antonywilliams.com

It's official, I've ditched Debian (and Ubuntu) completely. All my computers are now running Arch Linux.


Why did I switch?
It's more stable, faster, updated more frequently and more customisable.
Let me explain some of the main differences.

First off, Arch is intended to be simple. Not simple meaning easy, but simple meaning clean.
In Ubuntu, a fresh install leaves you with video drivers for intel, nvidia, ati (the OSS variants) etc...
With wireless drivers for broadcom, intel, atheros etc..
Additional to webcam drivers, scanners, printers etc..



But, I happen to know what video card I have, the wireless card I have, the printer I have, and don't need a stupid scanner. So, why have all these unnecessary modules and daemons loaded up. They're only using up resources (yes, I know, memory is cheap, but there are other side effects).


In Arch Linux, after installing (in which you choose which modules and daemons are loaded on boot), you're given a blank terminal screen. You log in as root, and have to create a user with adduser, install Xorg, gnome, firefox, openoffice.org etc.. (
Basically, you have to choose everything. It's not that hard though, As installing 'gnome' and 'gnome-extra' will include all the basic stuff like epiphany, gedit, the gnome games etc.. You don't have to individually install every little package.

This brings me to the package manager. I've long said that APT (the package manager of Debian and its derivatives) is fantastic. I've always wondered how people manage with the awfully slow yast and RPM junk. OpenSuse and Fedora are so slow by comparison. I still stand by this, but there's now something even more fantastic than APT. It's called Pacman. It works very similarly to apt-get in debian, but it's actually faster!
I'll compare doing a complete system update with Pacman vs APT

sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade
vs
sudo pacman -Syu
The 'S' is to sync, the 'y' is to update repositories, and the 'u' is to upgrade the system with the newly sync'd repositories.
So, to install firefox, you'd just type
sudo pacman -S firefox

So, it's pretty easy to switch over. If you fiddle about a bit, you can also make bash-completion work. There is no GUI available for Pacman by default (there are unofficial programs that do it) but this doesn't matter, as learning a few terminal commands is really pretty easy.
Another thing I like is the simplicity of the repositories. They have the following:

Core: all the core stuff to getting a system working, like the Kernel, and a few other basics.
Extra: extra stuff like firefox, openoffice.org etc..
Community: with stuff done by the community (obviously not officially supported)

Then there are some testing and unstable repo's if you're so inclined. (and you can also easily make you own repository).
Pacman is designed to be simple, so it uses wget libdownload to download files (which is nice, as this gives a nice progress bar while downloading), but, it is modular, so you can change it to use a download manager (such as wget or aria2 etc..) that will thread the downloading across different mirrors.
It just seems genius to reuse as much freely available code as possible. Why rewrite your own downloading program to update repositories when extremely stable download managers already exist. Since Pacman uses the system available libdownload, this means that if the libdownload devs provide an update, it directly helps improve Pacman (who doesn't like free bug fixes!)

By minimising unneeded modules and Daemons I'm able to boot Arch Linux in about 17 seconds. Isn't that amazing? That's about half of what ubuntu used to take. (Don't even get me started on vista, which I've seen take 2 mins to boot up, and just as much to shutdown).

But, The main reason I switched was for an entirely different reason.
Arch Linux uses a "rolling release" system, with new packages provided daily.
This means that there are no deadlines. When a new package gets released, it is compiled by a dev, put in the testing repo, and if no problems are found, moved to a stable repo within a few days (the amount of days it's in the testing repo depends on how 'risky' it is. i.e. cups would go straight through, but grub, or a kernel would likely take longer).

So, what's the beauty of this? Well, Most (almost all) stable linux distros do a regular release every 6-12 months, with no updates in between (except bug fixing and security fixes). That means you'll get updated from firefox 2.0.14 to firefox 2.0.15, and 2.0.16 etc.., but they'll never give you a new version like firefox 3. To do this, they set a deadline (or freeze, as they call it) which means, they'll accept updates until a certain day (usually ranging from a few weeks, to a little more (again, depending on the risk). So, if Ubuntu wants to release 8.10 at the end of October 2008, they'll include whatever package is the latest as of a couple of months before (dates for that can be found here. This was always really, really annoying for me. To know that you aren't going to get any updates for 6 whole months. Even if there's a new program that has tons of amazing new features.
In particular, I'll be watching OpenOffice 3's release. It's going to be good. Very good. The problem is that they're planning on releasing it in Sept of this year. Just 7 weeks before Ubuntu 8.10. If everything goes according to plan, it'll make the 'freeze' but, if it gets delayed by a month, Ubuntu users will essentially have to wait 7 months till Ubuntu 9.04 comes out to use it.
Annoying? YES!

