 year warranty. Funny how some people think that because you defend a product or company you must have some connection to it? Childish. If I insulted your favorite car company, lets say GM for example, and you defended it would that mean you work for them or something? Secondly, I don't think you really know Dyson's story, because you must be kidding about him dumping on people who got him there. That's simply laughable! Secondly, considering how much debt he went into to find some way of realizing his dream, and that it only makes smart business sense, of course he's going to send production overseas. Business is business, unfortunately.
@rlj676:
Well, I guess you can call me a bit of a fanboy. I just appreciate good design being as that I'm in the same field as he is. I've been well acquainted with James Dyson's history as a designer, especially relating to his vacuum. The reason he comes off that way is that's his way to stick it to all the other vacuum manufacturers he's dealt with (100's), and when you learn what he had to go through and the amount of money/time (hundreds of thousands of dollars of his own money, many many years, and 1000 prototypes later) he personally invested in his idea then you really get it. Anyhow, I personally don't think he comes off arrogant, but rather confident in his product and considering his success and the quality of his product there's no reason for him to be any different. If you made some of the best vaccums in the world or any other product in the top of its "class" wouldn't you be confident in your product?
Well, I guess you can call me a bit of a fanboy. I just appreciate good design being as that I'm in the same field as he is. I've been well acquainted with James Dyson's history as a designer, especially relating to his vacuum. The reason he comes off that way is that's his way to stick it to all the other vacuum manufacturers he's dealt with (100's), and when you learn what he had to go through and the amount of money/time (hundreds of thousands of dollars of his own money, many many years, and 1000 prototypes later) he personally invested in his idea then you really get it. Anyhow, I personally don't think he comes off arrogant, but rather confident in his product and considering his success and the quality of his product there's no reason for him to be any different. If you made some of the best vaccums in the world or any other product in the top of its "class" wouldn't you be confident in your product?
