Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Almighty Buck Christmas Cheer News

Top 10 Things You CAN'T Have For Christmas 230

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the i-just-want-2-front-teeth dept.
Zothecula writes "It's getting a little late for a last minute Christmas shopping list, but not to worry, most of us outside the Forbes Top 100 couldn't afford any of these anyway! Still, it's fascinating to look at what's possible if the word 'budget' isn't in your vocabulary, so here's a look at what you won't be getting for Christmas (CT: Warning, gizmag features really intrusive advertising) this year – the most outrageous examples of high-end overkill from 2010."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Top 10 Things You CAN'T Have For Christmas

Comments Filter:
  • Meh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anrego (830717) * on Thursday December 23, 2010 @01:12PM (#34652848)

    Fairly poor “top 10” list. Nothing on this list was particularly extreme, and not really “geek” oriented.

    I guess the problem with this kind of list is that _everything_ has an extreme. Pick something you like, and some millionaire probably has an obscenely expensive version of it. This list was mostly the extreme versions of things I have no interest in.

    Often with these extreme versions they’ve just taken something existing and covered it in gold/diamonds/rare metals/rare woods.. which isn’t all that interesting to me either. I remember there was some vodka (touted as the worlds most expensive) that was basically just garden variety high-end vodka with a column of diamonds down the center.

    The only thing on this list that really held any interest for me was those speakers, but at that cost it’s totally not worth the novelty, and they probably look terrible close up (as this kind of stuff tends to look great at a very specific angle but look ridiculous from everywhere else).

    Ah well, can’t spend it all on philanthropic interests.. I guess after a while you run out of shit to do with that much money.

    • by arivanov (12034)

      It is not original either.

      Designs like the Domespace have been around for ages. It is a pity they are not used especially in places like Florida where you really need them.

    • Are you nuts? Those speakers probably sound just awful. May as well just slap a Bose badge on them.

      Cool stuff, I suppose, though it's a fool that buys something electronic which has value added to it. A digital Leica with a (probably small) 18MP sensor will probably look no better than a panasonic P&S. Why would you spend so much money on a case when the internals are going to be out of date in 3 years. And titanium? Really? Can we just get over that fairly commonplace metal? Call me back when you make

      • by timster (32400)

        While the titanium M9 is sort of dumb the sensor is "full-frame" (24mmx36mm) so it's going to be a whole lot better than a point-and-shoot. But no better than the regular M9 which is "only" $7000.

        • Well, I'll stand corrected on that. Squeezing 18MP into even a DX size is dicey (which I presumed they did). Leica made very nice, if exceptionally price, film cameras.

          Still, a premium like that for a camera with a limited shelf life (sensor tech and electronics tech) is pretty foolish. I still say titanium is not a very useful metal. Better to clad Mg for the weight) or go all the way to a high-nickel stainless, imho. Or, as I said, use Beryllium Aluminum. It's not that much more expensive, but it has the

          • for a camera with a limited shelf life

            I've always wondered why DSLRs weren't designed to use a sensor cartridge. You buy a body, you buy a sensor, and you can swap out the sensor every few years.

            • by radish (98371)

              The body IS the sensor cartridge. Other than that it's basically a screen, CPU, shutter, battery and lens mount. You probably want to upgrade the screen and CPU every once in a while anyway, and the shutter will wear out over time.

              The real money in a camera system (and the most important from a quality POV) is in the lens. You keep the lenses, you switch out the body (sensor).

    • Re:Meh (Score:4, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 23, 2010 @01:36PM (#34653076)

      I'm pretty sure I won't be getting a hot wife for Christmas, especially from my current wife.

      • Re:Meh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ocdscouter (1922930) on Thursday December 23, 2010 @01:43PM (#34653132)

        I'm pretty sure I won't be getting a hot wife for Christmas, especially from my current wife.

        Well, she could, but you'd probably have to get her a hot husband in exchange.

        • Somebody called?
        • by tool462 (677306)

          As I understand it, women aren't quite as obsessed with appearance as men. Though I'm betting she wouldn't mind a husband with a pleasant personality for a change.

          • by jimicus (737525)

            Don't you believe it. I hesitate to say it's common, but it's by no means unknown for women to marry an ugly nurturing man then have a wild affair with a rugged, good-looking bloke.