So, with Arch Linux, I'll probably get OpenOffice 3 a few days after it's released (whenever that is).

This isn't a big deal for some stuff, but, for apps that get updated quite frequently, like pidgin, 6 or 7 months can be upto 4 releases out of date.
Additional to that, there are some things that really NEED to be updated. For example, in the case of pidgin, it is an unofficial IM client for Google Talk, Yahoo, MSN, ICQ etc..
Sometimes some of those protocols change (like it did recently with both yahoo and ICQ) This means that pidgin has to change a few things, and release an update, or you'll no longer be able to sign in. Since generally this update would violate the 'freeze,' those updates aren't included until the distros next release, making the program pretty useless.

Yes, Arch is a little tricky to get right, but there is some AMAZING documentation available, that walk you through, step-by-step, what you should do, and (more importantly) why you should do it a certain way.
There are beginner's guides, more advanced guides, and really specific info on configuring printers, graphics cards, wireless, sound etc..

What's the last bit of great news?
You'll never need to reinstall again. You just have to run 'sudo pacman -Syu' every now and then, and you'll automatically be updated to the latest version. It only takes a couple of hours to get everything up, and then you'll never need to do it again.


(for the observant among you, I'm an alpha tester for the dropbox linux client.)

Highly recommended!
As a word of caution, I'd recommend that people consider using Arch only after they've used a more user friendly distro for a while (preferably a year or more). Sure, the wiki is good enough that a n00b could plod along through it, but most of the benefits of Arch would not be apparent to them anyway.

Oh, as a side-note, Arch always (I believe) packages stuff with no (or minimal) patches. This means you get the official gnome release, without the changed logo's, and without anything else changed. (just the mandatory included wallpapers). The benefit of this? There's less chance to screw something up. Ubuntu and Debian devs have made a few disastrous mistakes by making changes to the source code (the obvious openssl problem). I mean, seriously, the developer of the app knows his own app better than some random ubuntu dev.

p.s Just as I finished writing this, I noticed Linus released 2.6.26! Thanks to arch, I'll be using that pretty soon :)

I was looking at some of the recent improvements in Google Maps today.
They recently enabled lots of the features previously only available in Google Earth now available through the website.
I specifically wanted to see the new traffic feature. It's supposed to show real time traffic and show accidents, closed roads etc..
There wasn't a while lot to see in Provo, so I typed in a cali zip code (90210) and to my surprise, check out how many accidents are in such a small radius



At several spots there are 5 accidents within a 5 mile radius.
Ridiculous!

[EDIT] as a disclaimer, when I used the words "It's official" I didn't mean it was some official fact :)

You must have seen the original Jawbone around:


It was the first bluetooth headset that really tried to look cool, instead of some E.T. device on your ear. Unfortunately, it was a little big, and very expensive ($129). It was also only bluetooth v1.2 (but so was everything back then).
So, Aliph went back and added bluetooth v2.0 and made it smaller (at the unfortunately expense of decreased battery life). They also made it more comfortable, whilst maintaining the high $129 price.

The only downside from the hardware side is the STUPID idea to use a proprietary charger.
Unlike every other gadget you have (obviously excluding Apple and they over proprietary-ness) most devices now connect to your computer, and get charged through USB, or a derivative. This means, I could share my phone charger with my headset charger. What a novel concept. Does Aliph really think I want to carry around 5 separate chargers with me?
Still, this might not be a huge deal to some people.
Since my job pays for my phone expenses, I figured there was no reason for the price tag to put me off.
So, time for a review:
The improved noise cancellation technology dubbed 'Noise Assassin' is very impressive. I walked outside, and stood next to sprinklers, and the person on the other end couldn't tell. Impressive right? You'd think that would be the most important part of a headset right?
Well, technically, yes, but only if the rest of the stuff is at least up to par.
The problem? It's somewhat surprising, but I couldn't really hear them!
The speaker on the Jawbone is downright awful (and trust me, I've not got it configured incorrectly, and I know how to turn up the volume). The Jawbone's interface of just two buttons is stupid, and causes it not to have its own volume interface. Increasing the volume on the Jawbone only increases the volume on your phone (volume is shared). Even the max volume setting required me to be in a silent environment. So, lets get this straight Aliph:
You have amazing noise elimination technology so that they can here me in a thunderstorm, but, I can't hear them if I have the AC on in my car.
one word: Ridiculous.
It really would be like designing a car with a 500bhp V10 engine only to put a speed limiter on it for 50Mph. What's the point Aliph?
No, seriously, I'd really like to know. It's a wonder how things like this manage to get through testing, and QA.

