Pressure sensitivity can be a pretty big deal -- 512 levels offers functionality that can't be achieved with just 3. Also, the higher-end Wacom tablets also have tilt sensitivity. Usually tilt is used for doing calligraphy in Photoshop and such, but I imagine it could also be useful in a 3D app like this.
Make sure you try a non-LCD tablet (and an LCD tablet, for that matter) before you buy one. I had a non-LCD Wacom tablet, but I never used it because I couldn't get used to it. I recently got a Wacom Cintiq 12WX and don't regret it. It is on the pricier side, but not as much as the high-end Cintiq 21UX. Wacom also have some that are a bit larger than the Cintiq 12WX for around the same price, but they don't have the extra pressure or tilt sensitivity or the handy touch sliders and buttons on the side.
I haven't used a tablet PC, but I doubt they would be as good as a Wacom if you want it for graphic design or art.
Not all of us want computer games, you know. The only reason I'd have for buying non-Apple stuff was if I wanted to set-up a good gaming machine. For most other things, I prefer Apple.
Yeah, because they are the ones who are more likely to out source work to a private company, right? Last time I checked, parties like Labour generally prefer that the government did it themselves, even if it costs more, and it's the opposition who are the ones who like to out source and privatise things.
But that does still make sense for what Greenpeace are trying to achieve, even if they are unfairly singling out Apple. What wouldn't make sense is going after Apple for an accident -- something that Apple didn't intend to do, which is what this problems seems to be.
I think you are missing my point. What I meant was that a spaceship is pressurized from the inside, like an airliner at high altitude, so from an engineering perspective, it has to cope with negative pressure in relation to the outside atmosphere, compared to a submarine. If they want a pressurised cabin for high altitude flights, then the design will need to consider both internal and external pressure differences, which is unlike any submarine, aircraft, or spaceship that I know of.
But yeah, the OP did get the quote right (I just checked), and I guess Futurama is right depending on how you look at it.
Pressure inside the ship compared to the vacuum of space, as opposed to pressure outside the ship. I can't remember the original Futurama quote, though, so you could still be right in that respect.
But it leads me to something interesting, anyway, as if this proposed vehicle is made, it might have to be built to withstand both positive and negative pressure to quite a high range -- it would be quite a neat (even if small) engineering challenge. Of course, it does depend on if they require a pressurized cabin when flying.
You must be joking. Do you even had kids? I don't believe you do because otherwise you wouldn't have such a black and white view on responsibility, for one thing. Talk about naive...
While that's definitely, possible, I've never, ever encountered that once. I'd rather have a smaller form factor and be prepared to take it in to get fixed on the off chance something breaks if I was in the market for a laptop where portability was a major factor. Besides, it has wireless.
I think the dumber animal here is the one who thinks they know more than people who have actually done research on the idea. Do you have any evidence at all that this is a dumb idea for those supposedly dumb animals other than some anecdotal observations you made as a kid?
Also, this system may be expensive, but is maintaining miles of fencing a quick and easy task?
Actually, "an order of magnitude" is more descriptive than "a lot". And as for wanting to sound smart, DARPA is full of people who are interested in engineering, so perhaps this is just how they normally talk?
None of those really match the performance envelopes that DARPA are after. The flying sea creatures generally don't fly for very long. And the only birds that can spend a long time under water can't fly.
Slashdot Mirror
Pressure sensitivity can be a pretty big deal -- 512 levels offers functionality that can't be achieved with just 3. Also, the higher-end Wacom tablets also have tilt sensitivity. Usually tilt is used for doing calligraphy in Photoshop and such, but I imagine it could also be useful in a 3D app like this.
Make sure you try a non-LCD tablet (and an LCD tablet, for that matter) before you buy one. I had a non-LCD Wacom tablet, but I never used it because I couldn't get used to it. I recently got a Wacom Cintiq 12WX and don't regret it. It is on the pricier side, but not as much as the high-end Cintiq 21UX. Wacom also have some that are a bit larger than the Cintiq 12WX for around the same price, but they don't have the extra pressure or tilt sensitivity or the handy touch sliders and buttons on the side.
