Commercial and civilian jets all have certified ceilings that vary depending on the weight, balance, of the aircraft and length of the cruise, headwinds, weather, etc.
Most comercial jetliners can cruise at 36-40,000 feet. The Concorde cruised higher, at around 60-62,000 feet.
Additionally, commercial jets usually stick to well-known routes directed by ATC. Spacing for height and distance is variable.
I think Smartphones are one area where the vertical integration model works well. The fragmentation of Android will diminish it's value to handset makers as customers like you get soured on the issues involved.
Strangely enough, I find that even over ten years after leaving an Unnamed large computer company's customer relations group that my fingers type "customer" when my brain commands "custom".
At the altitude that the space station is oribiting, there is no atmosphere, and thus no drag per se.
I beg to differ. From SpaceRef.com:
"As a further consequence of ISS attitude, the station's daily orbital decay has been at its lowest (~20 m/day). Orbital decay is a function of atmospheric density at the orbit altitude and the station's cross-sectional ("frontal" or "ram") area, which creates the drag. Depending on attitude, ISS drag area can vary between a low of 390 square meters (where it is currently) and a high of 670 sq.m."
Do you have any idea how much it costs to turn around a shuttle for relaunch? Or to build the infrastructure capable of refurbishing and relaunching it?
Of course not. Anyone with even a passing familiarity of the overhaul each shuttle gets when it reaches the OPF knows that only Governments, Microsoft, and Google have the resources to launch a shuttle.
Boeing and Lockheed (A.k.a. USA) might have a passing chance at operating the shuttle privately, but with the vehicle's inherent limitations, dangers, and cost, no one would be crazy enough to lend them the operating capitol, including their parent companies.
Anytime I want to read pie-in-the-sky conjecture about the space program from people who have little to no idea what they're talking about, I come to Slashdot.
Photographers near universal failure to understand the technical situation and speak-up means that their needs are wholly under-represented, and many of the new color-professional wide-gamut products are unusable due the colorimetric distances being too far given 8b/color channel.
So....the problem is that photographers are too stupid to know what they're looking at?
Nice. I'll make sure to tell the photographers who have been making art for thirty years that they don't know what they're talking about.
Two of my clients are Apple "Pros", who have made their needs fully and widely known at Apple...when someone who isn't trying to promote Aperture is listening.
No. One. Gives. A. Shit. At Apple.
Some number larger than two of my clients are Canon Masters. Apple doesn't care. Canon recommends PCs. Where's Apple going with this glossy-only crap?
The only people I really hear throwing huge fits about this are the self-proclaimed "pro photography" set
I work with several professional photographers as a consultant. I can assure you that glossy displays DO NOT work as well subjectively for most photographers and other artists using LCD displays. Some photographers still insist on using CRTs because of those subjective preferences.
You can bake the numbers all you want, but if the palette and contrast don't feel right for photographers - many of which started using Photoshop to work with Tango-scanned film images - they will not touch it. Consistency, not gimmicks, are key for these folks.
These are not gear queers running out to compare the specs on the newest whoosy-whatsit, but artists who are extremely picky about their equipment. Here's what they tell me they HATE about glossy displays:
-Extreme brightness on glossy displays = extreme contrast. It's harder to believe you're looking at a calibrated 2.2 gamma when your "superbrite" glossy LCD display has such a massive contrast ratio.
-Working in neutrally-painted, darkened rooms is optimal. When you turn these superbright LCDs down to achieve a reasonable brightness for a darkened room, the glare and reflections from the glossy panel are distracting. Turn it back up, and it takes you several seconds to a minute to see where you're going.
-The higher brightness leads to colors looking more saturated, which sells with consumers. Most pros I talk to HATE it. Photographers who rely on a muted palette and who work in color managed workflows can't tell what's going to roll out of their printer with displays like the iMac's glossy LED display - the colors seem too contrasty and saturated, so everything gets dialled down too far.
That's my experience. Pros hate these damned displays.
Pro-ID group Discovery Institute has released an evolution textbook for use in schools, but a review shows it to be chock full of bad science and questionable reasoning
^ These idiots a veneer of respect by treating them as if they're rational? They AREN'T. They are functional (but nevertheless, crazy as a shithouse rat) religious zealots who do not respect science unless it serves their beliefs (see also: nuclear power, IC engine, medicine, etc.).
Myspace, IMHO anyway, is much more important to the music community because of its ability to allow non-commercial, non-signed artists to put their music and group information out there for everyone to see.
Too bad MySpace is so poorly designed and that so many of the pages are horrific messes.
But hey - if indie artists want to use a social network equivalent of a state university dorm to promote themselves, that's fine. They'll probably stay indie artists for quite a while with that tactic.
Slashdot Mirror
The vette also has a ridiculously tall top gear, which at 60 mph is ticking the engine over just a few hundred rpm over idle.
Helps fuel efficiency at highway speeds immensely, given the low cD of the vette.
You'll never be able to build and support hardware while maintaining your current net profits.
Penny wise, pound foolish.
Fucking gasoline explosions, how do they work?
Lion is plausible, but I suspect it will be called Leo.
Mac OS 8 was originally developed as Mac OS 7.7. I have the beta CD to prove it....
I use NeXTStep 4.2 on VMWare, you insensitive clod!
Several answers and none is quite right.
Commercial and civilian jets all have certified ceilings that vary depending on the weight, balance, of the aircraft and length of the cruise, headwinds, weather, etc.
Most comercial jetliners can cruise at 36-40,000 feet. The Concorde cruised higher, at around 60-62,000 feet.
Additionally, commercial jets usually stick to well-known routes directed by ATC. Spacing for height and distance is variable.
It's a trap!