It's official, Bill Gates is now retiring. The new Microsoft Head Honcho is Steve Ballmer.
This is a sad, sad day.
Being a linux user, I frequently have been annoyed at how an inferior OS (such as Windows) has the larger majority of users, and, accordingly, support from developers.
The reason is really quite simple. They became the most popular, so accordingly, they're still the most popular. It's really a lot like the iPod. Apple started out in the lead, and have maintained. It's one thing to become #1 in an area that previously didn't exist (like the iPod), but it's much, much harder to overtake #1 guy when the business has been around for a while.
It's for this reason that Apple hasn't overtaken Microsoft in the Computer market. The same reason nothing can touch the iPod, and the same reason Google wants to get Android off before anyone claims the vast majority (right now, there is RIM, or blackberry, Windows Mobile, Symbian, Apple etc..) of smartphone users

To maintain the #1 spot isn't usually too hard. In the case of microsoft, you merely need to release a mediocre product. After all, unless the difference between products is HUGE, people aren't going to want to go through the hassle of relearning something, or losing compatibility with certain stuff.

Imagine Windows without Office.
Imagine the iPod without iTunes.
If someone has all their documents in a format that can only be opened in Windows, they're unlikely to change.
If someone has a huge library that's organised, tagged, and rated in iTunes, they're unlikely going to want to get a non-Apple branded MP3 player.

Anyway, back to Bill Gates. I like him. unlike Steve Ballmer (and Steve Jobs) he's a humble guy. He's willing to accept criticism, and aware that competing products are good. Steve Ballmer things everything buy Vista sucks. I'm not sure whether I believe that he's really sold, or just putting up a front. As for Steve Jobs..... He thinks he's God.

As a tribute to Bill Gates I'd like to post an email sent by him to the Vista Release manager, Jim Allchin.

---- Original Message ----

From: Bill Gates
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 10:05 AM
To: Jim Allchin
Cc: Chris Jones (WINDOWS); Bharat Shah (NT); Joe Peterson; Will Poole; Brian Valentine; Anoop Gupta (RESEARCH)
Subject: Windows Usability Systematic degradation flame

I am quite disappointed at how Windows Usability has been going backwards and the program management groups don't drive usability issues.

Let me give you my experience from yesterday.

I decided to download (Moviemaker) and buy the Digital Plus pack ... so I went to Microsoft.com. They have a download place so I went there.

The first 5 times I used the site it timed out while trying to bring up the download page. Then after an 8 second delay I got it to come up.

This site is so slow it is unusable.

It wasn't in the top 5 so I expanded the other 45.

These 45 names are totally confusing. These names make stuff like: C:\Documents and Settings\billg\My Documents\My Pictures seem clear.

They are not filtered by the system ... and so many of the things are strange.

I tried scoping to Media stuff. Still no moviemaker. I typed in movie. Nothing. I typed in movie maker. Nothing.

So I gave up and sent mail to Amir saying - where is this Moviemaker download? Does it exist?

So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated.

They told me to go to the main page search button and type movie maker (not moviemaker!).

I tried that. The site was pathetically slow but after 6 seconds of waiting up it came.

I thought for sure now I would see a button to just go do the download.

In fact it is more like a puzzle that you get to solve. It told me to go to Windows Update and do a bunch of incantations.

This struck me as completely odd. Why should I have to go somewhere else and do a scan to download moviemaker?

So I went to Windows update. Windows Update decides I need to download a bunch of controls. (Not) just once but multiple times where I get to see weird dialog boxes.

Doesn't Windows update know some key to talk to Windows?

Then I did the scan. This took quite some time and I was told it was critical for me to download 17megs of stuff.

