Please note: Apparently the Empeg Car player will not start up in any visualization mode. That means that if you want to display the nice graphics, you'll have to configure the unit to do so EACH time you start your car.

I missed this legal ass-covering "feature" discussion elsewhere on the BBS and feel that it greatly reduces the attraction of the Empeg Car. So I'm just posting it more plainly.

Otherwise, I'm quite pleased with the unit.

-Hoagy.

Oh my god. Believe me, there is nothing you can add to this argument that hasn't been said already. Check the FAQ if you haven't already for the very long discussion on it. That and the faceplate choice have been the biggest issues on the board so far, but this in my opinion isn't that big a deal.

From what I read about the procedure to start the visuals, it doesn't sound like that big a frustration to me. Of course, I don't have an empeg. But the navigation system in my car always starts up with a warning and you have to press the OK button before proceeding.

DiGNAN
13653

Just hold the bottom button - this will switch to visuals mode from text-only mode.

It's standard for any unit which displays moving graphics (including sat-nav systems & in-car TV) to require user intervention before they display anything - just in case anyone reaches for their attorney after a crash.

Hugo

* places head between knees Basil-Fawlty-style, and hops around whimpering quietly *

I bet I've used my empeg a thousand times more often than you, and I get frustrated REALLY easily by annoying things, but switching the visuals in (one button press) really isn't a millionth as frustrating as seeing this thread get repeated every month!

Rob

I get really frustrated with people claiming to be easily frustrated by frustrating things who think I shouldn't be frustrated with something that is frustrating me... =)

Try saying that 5 times fast!

DiGNAN
13653

I dunno what the capabilities are on this board, but maybe you should reply with the FAQ url and lock the topic?

* jumping around beeing annoyed Nils-style*

[disclaimer: contents might be hot, persons may appear smaller then they are in real life, and lawyers may rule the world]

[disclaimer2: Writer of this post is not responsible of annoyance that is caused by this post]


:-)


*YES* there still ARE things that need clarification about that matter, even if you (rob) are fed up with reading about this, that still can mean other people are still annoyed about it, i'm sorry :-(


-1- you (empeg) never told us if you asked your lawyers if you could simply add a checkbox in emplode to disable this stupidity not even speaking about giving us a result of this talks ...

-2- I ( and others ) of course complained about this because it is needed for some countries, not for the whole world, again there never came a statement why other nationalities have to suffer from the lacks of sense in laws of *specific* countries. I mean it is simple, add a checkbox in your installer whether you belong to those countries or not. BINGO

-3- And even for citizens of those rigid countries i cannot see the sense in simply changing from full text to full graphics instead of SIMPLY RESTORING THE LAST MODE, for example visuals + info line.


Nils

I'm sorry if this sounds annoyed, but this matter simply annoys me everytime i start my empeg, and i am not alone.Especially as it should be soooo easy for a programmer to at *least* implement -3- don't you agree at least to this ???

As Hugo has said, the fact that it doesn't go back to Visual + Info:Line (it forgets the Info:Line) when you hold the bottom button is a bug. It'll be fixed.



Roger - not necessarily speaking for empeg

other nationalities have to suffer from the lacks of sense in laws of *specific* countries

You actually think there is no sense in these laws?
I for one think it is a good idea. I don't happen to be the type of idiot who stares at flashing objects in his car long enough to rear end the guy in front of him. I happen to be the type of driver who is literally scared of the other morons out there on the road. I don't care which country you live in. If you live in Europe, I've most likely been in your country, and riden in a car with one of your drivers.

In England I rode with a man who worked in the National Theatres. He seemed like a nice enough person, but was a mad man on the road!

In Italy I rode with a guy in the smallest car I've ever seen go speeds the equivalent of 80 miles an hour on tiny roads on the way to the Rome airport. I saw plenty of this in all four countries I was in last summer, and it was the same in Japan when I went two years ago. You CANNOT tell me this is specific only to the countries that have the types of legal issues we're talking about.

Just this morning, as I was driving into Washington D.C. on the way to work, I was driving down a road in the city that was 3 lanes wide and one way. I was in the middle lane when a moron in the right lane suddenly decided he needed to make a left turn at the next street. He did so, but not without scaring the hell out of me and other drivers. This is not uncommon. I see this almost everyday and every time I drive every 10 minutes.

So don't tell me that the legal issues we are talking about don't make sense.

