Like Doom III, the remake of Godzilla was technically superior. But despite it's enhanced effects, it lost the charm of the original.
In both cases, the "flawed" execution gave the game a certain suspension of disbelief. The "grand and new" remakes were just plain unbelievable. A digitally perfect lizard running amok in a digitally perfect New York makes you realize how completely bogus the whole thing is. The amount of food that would be required to sustain a creature of that size with that level of activity is simply impossible. Endowing it with reflexes that allow it to not only outrun a helicopter, but to out maneuver it defys believability.
In the case of Doom, you find yourself asking "WTF?". Why on Earth ARE you running around in the dark? How on Earth are you the ONLY person? Why are you completely unarmed, especially since you find weapons all over the place?
I know some folks have said this before in reply, but I'll try to put in in laymans terms. Airplanes use lift provided by air flowing over the wings to maintain altitude. That makes them very fuel efficient for long flights in the lower chunks of the atmosphere, but remember it's the plane's wings that keep it aloft. The engines only provide forward thrust.
Spacecraft need to get to speeds of 17,000mph to enter orbit. Beyond Mach 2.4 (~1400mph) the friction generated from slicing through the air produces enough heat to start softening Aluminum (the principle structural material of most spacecraft.)
But before you run into that problem, you have an issue. Wings need a findimentally different design below Mach 1, at Mach 1, and beyond Mach 1. (Thus variable wing aircraft like the F-14.)
The shuttle hits Mach 1 in 60 seconds. In 8 1/2 minutes it's in orbit. It only accelerates at 3gs to be easy on the passengers. A cargo rocket easly accellerates beyond 5. In other words, trying to design a spacecraft to exploit wings would only slow it down.
Time out. Dumping money into a project is not guanrentee of success. We didn't learn a damn thing from the space shuttle (except a few thousand things NOT to do.) The reason: The Shuttle was pure application. It was designed to use "off the shelf" tech to accomplish a "definite goal" with "known parameters."
Remember, when Apollo was created, they had no idea how they were going to pull it off. If one has the time, look through all of the design concepts for a moon flight that Nasa didn't use. A good starting point is the Apollo Spacecraft - A Chronology. They toyed with different numbers of stages. The idea of having a seperate lunar lander and command module that would re-dock in orbit was devised and executed mid-project. They basically designed whole new architectures for computing.
Whereas the Shuttle has a design parameters a few pages long, Apollo had one directive: Land a man safely on the moon and return him safely to the Earth.
I seriously keep trying to tell my wife that. I even put the cost of the ring she wants in terms of cars, additions to the house, vacations, etc.
Alas, that glint in her eye tells me that she wants her shiny thing. And she wants her expensive shiny thing. I think the important part is that it be expensive. It's a girl thing.
(Why it can't be something useful like a sports car, or a hot tub is information we men are not meant to understand.)
Except that you are discounting the problem that a conventional propulsion system can also fail. Just because we've used it for 60 years doesn't mean it doesn't have problems. Puncture a fuel tank and a conventionally powered spacecraft would be equally screwed.
At least with a malfunctioning beam projector you can repair it on station, have a spare station on standby, or try and capture the craft using an Earth based projector on the far side of Earth's orbit.
If a conventional propulsion system fails on a spacecraft you simply get to send letters home detailing events until your food and oxygen runs out.
Not really. Micrometorites would be on the surface of the Earth. Now as for Micrometoriods... they are mainly a hazard to orbiting spacecraft, and mainly because mankind has been dumping stuff into orbit for 50 years. Sure, there are elevated risks of micrometeriod collisions around comets and such, but the little buggers are already moving at such a fantastic speed that the added velocity of the spacecraft is negligable.
And no, spacecraft right now are NOT beer cans. They contain an outer shell, and several layers of different material to prevent micrometeriods from penetrating the pressure hull. Windows are specially designed, and if you pay attention to photographs from spacecraft you would see tons of scratches on the outer surface.
You can always spin the spacecraft around. That's exactly what they do/did with the Space shuttle. You may be traveling at an obscenely high rate of speed, but you have 360/360 degrees of freedom for attitude. Haven't you ever played Asteroids?
Need I remind you that the asteriods are rich with a host of rare metals that only exist in trace amount here on Earth. Indeed, one of the reasons mobile phones can't get any cheaper is that one part requires an obscenely expensive metal for the tuner.