This is after I was told we were doing delta patches to things but instead just to get 6 things that are labeled in the SCARIEST possible way I had to download 17meg.

So I did the download. That part was fast. Then it wanted to do an install. This took 6 minutes and the machine was so slow I couldn't use it for anything else during this time.

What the heck is going on during those 6 minutes? That is crazy. This is after the download was finished.

Then it told me to reboot my machine. Why should I do that? I reboot every night -- why should I reboot at that time?

So I did the reboot because it INSISTED on it. Of course that meant completely getting rid of all my Outlook state.

So I got back up and running and went to Windows Update again. I forgot why I was in Windows Update at all since all I wanted was to get Moviemaker.

So I went back to Microsoft.com and looked at the instructions. I have to click on a folder called WindowsXP. Why should I do that? Windows Update knows I am on Windows XP.

What does it mean to have to click on that folder? So I get a bunch of confusing stuff but sure enough one of them is Moviemaker.

So I do the download. The download is fast but the Install takes many minutes. Amazing how slow this thing is.

At some point I get told I need to go get Windows Media Series 9 to download.

So I decide I will go do that. This time I get dialogs saying things like "Open" or "Save". No guidance in the instructions which to do. I have no clue which to do.

The download is fast and the install takes 7 minutes for this thing.

So now I think I am going to have Moviemaker. I go to my add/remove programs place to make sure it is there.

It is not there.

What is there? The following garbage is there. Microsoft Autoupdate Exclusive test package, Microsoft Autoupdate Reboot test package, Microsoft Autoupdate testpackage1. Microsoft AUtoupdate testpackage2, Microsoft Autoupdate Test package3.

Someone decided to trash the one part of Windows that was usable? The file system is no longer usable. The registry is not usable. This program listing was one sane place but now it is all crapped up.

But that is just the start of the crap. Later I have listed things like Windows XP Hotfix see Q329048 for more information. What is Q329048? Why are these series of patches listed here? Some of the patches just things like Q810655 instead of saying see Q329048 for more information.

What an absolute mess.

Moviemaker is just not there at all.

So I give up on Moviemaker and decide to download the Digital Plus Package.

I get told I need to go enter a bunch of information about myself.

I enter it all in and because it decides I have mistyped something I have to try again. Of course it has cleared out most of what I typed.

I try (typing) the right stuff in 5 times and it just keeps clearing things out for me to type them in again.

So after more than an hour of craziness and making my programs list garbage and being scared and seeing that Microsoft.com is a terrible website I haven't run Moviemaker and I haven't got the plus package.

The lack of attention to usability represented by these experiences blows my mind. I thought we had reached a low with Windows Network places or the messages I get when I try to use 802.11. (don't you just love that root certificate message?)

When I really get to use the stuff I am sure I will have more feedback.

I'm sure you've all heard somewhere that the average toilet seat is cleaner than the average keyboard. Why do you think it is? It should be obvious really. Keyboards never get cleaned.
I'd actually recommend doing it at least every few months.
Yesterday, I was drinking soy milk at me computer, and somehow a large amount of it ended up all over my keyboard. (And I'm usually so clean & tidy!)

No worries, there's an easy solution.
Just pull the keyboard apart, like this:

you can actually still type on this part, providing you touch type :)

and put this part through the dishwasher (with no soap, and non-heated dry)


If you don't have a water softener, the keys might be a bit stiff when you connect it all back together (be sure to only put plastic parts in the dishwasher; circuitry and water don't mix well.)

After 34 months in development, Firefox 3 has been released today!
I've previously talked a little about web standards here

There are several reasons you should actually pick your web browser (i.e., not just use the system default Internet Exploder)
What are they?

1. Does it correctly render websites?
2. Is it secure?
3. Is it stable?
4. Is it efficient? (low memory usage, fast rendering of Javascript etc..)
5. Is it extensible? (through plugins/extensions)

For that entire list, Firefox 3 is a huge increase over Firefox 2 (and obviously Internet Exploder.)
I won't go into too many details, as there are plenty of other sites that have talked about the improvements. But, the main ones are much better memory usage (it won't use up tons of RAM if you have a bunch of tabs open). It has a much better (SQLite) Bookmark system. The theme automatically matches your OS theme.