            The ugly man winds up bringing up the good-looking man's kids as his own.

            I don't know if it's always planned - my guess is it's got more to do with some primeval instinct to have the kids of the man with the best genes but have them looked after by the most kind sweet & thoughtful man.

      • by Nadaka (224565)

        If you want your wife to swing that way, she should feel like she is the hottest one in the room. That way she she will feel more secure and hopefully have just as much fun as you do.

      • Well, I'm pretty sure that I won't be getting another hot wife for Christmas, but then I only ever wanted one anyway.


        br. And no, my wife doesn't read slashdot (although, I should probably show her this post).
    • Re:Meh (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mlts (1038732) * on Thursday December 23, 2010 @01:50PM (#34653186)

      The speakers looked good. However other goods such as the diamond inlaid TV set were pretty pointless.

      With electronics, adding bling is pretty much the best people can do for selling ultra-expensive devices. Mainly because of the economy of scale market. If a boutique company made a cell phone that was slimmer than an iPhone, and only made 100 copies, the cost would be astronomical (tens to hundreds of millions of dollars), even factoring out the fact that the device would need a lot of QA testing. The only exception would be taking a motherboard from an existing device and putting it in a custom case, perhaps replacing some components (like the camera or screen) and making sure the OS can work with the modifications. Regression testing is important too.

      • Re:Meh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by nospam007 (722110) * on Thursday December 23, 2010 @02:09PM (#34653368)

        "The speakers looked good. However other goods such as the diamond inlaid TV set were pretty pointless."

        They are all pointless. My one and only Christmas gift I'll get, I'm getting it every year:
        Peace of mind.
        Since a dozen years or so, I don't accept gifts and I don't give them so no shopping stress, no disappointments to see or feel for me.
        It's heaven on earth.

        • Re:Meh (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 23, 2010 @02:29PM (#34653528)

          Except that people think you are a jerk. Yeah you get what you want out of it and you haven't conformed to societal traditions, but other people like getting and giving gifts. If you feel it's gone too far, there are other ways to improve the issue that don't require robbing other people of their enjoyment of the traditions. An easy one is shop online or throughout the year and buy whenever you see something people might like. The money wasted on the gift, if you view it that way, isn't that big a deal in the end. It's just money and other things are more important.

          • by nospam007 (722110) *

            It was never a tradition here, it was imprinted on us by US television, just like Halloween and other customs like it.
            Here the tradition is to give gifts on St. Nikolaus day, on 6th of December and only to kids.

            Now kids come trick and treating _and_ the original 2 times a year, Candlemas and Easterday, where the kids are making noise on the streets to call for mass, because the week before eastern, the Church bells are silent.

        • by Ihmhi (1206036)

          I'm a lot like you, but I do give gifts and receive them. I just completely ignore holidays.

          For instance, I was out shopping a few years ago and saw a fedora in a store that I thought a friend would like. So, I bought it and gave it to him. No need to wait for a birthday or Hallmark holiday.

          Kindness (and, in turn, gratitude) knows no season.

      • That TV is quite possibly the most hideous thing I could think of putting in a living room. You'd have to pay me to take that.
      • The speakers were also only $8000. Not that expensive, and not outside affordable. Plenty of people give their kids a (used) car for their birthday when that kid can get a driver's license. These speakers are in the same price range. I've seen ads in audio magazines for speakers at $375,000. And speaker cables at $40,000 for a 6 foot pair.
    • Well that, and the fact that the title is completely stupid.

      Top 10 Things you CAN'T Have for Christmas

      Funny value of "can't", for two things that are the same order of magnitude in price as a car. I could buy the speakers or the camera. I wouldn't, but to say I CAN'T is stupid.

    • by cyberfunkr (591238) on Thursday December 23, 2010 @02:30PM (#34653534)

      More extreme things we can't afford:

      1) Diamond-tipped pizza cutter with baby elephant ivory handle
      2) Stadium seat cushion made from puma hide and filled with narwhal blubber
      3) Beer cozy built from the insulation of the original NASA space suits
      4) Sofa throw blanket woven from the used toupees of William Shatner
      5) A 1:3 scale replica of the "Stay-Puff" Marshmallow Man crafted from albino bat guano

      • by Xyrus (755017)

        11) Snorting lunar dust of an alien hookers third tit

    • The money spent of even silly luxury items doesn't exactly go in to a black hole, you know.

