Go read this website. Dvorak really isn't that great compared to other layouts. If you're going to learn a new layout, pick one that performs better. Dvorak was a good idea, but it was designed in the days before computers and modern statistical analysis.
That's it! Exactly the one I was thinking of. It looks like "QGMLWB" is actually the best layout overall, according to his statistical work.
Wind power is considerably older than that. It's actually considered to be the first form of non muscle based power used by himans.
Also "renewable" and "sustainable" have reached the point of being politcial "weasel words" more often that sensible descriptions.
Dvorak is good, but Colemak is also a very good alternative that's probably a lot easier for Qwerty typists to adapt to. Also, some guy did a bunch of research and made a website (wish I had a link, sorry) about different keyboard layouts and found that Dvorak was actually eclipsed in some metrics by both Colemak and another layout he created.
>I think they do manual point-to-point wiring on the switches. But if you look at the sculpted shape of a Maltron, they don't lend themselves to conventional PCBs.
This sounds like an application for flexible circuits boards. Point-to-point wiring is far too labor- and time-consuming.
Is this the wisest choice? In my opinion, MicroUSB is actually a pretty crappy connector, and doesn't have very good retention. MiniUSB and regular USB-B ports are far better and sturdier choices for a corded item on my desk which gets bumped around a lot. The only really good thing about MicroUSB is the thinness, but that's only important on mobile phones, not large items like keyboards.
I don't get the bit about weight. Aluminum has a very high strength-to-weight ratio; you're not going to get a product with the same weight and durability with wood (e.g. you could use balsa, which is extremely lightweight, but it also have low strength and absolutely terrible hardness).
In high quantities, aluminum should be pretty economical; you can just use a big press to stamp it. The big cost here is the tooling, but after that the per-unit cost is cheap. Milling is far, far more expensive than pressing/stamping, and only really makes sense if 1) the quantities are really low and/or 2) the product cost is really high and 3) it's really needed for some reason. For enclosures and the like, stamping is usually sufficient.
To keep it from looking like an Apple product, there's something really cool you can do with aluminum called anodizing. Anodize it black and give it some corners and sharp lines and it won't look anything like an Apple product. Anodizing is better than paint since it's more durable. For a high-end product as this is sure to be, it should be within budget.
...but only if Samsung proved its viability first
Except that OEM preinstalls tend to be of very little vaule in "enterprise" environments. Even those fairly free of "crapware".
UA army claimed all BUKs were crippled beyond repair, so it is also likely that specialists and materials needed for repair (if it indeed happened) came from Russia.
Or what was stolen was rather less "crippled" than the Ukrainian Government would like to admit.
It isn't as if politicians tend to be the most honest of people, even in peacetime.
The plane was 10km up. It wasn't shot down by something bought for $50,000 from Bob's Quality Used Implements of Death and Destruction and delivered to you by a courier van. The suspected weapon system requires at minimum one tank sized tracked launcher vehicle, and for full capability it requires three such vehicles. This is way out of Bob the arms dealer's league. Although I'm pretty much guessing here, the missile alone I expect would cost over a million dollars to manufacture.
You mean something like http://www.mortarinvestments.e...
On the other hand any kind of "app store" in an "enterprise environment" where installing any kind of software is about the last thing "end users" should be doing.
Could always put politicians (and their cronies) in there
One side effect of prohibition is that of "legal hights". Which whilst not illegal often turn out to be considerably more toxic then what's been previously banned.
IIRC the numbers were the lowest the drug companies could get away with.
Anyway, what I'm saying is not that statins are bad, but merely to question what your goal cholesterol really should be. Your brain has a lot of cholesterol (myelin is high in cholesterol) and cholesterol modulates your cell wall plasticity. Too low would be bad.
One very intresting thing is pattern B LDL particles contain less cholesterol than pattern A LDL particles. Which rather means that breaking lipoproteins apart and looking at their lipid "cargo" is likely to be less useful than looking at the lipoproteins themselves.