I've been using Firefox 3 as my default browser since about Alpha 8, which was over 8 months ago. That's the best part about this browser. You can be guaranteed it's really stable. It's been throuh 8 alphas, 5 betas, and 3 release candidates. They're not throwing out untested rubbish Micro$oft style.

If for some reason you don't like Firefox, i recomend you check out the recently released Opera 9.5. It's also very good, and far better than IE7.

What are you waiting for, click the fox to download it!

First, I'll make my stance on the phone, and then I'll get into details.
The iPhone, is currently (by far) the best mobile phone available.

All attempts made by HTC, Sony Ericsson, Samsung etc... using Windows Mobile are a pathetic attempt at competing. BlackBerry's are closer, but also need an overhaul really soon to maintain their business users.
And, last of all, Palm. I'll never know how a company went from complete market dominance, to worthless in just a few short years. Basically, some idiot VP at Palm decided that the Palm OS was already perfect, and didn't need to be improved, or substantially changed (much the way Steve Ballmer talks about Vista). Seriously, did you know that the Palm OS still can't properly multi task ?? Even Palm has given up on itself, offering hardware that runs Windows Mobile. Funny thing is, the CEO still talks trash, claiming they are "working on something." Trust me, they're dead. Their only hope is getting out a Linux based OS soon, or embracing Android.
Blackberry's first attempt at going touch screen could also be risky. Here's a pic of their upcoming Thunder phone:
It may well be a decent phone, but remember, since BB is behind, and is only really making this phone to lure people in away from the iPhone Also remember, you'll be using a rev 1 BB product, vs a rev 2 Apple product. Likely, there will be issues with their first attempt at a touchscreen phone.



This is the problem I have with everyone (except Google) that tries to compete with Apple and the iPod/iPhone:

They always (stupidly) compete with the current model Apple is shipping. So, they end up matching Apple (sort of), until 3 weeks later, when Apple (who actually thinks ahead) releases something much better. You have to partly feel sorry for the company releasing the 'iPhone killer' who, (I'm thinking of you, Sprint, with the Samsung Instinct) thinks a re-hash with an iPhone look is enough.


Basically, Apple started creating a Phone from scratch (though obviously they used a lot of OS X). The benefit of this? There are no ridiculous ideas there. Like stuff that used to be cool years ago, but now isn't. No stupid stylus. No stupid decisions that were made due to lack of hardware years ago. Basically I'm talking about Windows Mobile. It's a joke. Windows Mobile 6 doesn't even have threaded messages. People had to use hacked programs to do it.
Microsoft actually, due to the iPhone, delayed Windows Mobile 7 (yet again) to release WM 6.1 (with basically no new features except threaded messages)

For those who don't know the history of WM (Windows Mobile), it's based on Windows CE (for embedded systems, or, 'light' systems, like phones)
WM5 was unsurprisingly based on Windows CE 5. WM 6 was, obviously, supposed to be based in WinCE6 (which was supposed to include a vastly improved kernel). But, what did Microsoft end up doing? They decided that they'd re-release WM5 with a different background (and more memory leaks) and title it WM6. This would have probably been fine, as there were few other options as far as 'smartphones' go. The problem? Apple released the iPhone, which absolutely trounced on Windows Mobile. The bigger problem? Microsoft had been sitting on its bum, and it will take them until mid 2009 to release WM7. Guess what the biggest problem of all is? Well, not only has Apple had a superior product for 2 years, but Microsoft, in all its arrogance, is probably targeting the original iPhone OS with WM7. I bet they release WM7, and arrogantly proclaim it's better than the iPhone. Obviously, Apple won't be sitting still, and will have the iPhone 3 by then, which will just maintain its lead.

Sure, it looks pretty good, but it's over a year away. By then, I doubt anyone will care.

Why is it that so many companies do this. Microsoft did it with the Zune. Sandisk did it with their MP3 line. They target the current iPod, and never seem to look forward. Instead they try to match Apple.
If you're the one copying, you'll always be one step behind.

This isn't actually what I was planning on writing about. I just wanted to make it clear that the iPhone is truly fantastic.

My problem doesn't lie so much with the iPhone, as it does with Apple. They create some fantastic products, but why on earth do they have to by so arrogant?
Also, why do they have to lie?
Why do people just believe their lies?