But Officer, you can plainly see that I'm not selling Herion. I'm selling Heroin(tm). In the fine print you can see the Heroin(tm) is a "light formulation of opiate". The inactive ingredients are clearly listed here... in Chinese:
(Translated from chinese:) May contain one or more of the following: ground glass, baking soda, rat poisen, and powdered sugar.
As one who never touched the stuff I whole heartedly agree.
Opiates are the perfect pain killer. We still use them (Codiene is an alternate form of herione people.) I think it was the Brits who found that they could keep a hard-core addict supplied and able to work in society for about $500/year using government formulated herion.
Previous idiots? War on Poverty was Johnson, I'll give you that. But the war on AIDS and Drunk Driving were Reagan, the same man who brought you the war on Drugs.
I'm not sure I've ever heard of the War on Cancer.
The last job couple of jobs I applied for. The problem was not that the recruiter asked me about it. The EMPLOYER asked for it. Of course the skill has almost nothing to do with the position I was applying for (TCL programmer).
We're not discussing server room, we're discussing desktop. I have no doubts that Apple X-Serves are very efficient, powerful boxes... but you don't play games or write email on those, do you?
Considering the number of times I walk into someone else's datacenter and I see a cheapo optiplex running exchange or SQL, the line between a server and a desktop are very blurry.
A high-end desktop uses the same parts as a high-end server. If you are serious about performance you run SCSI or SATA on your drives. You use a procesor/MOBO/RAM combination that gives you the highest speed. You generally are looking for a computer with longevity.
About the only difference these days are the video cards. Most servers don't really need a good one. (In fact Xserves don't even have one by default.)
Once you get down to video performance the issue isn't Mac vs. PC. It's ATI vs. Invidia, and the various product lines between them.
My Ford Focus has been back to the dealer twice. Even with the key inserted, the steering column wouldn't unlock. (I've been making out like a bandit on the extended warrenty. They've also had to drop in a new fuel tank and pump.)
Having owned 2 fords and 2 chevy's let me be the first to say that while I do have more day to day things drop dead on a Ford, it's usually a $20 part and it's usually discovered in my driveway. My chevy's on the other hand would drop dead in the middle of God's country and need a new transmission, a rebuilt suspension, or an obscure computer chip that costs $900 a pop.
I've had the opposite problem once. In rush hour traffic by throttle cable snapped at the pedal. For whatever reason I had a fork in the car with me. After about 10 minutes upside down (with a slight delay to explain to a passing cop what was going on) I managed to McGyver the cable around the fork, and loop it back over the grab point for the cable. With a little electrical tape I managed to limp the thing into my mechanic.
Not related at all to what's going on. My wife was with me, and thinks it's a funny story.
Except that many "white" people aren't Caucasians, i.e. decendent from the folks who settled in the Caucases Mountains. They are simply melanin-deprived mutts. (Ok to pick on my own gang.)
Many cars have an anti-theft lock that lashes the steering wheel in position when the ignition key is in the off position. Of course as soon as the engine cuts out, you can put it back into ON, and use inertia to coast.
Then again, who would have believed the BMW would build a car's electronics around Windows CE? Or was that PocketPC?
I'm starting to think that with all this rush to market, rapid prototyping, and designing things hyper-effieciently, we are missing the most crucial stage to design work. The "What the hell were you thinking" phase. Where you assemble a testbed and just scratch your head.
Slashdot Mirror
In both cases, the "flawed" execution gave the game a certain suspension of disbelief. The "grand and new" remakes were just plain unbelievable. A digitally perfect lizard running amok in a digitally perfect New York makes you realize how completely bogus the whole thing is. The amount of food that would be required to sustain a creature of that size with that level of activity is simply impossible. Endowing it with reflexes that allow it to not only outrun a helicopter, but to out maneuver it defys believability.
In the case of Doom, you find yourself asking "WTF?". Why on Earth ARE you running around in the dark? How on Earth are you the ONLY person? Why are you completely unarmed, especially since you find weapons all over the place?
I'm a married TCL coder you insensitive clod!
Spacecraft need to get to speeds of 17,000mph to enter orbit. Beyond Mach 2.4 (~1400mph) the friction generated from slicing through the air produces enough heat to start softening Aluminum (the principle structural material of most spacecraft.)
But before you run into that problem, you have an issue. Wings need a findimentally different design below Mach 1, at Mach 1, and beyond Mach 1. (Thus variable wing aircraft like the F-14.)
The shuttle hits Mach 1 in 60 seconds. In 8 1/2 minutes it's in orbit. It only accelerates at 3gs to be easy on the passengers. A cargo rocket easly accellerates beyond 5. In other words, trying to design a spacecraft to exploit wings would only slow it down.