      For example, people gawk at the opulence of things like the Newport mansions and tsk tsk at the concentration of wealth, but the lavish spending on those places bootstrapped many industries in that area that exist today. Some well known architectural firms, fashion labels and art museums owe their existence to a few family's mad drive to mirror European royalty.

      • Some well known architectural firms, fashion labels and art museums

        And most of the money that goes into these places goes where?

      • by blair1q (305137)

        But it kind of does. Trickle-down is a myth. Making jobs for one construction crew is nothing economically compared with putting 40 crews to work with the same outlay.

    • by gstoddart (321705)

      I guess the problem with this kind of list is that _everything_ has an extreme. Pick something you like, and some millionaire probably has an obscenely expensive version of it. This list was mostly the extreme versions of things I have no interest in.

      But .... but ... exoskeleton!! Powered freaking exoskeleton.

      Of course, I'd need the bigger LandWalker [gizmag.com] version, but it comes with guns, so that's OK.

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        It's not an exoskeleton, it's a walker.

        • by gstoddart (321705)

          It's not an exoskeleton, it's a walker.

          The article says it's an exoskeleton. The LandWalker article says it's an exoskeleton ... what's the difference? No working arms?

          I'd probably buy that distinction.

    • But most of it didn't matter in the slightest. So there are some thing that rich people can buy that are substantially better, or simply different, than what a normal person can. In fact I'd say that is what makes someone rich: The ability to purchase at least one thing that middle class people can't that is better or makes life better in a non-trivial way.

      However that wasn't what this list was. The sub boat is really the only thing that qualifies. A diamond studded TV? No, that's all show. Doesn't matter t

      1. Meg [slashdot.org]
      2. The Millineum Falcon
      3. an SR-71
      4. Fort Knox
      5. RIAA labels (so I can disolve them)
      6. MPAA studios (ditto)
      7. The Microsoft Corporation (so I could make it suck less)
      8. HTML tags that work in slashdot (like an <ol> tag that would go to 10
      9. Darl McBride's head on a platter
      10. Marvin's brain
      • Some things I want ought to be so easy we shouldn't have to think about them, but apparently politics and business prejudice make it difficult or impossible. Here's a brief list:

        • Ogg Vorbis in a mechless car radio. (Of course it must support USB or SD.) Also FLAC would be good to have. And can we have that in a mechless portable stereo (aka boom box)? And at a reasonable price, say, under $100, possibly $150? Just getting a MP3 player that can play Vorbis was difficult. The first one I got was this
  • i can't haz cheezburger?
  • by tnk1 (899206)

    Does this mean that I can actually have a pony? I didn't see that on the list.

    Just saying....

  • by wcrowe (94389) on Thursday December 23, 2010 @01:24PM (#34652964)

    I don't know about the article in question, but the ZipBuds girl has reminded me that I need to check the air in my tires.

  • by drooling-dog (189103) on Thursday December 23, 2010 @01:24PM (#34652966)

    Warning, gizmag features really intrusive advertising

    Well, let's not link to it, then.

    • by geekoid (135745)

      well than how else would I get to see boring shit I can't get?

      Think people, think~

  • Android 2.2 for my Captivate.
  • peace and happiness ?

  • 1. A kid
    2. Sex
    3. A girlfriend

  • by Delusion_ (56114) on Thursday December 23, 2010 @01:34PM (#34653060) Homepage

    ...make it the "most expensive" object in its class is more of an art stunt than a technology stunt, and a fairly unimaginative one at that. The $2.3million television is $2.3 million because it has $2.3 million worth of diamonds on it - the actual price of the television without the diamonds doesn't even change the rounding.

    At what point in time is this more about the diamonds than the fact that they may or may not be attached to a gadget?

    Answer: The initial concept.

    It's kind of like the "most expensive pizza" being so because it's covered in luxury foods like rare caviar and then topped off with gold flakes. It's more art project than food.

    • It's kind of like the "most expensive pizza" being so because it's covered in luxury foods like rare caviar and then topped off with gold flakes.

      Well, its like the gold flakes part.

      Luxury foods like caviar are still foods, and actually relate to the intended function of pizza, unlike diamonds on a TV.