To put in focus. Steve jobs at the recent Developer's Conference stated that he wanted to lower the price of the iPhone so that everyone could buy it. He announced that the 8GB iPhone would be $199. This seems fantastic right? But is it really a reduced price?


NO
NO
NO
Steve is lying to you! Don't believe him.
AT&T is increasing the price of the minimun rate plan.
Now, it's:
$40 for 450 minutes
$30 for unlimited data (vs $20, with an included 200 texts), now with no included texts


Honestly, no matter how good the iPhone is, it's not worth $1000/year.

The funniest part is, people are stupid. People will jump at the 'now discounted' iPhone, and unknowingly pay more. I feel sad for those people.

Luckily for me, I won't be paying those rip off prices, unless of course Android ends up sucking, which somehow I doubt.
Android is Google's answer to the iPhone. It's going to be brilliant. The only potential downside, is that they're not in charge of making any hardware. They're giving the OS away for free, so Handset makers can include it on any device they like, for free. This is good, as it will enable a large number of different Android devices to come to market. All at different price points, different sizes etc..
I'm a little worried that they won't have the hardware to match Apple. My best bet is the HTC Dream (likely the first Android phone to get released).


The reason Android will be a success is the same reason the iPhone is a success. They built it from scratch with a modern view of how a phone should work. It's looking like Android phones may not get to market until late this year. Rest assured I'll get one the second they're available for Sprint.
Here's the phone Google has been using to Demo around. It's likely that this is a prototype of the HTC Dream, though no one knows for sure.


The moral of the story?
Thank goodness Apple and Google are around. Until they recently started doing some amazing things, no one budged.
If Google hadn't done Gmail, we'd all have 2MB inboxes. But why? Microsoft only releases a good product when they're forced to. Not because they can, or because they want to.
Luckily, the iPhone forced stuff, just as the iPod has, and just as Google will do with Android.
Just look at that gorgeous interface!

What happened with the traditional 'Go out to watch a film on the weekend' mentality?
I'll tell you.
I went to watch Indiana Jones 4 yesterday (which I thought was pretty decent, and while not fantastic, was certainly a worthy sequel).
So, what happened?
For almost as much as the price of a DVD, you buy the cinema ticket, hoping to be able to stroll in and peacefully watch your film.
The reality?

You show up. There's popcorn already plastered over the seat that you're not even guaranteed to get.
You sit down. The claimed start time really just means the start of 15 mins of ads.

So, you have two options. Arrive early, get a seat, and watch 30 mins of ads, or get there when the film starts, and you can't get a decent seat.

So, about the ads. When watching TV, it's understandable, as the free feature is being subsidised by those ads. But how about when you're paying to see it? Should they continue to make money off of you?
So, you pay for the ticket and then they make a fortune by charging ridiculous amounts for any food/drink (and don't allow you to bring in any, thus eliminating their need to maintain reasonable prices), but, they also make a bunch of money from the ads they show.

one word: ridiculous.

So, what does this have to do with the Wynnsong?
Let me tell you.
We're past the 'start' time, watching ad after ad, when some employees bust in, turn off the sound and announce that they're collecting money for a charity (they fail to mention which).
They lay a guilt trip on us about how their goal was to collect $12,000, and are a long way off (to which my brother says 'it's not our fault you set your goal too high!').
They stay there for at least 5 mins hassling everyone. meanwhile, we've probably missed the last 10 ads.

What does this matter?
Not only are they soliciting for some unknown charity, but they're actually stealing at the same time.
No, I'm not talking about the audiences money. I'm talking about they advertisers money.
The advertiser paid a lot of money for their product to be shown before the feature film. Wynnsong gladly accepted the money, and then stopped the audience from watching it.

In my book, that's stealing.

In today's day and age, I soon see the day when Cinema's will become extinct. They're just pointless.
With Hi-Def TVs, and broadband internet, I'd much rather stream the film and watch it at home.
And, I can watch Indiana Jones 4 in the allotted 124 mins, instead of sitting next to people who smell like cheap butter popcorn for 3 hours.

Since its name is extremely vague, and gives you no idea whatsoever it is, I'll explain.
It's kinda like a white trash gym. High school kids come with girls and show off as they show how heroic they are by showing their incredible ability to jump off a trampoline into a foam pit.
Really, it's like that.

Fortunately for me, I went with a group of friends, so it was ok.