Remember, when Apollo was created, they had no idea how they were going to pull it off. If one has the time, look through all of the design concepts for a moon flight that Nasa didn't use. A good starting point is the Apollo Spacecraft - A Chronology. They toyed with different numbers of stages. The idea of having a seperate lunar lander and command module that would re-dock in orbit was devised and executed mid-project. They basically designed whole new architectures for computing.
Whereas the Shuttle has a design parameters a few pages long, Apollo had one directive: Land a man safely on the moon and return him safely to the Earth.
Alas, that glint in her eye tells me that she wants her shiny thing. And she wants her expensive shiny thing. I think the important part is that it be expensive. It's a girl thing.
(Why it can't be something useful like a sports car, or a hot tub is information we men are not meant to understand.)
At least with a malfunctioning beam projector you can repair it on station, have a spare station on standby, or try and capture the craft using an Earth based projector on the far side of Earth's orbit.
If a conventional propulsion system fails on a spacecraft you simply get to send letters home detailing events until your food and oxygen runs out.
And no, spacecraft right now are NOT beer cans. They contain an outer shell, and several layers of different material to prevent micrometeriods from penetrating the pressure hull. Windows are specially designed, and if you pay attention to photographs from spacecraft you would see tons of scratches on the outer surface.
Guess what they are from?
You can always spin the spacecraft around. That's exactly what they do/did with the Space shuttle. You may be traveling at an obscenely high rate of speed, but you have 360/360 degrees of freedom for attitude. Haven't you ever played Asteroids?
Need I remind you that the asteriods are rich with a host of rare metals that only exist in trace amount here on Earth. Indeed, one of the reasons mobile phones can't get any cheaper is that one part requires an obscenely expensive metal for the tuner.
Point taken. However, dropping the amount of fuel you have to hoist into orbit can only help.
(Translated from chinese:) May contain one or more of the following: ground glass, baking soda, rat poisen, and powdered sugar.
Defendent: Oops, I did it again.
Opiates are the perfect pain killer. We still use them (Codiene is an alternate form of herione people.) I think it was the Brits who found that they could keep a hard-core addict supplied and able to work in society for about $500/year using government formulated herion.
I'm not sure I've ever heard of the War on Cancer.
The last job couple of jobs I applied for. The problem was not that the recruiter asked me about it. The EMPLOYER asked for it. Of course the skill has almost nothing to do with the position I was applying for (TCL programmer).
Considering the number of times I walk into someone else's datacenter and I see a cheapo optiplex running exchange or SQL, the line between a server and a desktop are very blurry.
A high-end desktop uses the same parts as a high-end server. If you are serious about performance you run SCSI or SATA on your drives. You use a procesor/MOBO/RAM combination that gives you the highest speed. You generally are looking for a computer with longevity.
About the only difference these days are the video cards. Most servers don't really need a good one. (In fact Xserves don't even have one by default.)
Once you get down to video performance the issue isn't Mac vs. PC. It's ATI vs. Invidia, and the various product lines between them.
My Ford Focus has been back to the dealer twice. Even with the key inserted, the steering column wouldn't unlock. (I've been making out like a bandit on the extended warrenty. They've also had to drop in a new fuel tank and pump.)
Frankly I've found that I've been able to use cruise control all of 4 times. Most of the roads I travel on (I-96, I-x76) are way too crowded.
Having owned 2 fords and 2 chevy's let me be the first to say that while I do have more day to day things drop dead on a Ford, it's usually a $20 part and it's usually discovered in my driveway. My chevy's on the other hand would drop dead in the middle of God's country and need a new transmission, a rebuilt suspension, or an obscure computer chip that costs $900 a pop.
Not related at all to what's going on. My wife was with me, and thinks it's a funny story.
If the cops try to give him a ticket.
Except that many "white" people aren't Caucasians, i.e. decendent from the folks who settled in the Caucases Mountains. They are simply melanin-deprived mutts. (Ok to pick on my own gang.)
Many cars have an anti-theft lock that lashes the steering wheel in position when the ignition key is in the off position. Of course as soon as the engine cuts out, you can put it back into ON, and use inertia to coast.
I'm starting to think that with all this rush to market, rapid prototyping, and designing things hyper-effieciently, we are missing the most crucial stage to design work. The "What the hell were you thinking" phase. Where you assemble a testbed and just scratch your head.
Judging by the number of smacks, I'm assuming she didn't walk away from that one.