Jump to content


justforboa

Member Since 04 Sep 2008
Offline Last Active Oct 21 2012 08:45 AM

Topics I've Started

How many different jobs have you had?

27 October 2009 - 04:40 AM

Just curious what jobs people had in the past and the job that you have right now.

Louis Vuitton - China Will Be the Largest Luxury Goods Market

20 October 2009 - 08:57 PM

When the financial crisis has swept the globe, the luxury goods also face the strict test. Nowadays the luxury goods enter opening-store tide in China, and regard China as the most potential market, and will Louis Vuitton create new productions for Chinese Market?
The answer is that of course, in the last 10 years, the luxury goods development of China has been expanded fastly, now Louis Vuitton has 29 stores in 24 cities of China, every store in China contains the speciality. Since walking into the Chinese market for 17 years, we have just taken a small step. The young consumers in China are protential and the power of buying is strong, we can see that in the short run, China must be the largest luxury goods market in the world. Every production of Louis Vuitton follows the production 150 years ago, and we keep the traditional handed technology, we aim at the global consumers and we will not create for some markets.
Also, the customers of ours are very large, from the suitcases to the decorations, from several hundreds of thousands of RMB to a thousand RMB, we hope that all the customers of ours can find the very things that they need here, and the service we offered is the same, whatever you buy, the watch which is worth several hundred thousand RMB or a key ring which is worth one thousand, the service and repection we provide are all the same!
Finally, I want to say that luxury is a kind of attitude. The features of luxury goods are with long history, deep contains, high-quality productions , high-level shopping environment, good after-sale services and the foundational high price level. Luxury goods are not the same as the super high price of the common meaning. In fact, the luxury goods are not expensive for we cannot just definite the productions from the prices. Luxury goods usually are made by hand and the labor power, physical resourses that are cost for the productions are very considerable, all of our stuff need to be trained in France and we need to do much advertising. Besides, what luxury goods bring is not only the production but also a kind of lifestyle, this feature makes the people who agree with the definition attracted. Luxury goods also pays much attention on the details, and they are only sold in their own stores.

http://www.flashrepl...ury-market.html

Yahoo: "Last year, China's luxury goods sales were just $7bn, compared with about $20bn in Japan, according to a recent McKinsey report." Wow, I never knew the US spends so less on luxury goods. Why are Asians more likely to demand these luxurious goods?

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

Study: Windows 7 doesn't boot faster

10 October 2009 - 08:16 PM

Although Windows 7 has been praised for loading and shutting down faster than prior versions of Windows, one software company says that, in many cases, the new operating system can take longer to get started than Windows Vista.

Iolo Technlogies, which sells PC tune-up software, said its lab unit found that a brand-new machine running Windows 7 takes a minute and 34 seconds to become usable, as compared to a minute and 6 seconds for Windows Vista. Iolo notes that it measured not the time it takes for the desktop to appear--which can be as little as 40 seconds on a fresh installation of Windows 7--but rather the time it takes to become fully usable "with CPU cycles no longer significantly high and a true idle state achieved."

The results are also fairly similar to what CNET found in its testing of the operating system. A Microsoft representative was not immediately able to comment on Iolo's findings.

Iolo plans to release more details on its findings and methodology next week. Although it remains to be seen just how it reached its conclusion, the report is clearly not good news for an operating system whose primary selling point is doing the basics better than past versions of Windows.

I will say that for my part, I have been using Windows 7 for months now and find myself rarely doing a full reboot and instead going in and out of sleep for days at a time--a process that moves particularly quickly.

As is often the case with Windows, Iolo found that things only get worse over time. It found that a three-month-old machine can take up to a minute longer to boot, or 2 minutes and 34 seconds. Windows 7 did outperform Vista at the three-month and six-month marks, Iolo said, but it generally "trailed the older version significantly" in its boot-up tests.

I plan to follow up on this on Monday, when more details about Iolo's conclusions--and how they were reached--become available.

Updated at 7:20 p.m. PDT: On the plus side, Wall Street Journal reviewer Walt Mossberg is out with his review of Windows 7 and gives it high marks, saying Microsoft now gives Apple a run for its money.
http://news.cnet.com...0370369-56.html


I guess I'm going to continue to use Windows XP Pro Service Pack 3.

Credible sources: China successfully develops ASBM to counter US super

05 April 2009 - 03:10 PM

First posted on a Chinese blog viewed as credible by military analysts and then translated by the naval affairs blog Information Dissemination, a recent report provides a description of an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) that can strike carriers and other U.S. vessels at a range of 2000km.

The range of the modified Dong Feng 21 missile is significant in that it covers the areas that are likely hot zones for future confrontations between U.S. and Chinese surface forces.

The size of the missile enables it to carry a warhead big enough to inflict significant damage on a large vessel, providing the Chinese the capability of destroying a U.S. supercarrier in one strike.

Because the missile employs a complex guidance system, low radar signature and a maneuverability that makes its flight path unpredictable, the odds that it can evade tracking systems to reach its target are increased. It is estimated that the missile can travel at mach 10 and reach its maximum range of 2000km in less than 12 minutes.

Supporting the missile is a network of satellites, radar and unmanned aerial vehicles that can locate U.S. ships and then guide the weapon, enabling it to hit moving targets.

While the ASBM has been a topic of discussion within national defense circles for quite some time, the fact that information is now coming from Chinese sources indicates that the weapon system is operational. The Chinese rarely mention weapons projects unless they are well beyond the test stages.

If operational as is believed, the system marks the first time a ballistic missile has been successfully developed to attack vessels at sea. Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

https://www.usni.org...eKillWeapon.asp


One of the authors on my blog Information Dissemination is someone I have known online for many years, long before I began blogging. Feng is a long time contributor (even a part time moderator for validity purposes) at various military related internet forums, and runs a blog of his own that specifically discusses China Air and Naval Power. It isn’t enough for me to say Feng, who enjoys being anonymous for valid reasons, is a credible source; trusting some guys word (even mine) should never be enough. I would note however, that careful analysis to his credibility has been given by serious researchers in our government. For example, Ronald O’Rourke cites Feng a dozen times in his Congressional Research Service report titled China Naval Modernization: Implications for U.S. Navy Capabilities — Background and Issues for Congress last updated November 19, 2008. Personally, I find Feng to be one of the very best serious researchers publishing English language content in the open source on China military activity relating to Naval and Air Force issues, and note that his contributions on my blog often provides imagery and analysis unique on English language open source forums.

I was recently given a tip regarding a blog post on a Chinese blog by a very well informed individual who studies Chinese threats and capabilities being developed by China against the United States Navy. Within 3 days, I was sent the blog address again, this time from a high ranking naval officer who has more than a passing interest in the subject. It is one thing to get a link from someone who simply passes on a link and says “check this out.” It is quite another to get the same tip from two credible individuals who do two very different things and most likely do not know each other.

http://blog.usni.org/?p=1964


As the world's first country to successfully develop an ASBM to attack vessels at sea, why worry about North Korea's non-deliverable nukes when China's threat is even more substantial during conventional warfare? The release of this recent publication is just as embarrassing to the US DOD as the Chinese Sub that went within firing range of the USS Kitty Hawk. If anything, the USAF should suspend development on the F-35 Lightning II until it can guarantee the safety of its supercarriers.