With that said, I agree that there should be an option in emplode, accompanied with warnings and very large pictures of car crashes and death, that allows you to remove this slight inconvenience. But I understand why they would want to keep it there.

Oh, and don't get mad at me for saying this, it's my annoyance.

DiGNAN
13653

It has always been a saying of mine:

"I love driving. I hate drivers."

DiGNAN
13653

Ahh if you see it as a bug, it will be fixed soon, good news, i missed that, i thought it is just #23845853 in the to do list, which would be a shame :-)

Nils

Argh not getting mad at anyone here or at empeg ltd, you got me wrong there ... its the laws & lawyers that get my full attention when it gets to getting angry :-)

And in no way, i wanted to say that the people living under such laws are worse drivers then others, they may become worse drivers in some generations, because of thos politics, but i saw some pretty bad driving here too, trust me ...
( And driving in the US is like riding a sheep, compared too many heart-stopping traffic situations in Europe and Japan, yes i do travel a lot too ... )

And i agree on you stating that there are a lot of idiots out there ( anyone made a fool of himself on numerous occasions, including as a car driver, or is it just me ?? :-) )

But there are 3 ways of dealing with mistakes:

-1- ignore -> not very smart, but saves you lots of trouble.

-2- inverse evolution: reducing overall efficiency with protecting idiots and limiting all persons in many ways.
This GROWS idiots for the next generations, just wait, now they don't know anymore that coffee should be hot, tommorrow they don't know how to breathe ...

-3- educate people, so less mistakes occur in all life situation, difficult, expensive, time consuming, SO LETS DO IT


Nils

P.S. sorry if i cannot bring across my point too clear, wrong language :-)

I understand. I agree with you, the idiots are indeed hard to train.

I have to admit, I was once in a rear-ender. Not entirely my fault, and I wasn't doing anything stupid like reading a newspaper (can you believe people do that?), but I didn't see the sudden backup ahead in a place that there are never backups, and it ended up as one of those situations where I was the last in line to stop too short in a car with bad brakes, and I hit someone. I've never gotten in an accident again, and I hop never will, and I don't do the things that could cause this.

Unfortunately I had to go to traffic school and sit there with the stupidest people in the world who didn't know that red meant stop. Then the guy teaching the course was an idiot. He tried to teach us to go 55(mph) in the left lane. Now, I know this is what is legal and should be done, but I felt like jumping up and saying "But I'll be killed if I do that!"

Anyway, I'm just saying there's lots of idiots out there who can't learn any better. I happen to like those commercials (I think it's for car insurance) with the people who do horrible things in the car. And they're all true!

So don't get too mad at empeg for trying to save their own butts. I wouldn't want to miss out on the great software upgrades they've got in store for us if they had to shut down due to a lawsuit.

DiGNAN
13653

He tried to teach us to go 55(mph) in the left lane. Now, I know this is what is legal and should be done, but I felt like jumping up and saying "But I'll be killed if I do that!"

Actually, it's not legal. You're right, he was an idiot.

The "Slower Traffic Keep Right" law deliberately states that it's regardless of the speed limit. If you're going slower than the other traffic, by law, you have to move over to the right lane. It doesn't matter if they're exceeding the speed limit, you are supposed to stay in the right lane unless you're passing.

This is my number one pet peeve.

___________
Tony Fabris

True, true. But technically, the faster traffic is not going a legal speed. 100 cars don't pass at the same time. In a perfect world, where we treated everyone with kindness and more importantly didn't mind going slowly, boring as it is, we would all go 55 in all lanes. But that is stupid as well.

But I had forgotten about that slower traffic keep right law. Good thing they put that in there, too, because people could get hurt not doing that.

In fact, on the news last year there was a story about an old woman who got a ticket for going 35 on interstate 495. She was in the right lane, but it's still illegal, and I'm suprised she was on that highway for any time at all without being run off. What pissed me off most was that all the newscasters were sympathetic towards the woman. Are you kidding? I wanted to give that cop a medal!

DiGNAN
13653

Well actually, the sign is for the MAXIMUM speed limit. In a perfect world, everyone would be travelling in the right lane at less than 55.

You guys are still implying that the two laws (speed limit and keep right) are somehow related. They're not. They are totally independent, and the keep-right law deliberately makes that clear.

Let's assume for a moment that a cop would ticket you for breaking the "keep right" law. I've never heard of anyone getting busted for this, but just for the sake of argument, let's say a cop wanted to.

