ORIGINAL: Oberst
Remember when Ford used Firestone tires on the explorers? Ford denied the problem until more and more got killed, then they said there might be a small problem and that they will look into it. A year later as I recall they told everyone down south to bring in there Ford Explorers to have the tires changed. A massive call back was issued to remove and replace all Firestone tires.
I think that's a bad analogy for the point you're trying to make. That analogy would be better suited to trying to convince somebody that they should switch from one brand of 2.4 to another. I'm guessing Ford didn't address the problem of faulty tires by replacing them with the old wood spoke tires because "that's what we used to use and it worked just fine." They replaced them with a different brand of tire that didn't kill people (i.e. same technology, but better performance)
ORIGINAL: Oberst
How many people were injured or killed before Ford did anything about it?
And the companies developing 2.4 systems will do what needs to be done to fix the problems with this relatively new technology. Sweet Jesus! Where would our society be if we scrapped every new technology at the first hiccup in its development. You wouldn't have a choice about whether you were going to take the car or the horse to work.
ORIGINAL: Oberst
The 2.4 isn't here to stay, it's a matter of time that it will be replaced and the better technology is already being tested
It's a fad, just like the internet. I think too many of the big name companies have too much money sunk into 2.4 to let it go away anytime soon. Barring a government ban, I don't see it going anywhere for a while. I do, however, agree with the second part of your sentence. If there is indeed some sort of "better technology," it will inevitably replace 2.4, because for the most part that's how the evolution of technology works.