tso-d_chris

Okay, that's pretty obvious logic, now that you've pointed it out. I need more coffee, I guess.

Do you think Jobs is still bitter that Gates stole requisitioned from him the software he himself borrowed in an other than fully ethical manner from Xerox? Or maybe it's because Gates went on to build the world's biggest fortune with the booty? Either way, Microsoft has failed to ever produce, by themselves, from scratch, a decent operating system. Apple has succeeded.

I had it in 92. For Great Deals on Gear

What software have you been unable to find for Mac? I was not aware that this was a big deal anymore. Even games are becoming more widely available for Mac, and that seems to be their weakest area, as far as applications are concerned. I agree, XP is way better than all previous versions of Windows.

The days of overpriced Macs has been gone for awhile. To buy a comparable PC costs about the same, and Total cost of ownership has been shown many time over to be substantially lower than that of PCs.

Nope, not true. The universal binaries will run on both platforms. BTW, there are simple work arounds to allow G5 software on a G3, your G4 should be good to go for a long time to come, with few if any limitations. The Intel chips do not support Alta-Vec, so the fastest of the G3 machines might actually be viable a bit longer, since this is the primary difference between G3 and G4.

Well, since you brought it up... I think that Apple has had up and running for five years an operating system that was from day one designed to run on a 32 bit x86 processor. Microsoft cannot say that. As I understand it, there will be nothing to stop a Mac from running Windows; non Apple x86 chips will NOT be able to run OS X. So basically customers will be given the ability to switch back to Windows if they don't like OS X. According to Apple, OS X has them set for the next two decades. Given that they have written five operational versions of the current OS already, it appears that Apple does indeed have longterm vision. And if they do take a temporary hit in Mac sales between now and the time they are intel inside, they have iPod sales and iTunes to carry them through. The transition, from a users standpoint, should be pretty seemless. The company that produces Mathmatica, a pretty hard core math application, was able to recompile their software, and it only took one person two hours to recompile the entire program, including unreleased extensions. And that was from the time Apple told the guy what he had to do. Only twenty lines of code had to be changed, and the end result could be run on either platform. Software developers are more familiar with the x86 platform than the PPC, anyway. And apple has a transparent emulator that will run the few programs that have not yet been ported at release time. Their timing couldn't be better with respect to Microsoft, who has been unable to deliver Longhorn. The intel macs should be out by then, possibly already running Leapard. It is unlikely Microsoft will field a comparable OS. I think Apple knows exactly what they are doing, and by making this move they are taking a short term risk at a time they can well afford to lose and survive, for the longterm benefit of being able to increase sales and make large gains in market share by letting users take the Pepsi Challenge, so to speak. I think the Apple stores have proven to Apple that if you let people try it, most will want to switch.

I hope you don't think I seriously meant to imply you were alienating Mac users. I just like to pick on you MS fans because I know I'm the underdog. (And because I know Macs are better. Sorry if it came across the wrong way. Don't get me wrong, XP is the best version of Windows I've used, and I started with 3.1. Nonetheless, it still has serious shortcomings, especially for the non tech saavy. I feel it compares more in look, feel and functionality to OS 9 than OS X, though. Microsoft just hasn't kept up. Their GUI looks cluttered, and the operating system doesn't have enough control over the software. (ex: Active X).

I can do that with my mac! I was a PC person for many years, until I had a chance to play with OS X for a year or so, and experienced for myself the differences. The stability of Unix (the foundation of OS X) is unmatched. I like being able to go weeks between reboots. I'd be willing to bet that in a year, when Intel Inside Apples hit stores, people will be amazed at just how much more efficiently and stably apps run on OS X than Windows, given the same processor. OS X has been written from the beginning to run natively on Pentium chips; Microsoft ha still not upgraded all the code patches written for 16 bit processors in Windows XP. Of course Longhorn will come out in a year or two, but it will likely be too little too late, since OS X Leopard will be releaed at about the same time. Incidentally, Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop were available for Macs first!

