Russian engines have primarily been high-pressure designs, while American engines have primarily been low-pressure designs.

However with the full design and build specifications in-hand, with trial engines already built to verify the specifications and designs were correct, the US can build high pressure engines.

Will they? That's a good question. Russia has effectively been giving away engines for cost to keep their space industry from collapsing. Under those conditions I don't see how it's economically feasible to not buy them from Russia, since being wonderful capitalists the US military would buy them from companies who build subcomponents for a profit to the general contractors who put the subcomponents together into the basic components who turns around and sells them to... and the very far end of that chain is the military, who pays Lockheed and Boeing for the completed product.

I sincerely hope SpaceX succeeds financially, as it really represents a change from the subcontractors of subcontractors of subcontractors pyramid that represents the traditional US space industry.

It can, but it'll only happen once the media companies get serious about computers. Right now they're content to let their software divisions bring in profits without any need to legislate laws to protect their antiquated, broken business models.

Once they realize their software divisions are doing poorly due to, well, because they're the ones running the companies, they'll start prodding their lobbyists with sharp sticks to "protect" their software divisions too.

The other cameras were on the recovery ship, which couldn't reach the recovery area without, you know, sinking. They'd have ended up roughly where the master recording currently is, resting on the ocean floor.

The problem isn't the camera, it's that the data was garbled during transmission. In part because both the source and destination locations were in constant (and, given the storm, quite random) motion. It's hard to hit the side of the barn when you're aiming from mid-air in the center of a tornado.

That they got even this much is remarkable.

This comment reminds me of the people on Apple Support Communities who insisted that FlashBack was not actually a thing, that it was not infecting any systems, anywhere, and it was all just a big myth created by AV companies to sell product.

Meanwhile I was spending a day each week clearing FlashBack off dozens of infected student systems because the kids were too &*(@#$ stupid to not whack the monkey or whatever stupid thing they did in order to get infected (and god help us if we didn't give them administrative privileges, you don't want to hear the caterwauling they make at the slightest hint of restrictions).

See, apparently I'm in the employ of AV companies and didn't know it. My bank account never noticed it either.

A company I used to work for held negotiations with music & movie companies over a product we wanted to bring to the market which would let customers listen to music, watch videos, etc. while sitting in a restaurant or similar location. Essentially it took the place of a jukebox but since everything was in digital form it could have additional functionality.

This was back at the height of the xxAA's anti-P2P "Napster" hysteria, when they had their heads lodged firmly in the sand that everything digital was evil. Before the iTunes Music Store proved they were being completely asinine.

In any case, the only way they said they would work with us is if we helped them, at our expense, figure out how to charge all movie & music customers, everywhere, for every time they viewed a movie or listened to a song. And they'd own the rights.

As you can imagine, my employer decided to kill the project. Multi-billion dollar companies expected a small business to foot the bill for their asinine product development plan...

(small voice) But I like pretzel buns...

Scan in the card, scan in the $20, throw both into the trash, then recover all the $20 bills later that night after they hit the dumpster.

Look deep into your heart, you know it to be true.

Really, I don't know what all the fuss is about. So I threw a few chairs, haven't we all?

Well, if you were in one of the states where she wasn't on the ballot, it would have to be a figment.

If Apple has the margins of a fashion company, does that make Cisco even more fashionable since their margins are higher?

The market they sell into is meaningless, your original statement said absolutely nothing about their customer base, just their profit margins. Since Cisco's profit margins are higher than Apple's, therefore they must be even more of a fashion company than Apple, according to your original statement.

Changing your statement now, to try to make it mean something completely different, isn't helping. What you said is right there for all the world to see.

Just take your lumps. We all make mistakes.

I bought the chair. It's mine, I can do what I want with it.

And if I want to run around on stage holding it on top of my head while chanting "Developers" over and over...

This is just a guess, but I suspect he meant a chain link failure.

All to have the same functionality of a laptop in a docked (home/office) setting. In a mobile setting you have a tablet, instead of a (larger, heavier, etc.) laptop.

Listen, I don't even believe in laptops because they're less powerful than desktops, nor do I own a tablet. But I can understand the appeal of a light, responsive "mobile" device that can accomplish what needs to be accomplished on the go while docking to get extended functionality when you get home or to the office. And it's not like (better, not bottom-of-the-barrel netbook-esque models) laptops don't also have docks to gain ports and slots and additional functionality when you reach the same places. Arguing against docks when docks exist for both platforms is just silly.

Frankly the largest thing I want to be hauling around is a smartphone or similar pocketable device. I'm not thrilled with the current mobile iDevices because their screens are just a bit too small, but if the iPhone 5 comes out with a larger screen it may make a suitable replacement for my current mobile device. And no, the iPad isn't a mobile device in my book - if I can't fit it in my pocket, it isn't mobile. But that's for me, others can use their own value system and still be perfectly rational, even if the result doesn't match mine.

No, it's still a tablet. Want to know why?

Now that you're done sitting down editing your documents with a keyboard and screen, pick up your computing device. Remove the keyboard. Remove the video output. Strip it down to the bare, lightest, minimum for mobile use.

You can't do that with a touch-screen laptop. You're stuck lugging around extra equipment you don't need in a mobile setting. That extra equipment carries a power penalty. A weight penalty. Penalties you don't have to pay with a tablet solution.

Just because a tablet can be expanded doesn't mean a touchscreen laptop can be contracted.

The only websites I really notice being built entirely in flash are car company websites, but they all have sensible mobile sites.