I haven't used a tablet PC, but I doubt they would be as good as a Wacom if you want it for graphic design or art.
Not all of us want computer games, you know. The only reason I'd have for buying non-Apple stuff was if I wanted to set-up a good gaming machine. For most other things, I prefer Apple.
Fuck Labour.
Yeah, because they are the ones who are more likely to out source work to a private company, right? Last time I checked, parties like Labour generally prefer that the government did it themselves, even if it costs more, and it's the opposition who are the ones who like to out source and privatise things.
The one that isn't interesting in making a gaming platform?
Perhaps not a good answer for you? A lot of people are using them as servers. I still plan to get two of them.
They like they fact that with a console you plug it in, turn it on and play.
It will be a while before the PC gaming industry can offer that.
Do you have any stats to back up your claim that Apple is more prone to failure than any other manufacturer?
Someone who doesn't want a built-in screen and keyboard?
You pay the government to take problems off your hand. Give credit where it's due.
But that does still make sense for what Greenpeace are trying to achieve, even if they are unfairly singling out Apple. What wouldn't make sense is going after Apple for an accident -- something that Apple didn't intend to do, which is what this problems seems to be.
Actually, the quote says "due to the order of magnitude difference". It doesn't say how many.
I think you are missing my point. What I meant was that a spaceship is pressurized from the inside, like an airliner at high altitude, so from an engineering perspective, it has to cope with negative pressure in relation to the outside atmosphere, compared to a submarine. If they want a pressurised cabin for high altitude flights, then the design will need to consider both internal and external pressure differences, which is unlike any submarine, aircraft, or spaceship that I know of.
But yeah, the OP did get the quote right (I just checked), and I guess Futurama is right depending on how you look at it.
Can someone give me some insight into why splitting the company into two is supposed to help AMD?
Pressure inside the ship compared to the vacuum of space, as opposed to pressure outside the ship. I can't remember the original Futurama quote, though, so you could still be right in that respect.
But it leads me to something interesting, anyway, as if this proposed vehicle is made, it might have to be built to withstand both positive and negative pressure to quite a high range -- it would be quite a neat (even if small) engineering challenge. Of course, it does depend on if they require a pressurized cabin when flying.
You can't seriously be trying to turn this into a slippery slope argument, I hope?
Seriously, traditional societies recognize adulthood at, like 13. That's when you're physically mature.
Good thing it's moved up, then, so that it more reflects mental maturity and not just physical.
Don't worry, I'm sure you'll get your own car once you get a job and move out of your parents basement, so try not to get too upset, OK?
You must be joking. Do you even had kids? I don't believe you do because otherwise you wouldn't have such a black and white view on responsibility, for one thing. Talk about naive...
While that's definitely, possible, I've never, ever encountered that once. I'd rather have a smaller form factor and be prepared to take it in to get fixed on the off chance something breaks if I was in the market for a laptop where portability was a major factor. Besides, it has wireless.
I think the dumber animal here is the one who thinks they know more than people who have actually done research on the idea. Do you have any evidence at all that this is a dumb idea for those supposedly dumb animals other than some anecdotal observations you made as a kid?
Also, this system may be expensive, but is maintaining miles of fencing a quick and easy task?
Shouldn't that be -1?
I then put two and two together and got five...
It's easy to see how conspiracies start when even seemingly sane people make too many assumptions.
Actually, "an order of magnitude" is more descriptive than "a lot". And as for wanting to sound smart, DARPA is full of people who are interested in engineering, so perhaps this is just how they normally talk?
None of those really match the performance envelopes that DARPA are after. The flying sea creatures generally don't fly for very long. And the only birds that can spend a long time under water can't fly.