What's ridiculous is how they try to make a trampoline sound sophisticated by calling it 'progressive power tumbling.'

Is it progressive?
no

Is there any electricity, motors, or 'power' anything ?
no

Is there any tumbling?
well, there's jumping.

The problem is that not only are car salesmen liars, but some are either not very intelligent, or just pretend to not understand valid questions.

I'll walk you through my dad's attempt to buy a car.

We discussed (beforehand) exactly what kind of car my dad wanted.
My dad wanted a 2007 Infiniti G35, in any colour but white.
I believe it to be by far the best sports sedan available for ~$30,000
It's rear wheel drive, has 306 bhp, a 20 gallon tank, Bose sound system, Slip differential, and tons of other cool gadgets.

The reason my dad wanted a 2007 is cause that's the year they did the redesign, and he wanted to get one that was about a year old, as you can save around $6k.

So, we saw a nice G35 at Riverton Chevrolet

The website claims "the exterior is flawless."
In fact, checking the site now STILL shows the claim of being flawless
My dad went up and test drove it. He really liked it.
The problem is, the exterior was FAR from "flawless."
It had a really thick scratch on both passenger doors.
Can you believe my dad had to argue with them to repaint it ?
Their initial response was "Oh, someone must has banged it opening their door."
who care why it happened! the point is, they were advertising the car which they claimed to be flawless for a certain price, and were still charging the same price with scratches. Ridiculous!
After some discussion They agreed on $30,500 OTD (Out the door, including all taxes and fees), providing they fixed the scratches on the door.
He said he didn't want to buy it until I test drove it also. He asked them to hold the car for him until tomorrow, when he could bring me.

I went up with him. I was the one who recommended he look at getting a G35, so obviously I was keen on him buying it. We basically went there planning on buying it right there and then.
I test drove it. It was fantastic.
My dad goes in, to basically buy it.
He says to them.
"What's your price?"
They tell him $30,700. $200 more than they'd told him the day before.
My dad obviously complains and they give some pathetic excuse.
Get this though, they then acted like they were doing him a huge favour to 'knock it down' to the previously agreed $35,000.
disgraceful.
Anyway. Annoyed at this point my dad says
"I'll buy it if you fix the scratch"
they say
"We'll fix it, but we can't guarantee it will look flawless"

They wanted him to pay for it now, and pick it up a few days later after it had been fixed.

So, my dad asked the obvious question.
"What's the guarantee that after I pay for it, you'll make an effort to really fix it?"
Obviously, once they've sold it, who's to say they care about you?
The salesmen gave some ridiculous pitch about caring about their customers.
Yea right, like my dad's going to just take his word for it...

So, my dad come up with an alternative solution.
"Why don't you first fix it, and I'll come back and look at it, and if it's fixed to my satisfaction, I'll buy it."

Now, honestly, doesn't that seem like an extremely reasonable thing to ask?

This was the response he received:
"We actually have another customer coming to look at the car tomorrow, so if you don't buy it now, we'll sell it to him"
(even though he'd supposedly held the car for us)
my brother muttered under his breath just loud enough for the salesman to hear "I'm sure you do."

What kind of ridiculous attempt at intimidation is this?

Then, he came up with another genius response.
"We would be taking a risk by fixing it. What if we pay to fix it, and then you don't want it? Then we've lost that money."
Is it as obvious to the rest of you as it is to me that this salesman is a complete idiot?
So, he's saying that if we didn't buy it, he'd be worse off, because they'd now have a better car????
Is this guy an idiot?

Well, to cut a long story short, my dad just walked out. The guy was really pretending they had another buyer.

Funnily enough, this was 2 weeks ago. You guessed it, it's still there. Still available. Still scratched.

How on earth does a car salesman manage to not sell a car to someone who actually wants to buy it at the asked price???
It's like a teacher who makes you forget what you've learnt.

All I can say is be careful when buying a car. Especially of those claiming that every car you're looking at has other interested potential buyers. Especially of Riverton Chevrolet.

[EDIT] My dad did offer to put down a deposit for the car while they fixed it, which they didn't accept. As I'd mentioned, they told him they had another buyer, so obviously, they had to pretend that his definitive buy would be better than my Dad's deposit. They also said no to reducing the price and having us get it fixed.
Seriously, some people as so greedy they become stupid.