If the speed limit were 55, and you were doing 65 in the fast lane, and you didn't pull over for faster traffic, technically, the cop could pull you over and ticket you for both exceeding the speed limit and not yielding the right-of-way to faster traffic. Yes, it sounds crazy and self-contradictory. Which is why I've never seen anyone ticketed for this. But that's the way the laws are worded. And that's the right way to do it.

One of the reasons that this is my pet peeve is because I believe that we'd have fewer traffic jams if the "keep right" law were more strictly enforced. I've seen left-lane slowpokes cause problems that snowball into real traffic jams. Here we are spending millions to add more lanes to our freeways, when simply following the rules of the road would be enough for many areas. My dream project is to do a large-scale software simulation that proves this theory.

___________
Tony Fabris

Well just to put things to Reality, when i drive through Hamburg in the late evening, it is not uncommon that (on a 3 lane motorway with 50 mph -> 80kmh limit ) the right lane is driving 70mph the middle goes 80 mph and the left lane is at 90+ mph ...

whew, so if you drive like a sensible citizen with 50 mph on the right lane, you will get your share of honking and flashlights, i assure you ...

Well, but i am at my girlfriends place some minutes earlier, so i don't complain :-)

Nils

In England, the game plan is that you should stay in the left (bearing in mind that we drive on the other side) lane as much as possible. You're only supposed to move to the next lane should you wish to overtake someone. There (technically) is no slow lane, no fast lane. The point is: you overtake by moving into the next lane.

The only reason for staying in anything other than the left-hand lane is that everyone else is going slower than you. And nobody should be going faster than 70mph anyway *cough*.


Roger - not necessarily speaking for empeg

I thought that in the US, freeways meant that you could overtake slower traffic on either side. In the UK, you're not allowed to overtake on the left.


Roger - not necessarily speaking for empeg

Overtaking on the left tends to get called 'undertaking', which is a service you may require if you do it too often

I seem to recall that you can overtake on the left here only if the vehicle in front has indicated that it is turning right, or if the entire lane of traffic to your right is moving slower, e.g. in a traffic jam, or if the lanes are filtering traffic in different directions. (Although I'm quite prepared to be humiliated and told I'm wrong)

Where did I leave that copy of the Highway Code???

Geoff
---- -------
Got one of the first Mark 2 empegs...

I thought that in the US, freeways meant that you could overtake slower traffic on either side. In the UK, you're not allowed to overtake on the left.

(Temporarily translating the drive-on-the-opposite-side-of-the-road thing back again, and making the point that traffic laws vary from state to state so I can only really speak for California...)

No, that's an incorrect assumption. If you ever go driving in California, if you look closely, you'll see the "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs posted even on 6-lane freeways. So the laws are the same here in the states as they are in England, and they apply to freeways as well as highways.

Many people think as you did, and it's one of the root problems. You'd think people would understand the traffic laws, or at least be able to read the road signs, but they don't.

In England (and all of Europe), as I understand it, it's a common practice to flash your lights at someone in the fast lane to indicate you want them to move over so you can pass. You wouldn't believe how angry U.S. drivers get when you do this. Sometimes there's been room for me to use the slow lane to pass them, and they get pissed and wave me around on the slow side. They don't realize that if I have room to pass them on the right, they have no business being in the left lane at all. By law.

___________
Tony Fabris

Sorry, I've been at work for 14 hours today, and the same for most of the last two weeks. I'm not getting into this thread again, I've said everything I have to offer on the subject. There aren't enough hours in the day to debate this one.

In conclusion, I think we're exceptionally responsive to client requests and suggestions, but just like any manufacturer it's our job to decide the final specification. We think we've approached this issue in a legally responsible way, and we think we've gone to some effort to reach an acceptable compromise. If holding the button is too much effort for you, well, then that's a problem you have to live with (or abandon empeg I guess). If you buy a Clarion, or an Alpine, or other multimedia head unit (almost all of them have a similar "safety feature") I hope you'll be as vocal in complaining to their CTO, head of operations, or chief programmer.

I guarantee this is my last post on this issue!

Rob

I just wish there were more of the "Slower traffic keep right" signs along I-25 here in Colorado. Driving to or from Denver is a pain so many times when people think that because they are going 75, they are fine in the left lane. Even if I'm going 85 in that lane passing people, and I see someone come up on me faster, I'll get to the right when possible. I'd try to stay on the right, but thats near to impossible with all the traffic now. I wouldn't be supprised if it's turned into a 6 lane highway for the entire 60 mile stretch soon.

