I just lived this - I started with a Dell Venue Pro 11 i5, TDP 11.5W in plastic case. It was a throttling and heat nightmare, slow, sluggish, very buggy graphics drivers. Next up was the Yoga 3 Pro in the review. Saw the same performance oddities in the review plus buggy graphics (frequent crashes with video, flash, very poor windowed video performance) and poor battery life despite removing all bloatware. Moved to a Asus Zenbook UX305 in the review, Signature Model sold by Microsoft. Felt much faster in use than Yoga 3. In my usage, twice the battery of life or more of Yoga 3. Very light, sturdy and fast, great value. But also buggy graphic problems which seems to be Intel's Core M variant of the 5500 drivers. That plus I just missed backlight on keyboard, returned (but still a worthy model). HP Spectre x360. This unit is a bit heavier but in my view is the winner. Fast, excellent battery life, much better graphics driver, nicest keyboard in my experience. Due to a shipping error got the QuadHD screen, but surprised that unlike Yoga 3 Pro, battery life does not take much of hit and performance is much better. Really like it and it's a keeper. It feels fast enough if you want to do some Photoshop or medium editing but light and sturdy enough that it's close to Macbook Air functionality (3.26 lbs vs. 2.96). Nice range of models from non-Touch. I

>>3D model+texture mapping I work in VFX as well and this is simply not true when have a 2D texture map and 3D model. Incredible distortion and fakery of the texture image is required - this only works if you create new texture maps i.e, completely fake. I use mutiplane animation precisely because it the ONLY animation technique with photographs that allows me to leave the images undistorted. Furthermore, no paint or cloning is done - we only use it when we have multiple views of the data. And, I use the same positional data that you would use in CGI/VFX. Finally, your missing the forest for the trees. Enjoy the beautiful of these real images animated using photoanimation. I and most everywhere who views them finds them far more moving and beautiful than CGI because even the best CGI of space cannot reproduce reality or actual anything close to it. The science of these objects is still not well understood enough to photo accurately model and light them. Far more "processing" of these images goes into the create the color still than I use for photoanimation. Your responding as if I'm faking the moon landing.

It's mutiplane photoanimation not CGI or VFX - like the Oxberry animation camera. Photoanimation is as old as cinema itself but the images themselves on are not computer generated - they are real photographs animated. There is far more alternation of what you see to create a color still in space photos that to animate using photoanimation. No one has used photoanimation to make a space documentary. The approach is textures maps, 3D models, 3D CGI and the normal VFX used. This footage uses none of those techniques - not even painting and cloning in 2D, nor morphing or tweening. Just multiplane photoanimation.

This is the filmmaker here. Gordan is one of the main image processors for the film. This photographs is also "artificial" as Cassini has 1 megapixel black and white cameras. He did quite a bit of geometry and color work to make this image. You are correct the film is not what Cassini sees either. But you can see a video I posted that shows exactly what Cassini does see. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXWmVZxEtlY The technique I'm using is not CGI - it's a technique as old as cinema - multiple plane photoanimation used by Disney and others. I basically use a computer as an Oxberry animation stand camera system. I could make the animation without computers but computers are critical to what Gordan and others are doing. Great to see Slashdot highlighting his artistry. He is a genius.

The article linked about private property on the moon shows that we are likely to fail our test of if we have actually learned anything from our history or not. How (and in some ways if) we explore space will determine our future. I think this is the question of our age and I'm making an IMAX film about this very question with a section detailing what will happen to the moon if current plans are carried out. http://wwww.outsideinthemovie.com/