    • It just goes to show what great times we live in. It used to be that only the rich could afford the horse carriage, then only the rich could afford a car, than only the rich could afford a tv etc etc. These days everybody (in the developed world at least) can afford pretty much all the conveniences that latest technology provides. Really poor people (as in Africa) would laugh at the people in the US calling themselves poor even though they have a flat screen TV and an SUV in the garage of their 2000 sf. hom

    • by blair1q (305137)

      Think of it this way: you're not studding your universal remote in diamonds, you're enabling your diamonds as a universal remote.

      Diamonds have no real value, but people pay a fortune for them. DeBeers held a monopoly on them until the Canadian kimberlite miners told them to fuck off and started dumping rocks on the market. Did the prices drop? Nope.

      People are dumb. Supply and Demand is a crock of shit. And I bet those speakers sound terrible.

  • by dominious (1077089) on Thursday December 23, 2010 @01:37PM (#34653084)
    A girlfriend!

    ducks
  • viewing platform would be a cool place to party with all your skydiver buddies at 30,000'
  • I'm not sure what surprises me more... That companies produce crap like this, or that they expect there's enough of a market for people to buy crap like this.

    I mean, the number of people to whom money is no object is a countable number. Furthermore, the larger percentage of people who's wealth is publicly tracked (such as Warren Buffet or Bill Gates) do not invest in expensive throw-away baubles.

    Therefore have to assume that items such as these are purchased by people who's wealth is NOT tracked, such as Sa

    • by symbolic (11752)

      It's all part of the scumbag chain of finance. The people on Wall St. who take home obscene salaries and bonuses for completely F*CKING UP our economy need to spend their money on something, so why not this junk? It's about as superficial as their understanding of integrity and humility, which makes it a perfect match.

    • by Animats (122034)

      Who buys this crap? A surprisingly large number of people.

      There are about 62 yachts in the world over 250 feet in length. [wikipedia.org] There are about 120 private jets in the Boeing 747 size and up. Some are used by heads of state, but most are owned by private parties. Big jets are popular with Russian oligarchs; if you have business interests in Siberia, going there in comfort needs proper support facilities.

      There are people who are just into buying expensive stuff, most of which they don't use. I've known a f

    • I'm not sure what surprises me more... That companies produce crap like this, or that they expect there's enough of a market for people to buy crap like this.

      There is. You should read the leaked Citigroup "plotonomy" document. The hyper-rich are nearly half the market.

  • Peace on Earth, Goodwill toward Men
  • The List (Score:5, Informative)

    by southpolesammy (150094) on Thursday December 23, 2010 @02:37PM (#34653584) Journal
    1. Seabreacher X -- submersible shaped like a great white shark, from Innespace, $93,500
    2. "Mercedes-Benz Style" helicopter -- cost not indicated
    3. The Kid's Walker exoskeleton -- made by Sakakibara-Kikai, 5.25 feet tall, for kids (???), $21,000
    4. The most exclusive motorcycle on the planet -- NCR M16 MotoGP streetfighter, based on Ducati's Desmosedici RR, $176,880
    5. LEICA M9 'Titanium' digital camera -- $29,000
    6. Top of the line television -- Panasonic PrestigeHD SUPREME Rose Edition, 152" 3D plasma w/ diamond encrusted bezel, $2,293,580
    7. Domespace rotating wooden house -- cost not indicated
    8. A balcony for your private jet -- Design Q, $16-18M (comes with a free plane!)
    9. See-thru speakers -- Greensound Serac and Floe series speakers, $8000
    10. A quiet getaway ... in a "flying" submarine -- Necker Nymph, rent for $88,000 per week
  • A DeLorean car, including a working Flux Capacitor, and MrFusion just to be green. Not only you will be able to get all those gifts, you will own Las Vegas too. If is asking too much, i could be happy with an antigrav hoverboard.

    Too bad i can't have them for christmas.

  • of things that are actually cool rather than just plain old stuff with diamonds stuck on them.

    1. Space shuttle.

    2. F22.

    3. Megan Fox.

    4. Nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.

    5. Cray X1E

    6. Having Woz as your on-staff technical advisor.

    7. A copy of the NIST F1 atomic clock.

    8. A gigawatt laser.

    9. All the digits of pi

    10. Your own website that's as popular as /.

"You know, we've won awards for this crap." -- David Letterman

Working...