Even if I'm going 85 in that lane passing people, and I see someone come up on me faster, I'll get to the right when possible.

Me too. But Drakino, we are sadly in the minority.


I wouldn't be supprised if it's turned into a 6 lane highway for the entire 60 mile stretch soon.

The saddest part is that the people of Colorado are going to spend a great deal of money adding those lanes, when simple adherence to the rules (by the same people, might I add) would reduce traffic jams more effectively.


I just wish there were more of the "Slower traffic keep right" signs along I-25 here in Colorado.

Unfortunately, such signs are ignored. Then again, I often ignore the speed limit signs, so I'm one to talk.

___________
Tony Fabris

(Temporarily translating the drive-on-the-opposite-side-of-the-road thing back again, and making the point that traffic laws vary from state to state so I can only really speak for California...)

No, that's an incorrect assumption. If you ever go driving in California, if you look closely, you'll see the "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs posted even on 6-lane freeways. So the laws are the same here in the states as they are in England, and they apply to freeways as well as highways.

Actually, this isn't correct for California, which really surprised me when I discovered it. In California's driver manual (the relevant section of which is accessible here), it explicitly says:

Pass on the right only:

- If an open highway is clearly marked for 2 or more lanes of vehicles moving in your direction of travel.

- If the driver of the other vehicle is making a left turn.

(it goes on to say other wonderful things).

This basically gives California drivers free reign to pass in whatever lane they dang well please (the only place you're required to pass on the left is a road where you have no choice, except if you're silly enough to want to use the shoulder for passing!) - despite the "slower traffic keep right" signs which are, in fact, posted quite frequently on most major freeways. This, I think, is a primary contributor to the terrible traffic I see all the time here in the L.A. metropolitan area.

-----
Daniel M. Zimmerman
Mk.2 #060000058, 36GB, Red
Mk.1 #00101, 10GB, Blue

- If an open highway is clearly marked for 2 or more lanes of vehicles moving in your direction of travel.

Yes, but if you read the actual text of that section of the vehicle code instead of that dumbed-down summary, you will see that they also state:

"The provisions of this section shall not relieve the driver of a slow moving vehicle from the duty to drive as closely as practicable to the right hand edge of the roadway."

The basic rule is that you have to stay to the right all the time unless you're passing. That's the rule stated here in the vehicle code.

The part of the "keep right" code that explicitly states that the speed limit has nothing to do with it is here.

___________
Tony Fabris

(man, there really isn't any good way to automatically quote text while preserving hyperlinks... oh well.)

Yes, but if you read the actual text of that section of the vehicle code instead of that dumbed-down summary, you will see that they also state:

"The provisions of this section shall not relieve the driver of a slow moving vehicle from the duty to drive as closely as practicable to the right hand edge of the roadway."

I completely agree that that's the intent of the law, and I myself respect it as much as practicable given the way everybody else drives; however, the definitions of "slow moving vehicle" and "duty" are sufficiently flaky as to render it pretty much meaningless. And of course, I'd imagine that some 99.44% of California drivers won't have read the vehicle code itself, and will be relying solely on the dumbed-down summary for their knowledge of the rules of the road.

The basic rule is that you have to stay to the right all the time unless you're passing. That's the rule stated here in the vehicle code.

This, I think, might be a misreading on your part... It seems to me to state the "right half of the roadway" - meaning the half where cars are travelling in the same direction as you - rather than any particular lane.

The part of the "keep right" code that explicitly states that the speed limit has nothing to do with it is here.

This section is quite clear. But it doesn't prevent people who are going faster than the "normal speed of traffic" from passing on the right, if they have an opening. Of course, those people are probably breaking speed limit laws anyway; but around here, the only time I ever see people driving the speed limit is during rainstorms (when they should really be driving somewhat slower; in Southern California, nobody except people who learned to drive out-of-state seems to have any idea how to drive in the rain :).

-----
Daniel M. Zimmerman
Mk.2 #060000058, 36GB, Red
Mk.1 #00101, 10GB, Blue

I think 1) the roads need to be engineered better and 2) speed limits should be dynamically controlled based on the flow of traffic. All the speed limit signs should state a minimum speed and a maximum speed in big Led letters that can adjust throughout the day based on flow. The Bay Area has done a lot of good stuff with the metering lights to control flow, and induction sensors all throughout the highway to monitor flow, but the next step is to is to adjust the traffic speed based on this. Then the problems will start to go away...