Hahaha, always a possibility. Though I had thought OpenMoko's lack of success wasn't about it being poorly written, and iirc, that's what you were questioning here.

To clarify, I think Tizen will have an uphill battle:
* Android has a massive head start, and is easy to pick up if you know some C.
* Macolytes generally won't consider anything other than "their precious".

but, if i had to pick a mobile os based on efficient use of hardware resources, Tizen would be worth a look just from its pedigree.

Technically the CNC stands for Computer Numerically Controlled, which doesn't seem to make a restriction to additive or subtractive processes.
Though it should be noted that a traditional CNC mill is subtractive, and 3D printing is additive.

but being Rasterman does!
we don't need another phone os. but if we can get one that runs as fast enlightenment it could be worth a try.

could be...the MATS page suggests all initial terms were met. but it doesn't go into much detail on each individually.

oh, here's another (3rd & 4th paragraphs): http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-h...
"With its 65,000 lbs of thrust, the F101DFE engines produced enough power to give the F-14 a thrust to weight ratio of almost one to one. That means, the F-14B prototypes were able to accelerate in the vertical, something the F-14A was unable of. But the Navy - not the pilots - decided against the F-14B and the test program was terminated in September 1981.

A few years later, in July 1984, Grumman was ordered to take the F-14B prototype out of storage again and install a pair of General Electric F110-GE-400 engines..."

same source again though, so my diversity is low. so far that's the most comprehensive f14 page i've found, but i can't say with any authority how accurate it is.

been chatting about it allot on Falcon BMS forums lately. you know the f14 seems like it might have had the worlds first microprocessor as well: http://www.firstmicroprocessor...

I don't think that's right. Though the p&w engines had serious compressor stall issues and didn't provide the thrust of the later GE engines, at the time the A was fielded in 1974 it was regarded as a pretty incredible performer.

i think this is a grumman promotional video, but it seems they use real nfws pilots and instructors.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

as a side note: it damn hard to find anything on youtube about this plane and that school that aren't about a tony scott film.

from here:
http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-h...

As an incentive for the contractor to fullfill the requirements, the Navy put some penalties on the project if Grumman would fail on some of the contract guarantees:
Empty Weight: $440,000 for each 100 lbs overweight
Acceleration: $440,000 for each second slow
Escort Radius: $1 million for each 10 nautical miles short
Approach Speed: $1.056 million for each knot fast
Maintainability: $450,000 for each extra maintenance man-hour per flight hour
Delivery to Navy Board of Inspection and Survey: $5,000 for each day late

With this background and a good deal of knowledge on building Navy fighter aircraft, Grumman succeeded in delivering the F-14 on time, on cost and as an even better fighter than they contracted for!

I agree whole-heartedly. Just posted a followup after I remembered this was about UK law, and figured I'd bridge the gap for anyone who didn't know about this method the US politicans have of bleeding their filth into other nations*

* not to say the UK politicans are without faults, just that corruption related to IP is something of a US special(i)ty.

though I guess it should be noted that US congress passing laws for **AA only affects the UK after the WIPO says "a good reason to extend UK copyright terms are to be parallel with the US"

This! This! 1000 Times!

Unlike theft, when you share a file it doesn't deprive anyone of their copy, when the **AA lobbies congress to extend copyright it deprives us all of any (even unprofitable) works entering our public domain.

The certainty of all works entering the public domain after a limited time is key to understanding copyright. It was not supposed to devolve into the IP dynasty creation that it is now.

Kim Dotcom hasn't been in the news much lately, so I thought it said Kim Jong-Un for a second. "Oppan Pyongyang style"

I inferred from the little doc-thingy, that the patent had to do with having both a long and a short file name for each file. I had thought (no real experience with non-ms platforms back then) that other operating systems at the time could already handle long file name support, but weren't as concerned with backwards compatibility as microsoft, diminishing the need to maintain a short file name for each file.

Even-so the ancient concept of abbreviating a name with a nickname or alias seems like prior art to me.

scratch that, VFAT was introduced with NT3.5 (September 21, 1994), so the patent was probably filed for in anticipation of the NT3.5 release.

from the same wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table

OS/2 added long filename support to FAT using extended attributes (EA) before the introduction of VFAT; thus, VFAT long filenames are invisible to OS/2, and EA long filenames are invisible to Windows, therefore experienced users of both operating systems would have to manually rename the files.

perhaps that was taken as prior art?

iirc the vfat extension to fat16, was introduced with win95 and had lfn support, while still not being fat32. even-so, the patents should be close to death assuming 20 years (not really sure what the term is in germany. anyone? ). the eu patent was filed for in 5.10.1994 and relates to lfn support.

from wikipedia:
1977 (Stand-alone Disk BASIC-80)
FAT12: August 1980 (SCP QDOS)
FAT16: August 1984 (IBM PC DOS 3.0)
FAT16B: November 1987 (Compaq MS-DOS 3.31)
FAT16X: August 1995 (Windows 95)
FAT32/FAT32X: August 1996 (Windows 95 OSR2)

Another year, another disappointing Toyota...

the green(ish) vehicle we want is the SARD Supra HV-R
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SARD
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/10/Toyota_Supra_HV-R_02.jpg

so why won't they build a few?!?!?!

if i could only spend all my mod points on one post to turn your funny into an insightful.