I think Smartphones are one area where the vertical integration model works well. The fragmentation of Android will diminish it's value to handset makers as customers like you get soured on the issues involved.
This is not how the Face of Boe got his name.
Or maybe so.
Strangely enough, I find that even over ten years after leaving an Unnamed large computer company's customer relations group that my fingers type "customer" when my brain commands "custom".
Shit, almost did it again.
Do they give money back to the users when a drug dealer is busted?
At the altitude that the space station is oribiting, there is no atmosphere, and thus no drag per se.
I beg to differ. From SpaceRef.com:
"As a further consequence of ISS attitude, the station's daily orbital decay has been at its lowest (~20 m/day). Orbital decay is a function of atmospheric density at the orbit altitude and the station's cross-sectional ("frontal" or "ram") area, which creates the drag. Depending on attitude, ISS drag area can vary between a low of 390 square meters (where it is currently) and a high of 670 sq.m."
Well there is that Saturn V on the lawn somewhere. Houston I think.
One in Houston, two in Huntsville.
The wings on the thing are just on there to help control the descent and serve as fuel storage.
Shuttle keeps fuel in the wings, hunh? That's a new one. Here I was, all these years, thinking that's what the big orange tank was for.
The wings on the shuttle do not provide lift; the entire shape of the shuttle does. Do a search for "NASA lifting body tests".
"If its on its last mission, and its never going to be relaunched, why bother bringing the thing all the way back, just to be decomissioned?"
Heat, power, air, maintainability. Not to mention that the ISS crew rotating out would need a way to get home and the trip is free.
The ISS was built to store/supply all these things for months at a time. The shuttle was never meant to.
Another factor - drag - shouldn't be discounted either. While the drag at ISS altitude is very tiny, it does exist.
Do you have any idea how much it costs to turn around a shuttle for relaunch? Or to build the infrastructure capable of refurbishing and relaunching it?
Of course not. Anyone with even a passing familiarity of the overhaul each shuttle gets when it reaches the OPF knows that only Governments, Microsoft, and Google have the resources to launch a shuttle.
Boeing and Lockheed (A.k.a. USA) might have a passing chance at operating the shuttle privately, but with the vehicle's inherent limitations, dangers, and cost, no one would be crazy enough to lend them the operating capitol, including their parent companies.
Anytime I want to read pie-in-the-sky conjecture about the space program from people who have little to no idea what they're talking about, I come to Slashdot.
Shout out for Ames Research Center - where the Pioneer spacecraft got their initial marching orders.
Tucked right between Google and Yahoo, too.
Whoops, that should be:
1 Boeing 757-200 (Rolls-Royce power)
1 Boeing 767-200 (GE CF-6-80 power)
So, let's see what they've got:
1 Boeing 767-200 (Rolls-Royce power)
1 Boeing 757-200 (GE CF-6-80 power)
1 Alpha Jet
At other fields:
2 Gulfstream G550s
Think they've got enough of a little air force there?
So....the problem is that photographers are too stupid to know what they're looking at?
Nice. I'll make sure to tell the photographers who have been making art for thirty years that they don't know what they're talking about.
Two of my clients are Apple "Pros", who have made their needs fully and widely known at Apple...when someone who isn't trying to promote Aperture is listening.
No. One. Gives. A. Shit. At Apple.
Some number larger than two of my clients are Canon Masters. Apple doesn't care. Canon recommends PCs. Where's Apple going with this glossy-only crap?
I work with several professional photographers as a consultant. I can assure you that glossy displays DO NOT work as well subjectively for most photographers and other artists using LCD displays. Some photographers still insist on using CRTs because of those subjective preferences.
You can bake the numbers all you want, but if the palette and contrast don't feel right for photographers - many of which started using Photoshop to work with Tango-scanned film images - they will not touch it. Consistency, not gimmicks, are key for these folks.
These are not gear queers running out to compare the specs on the newest whoosy-whatsit, but artists who are extremely picky about their equipment. Here's what they tell me they HATE about glossy displays:
-Extreme brightness on glossy displays = extreme contrast. It's harder to believe you're looking at a calibrated 2.2 gamma when your "superbrite" glossy LCD display has such a massive contrast ratio.
-Working in neutrally-painted, darkened rooms is optimal. When you turn these superbright LCDs down to achieve a reasonable brightness for a darkened room, the glare and reflections from the glossy panel are distracting. Turn it back up, and it takes you several seconds to a minute to see where you're going.
-The higher brightness leads to colors looking more saturated, which sells with consumers. Most pros I talk to HATE it. Photographers who rely on a muted palette and who work in color managed workflows can't tell what's going to roll out of their printer with displays like the iMac's glossy LED display - the colors seem too contrasty and saturated, so everything gets dialled down too far.
That's my experience. Pros hate these damned displays.
Piyush Jinda, Governor of Louisiana (George Bush with a funny name, if you ask me) is trying to sneak this shit right back in.
Louisiana: Last on the good lists, first on the bad lists, and determined to keep it that way.
I can say that because I'm a rare escapee from that temple to ignorance. Still, it's a lot of fun to visit the Bayou State.
And while we're at it, can we stop giving:
^ These idiots a veneer of respect by treating them as if they're rational? They AREN'T. They are functional (but nevertheless, crazy as a shithouse rat) religious zealots who do not respect science unless it serves their beliefs (see also: nuclear power, IC engine, medicine, etc.).
Too bad MySpace is so poorly designed and that so many of the pages are horrific messes.
But hey - if indie artists want to use a social network equivalent of a state university dorm to promote themselves, that's fine. They'll probably stay indie artists for quite a while with that tactic.
iTunes doesn't do this. You can burn to CD or copy any iTunes track unlimited times.
iTunes does restrict playlists to ten CD burns, but copying the contents to another playlist resets the counter. The summary is poorly informed.