I have one, but compared to my Mac it does less, more slowly, and less efficiently, so until I find a reliable OS for it, it isn't being used. Also have unlimited access to an Alienware Area 51M (a high end PC based laptop), but while it is faster than my Mac, the reliability is not there. It suffers from all the problems inherent in Windows, which don't affect my Mac.

It's all illegal now, even the prescribed stuff, according to the US supreme court today.

???? For Great Deals on Gear

Given the market share of XP vs OS X, Mac users are checking out your site at a much higher rate than Windows Xp users. Why alienate them?

So the port was successful; it does work just like the Windows version?

The only guarantee in aviation: If you take off, you will land. For Great Deals on Gear

From what I have been reading, the thread has and still is about RWS justifying a price increase. I am not bashing Vector in any way. It is with good reason that it is the most imitated container on the US market today. But the fact is, it is very well imitated in very recent years. So well that some aspects have actually been improved upon, if only marginally, such as Aerodyne's mini force risers, which Bill Booth's own testing proved to reduce necessary pull force by 1-2 lbs. Not much, admittedly, but if we are going to nitpick about little differences, the Vector comes up slightly short in that particular comparison. I just compared closely a brand new Icon and Vector 3. Admittedly, the workmanship is clearly better on the Vector. Bear in mind that does not imply poor workmanship on the Icon. It's just that in this particular comparison, the Vector comes out slightly ahead. The design seems to be slightly more detail oriented on the Vector. Again, the perceived benefits are likely to be marginal at best. In fairness, I am not a rigger, and it would be very interesting to hear what an experienced master rigger hadto say about the two rigs during a side by side comparison. Or, better yet, an engineer from each company! From what I can see, the two rigs have far more in common than they have differences. Evidently I'm not the only one who has noticed this, and that is why jumpers want to understand why RWS is increasing prices. For Great Deals on Gear

***Damn! I do believe that's the pre-second video clip I've ever seen posted in the forums! Didn't think anyone could ever get one small enough in size...Quote

Jimmy Tranter and The Freedom Of Flight School did a lot of feet first tracking. He called it the MoonSlide. Nobody around here had seen anything like it before. This was a couple years ago, and those guys could track flatter feet first than 98% or more skydivers can track headfirst. The training tapes were very impressive to watch. For Great Deals on Gear

I learned the three types were: Profile drag, due to the viscosity of the air as it passes over the surface of the wing. Induced drag, which is the horizontal component of the Total Aerodynamic Force, which is perpindicular to the chord line. Use of the term drag would imply that Induced drag can only exist with a positive angle of attack. Parasitic drag is drag due to non lift producing parts such as your canopy lines or the jumper under the canopy. Part of the problem with modeling a track mathematically is that few people are able to track with a low enough angle of attack to keep from being well into stall range, and the movement due to deflection is going to change drastically with slightly different tracking positions between jumpers. For Great Deals on Gear

You need to consider what type of Racer; it comes in different configurations. Does it have Velcro riser covers, or tuck tabs. Don't be afraid of Velcro, but be aware that it does require periodic maintenance/ replacement. A well configured and maintained Racer is one of the most under-rated rigs when it comes to freefall security. They are also known as perhaps the most comfortable harness/container out there. And without any doubt, no US manufactured or marketed container has the level of reserve pin security that the Racer has. Period. I know at least one highly respected freeflier who considered it a major concession to his team to give up his Racers in order to receive sponsorship from a more expensive, more popular model. Rigging can be a concern with a Racer. Many riggers aren't as familiar with them as with other brands, and find them difficult to pack, and actually charge more. Those that pack them often tend to find them easier to pack, and will sometimes even charge a little less (usually to thumb their noses at the riggers who complain about them being too hard to pack! Other riggers charge more, fairly, to pack the Racer because they replace the Velcro. This is money well spent IMO. The Icon is fast becoming a popular choice, for good reason. It is a nice looking, secure container available at a relatively inexpensive price. Although it has not been around nearly as long as the Racers, there are many in use, and I haven't heard any major complaints about them. For Great Deals on Gear

Check out a Racer. No American rig currently on the market has the reserve pin security of the Racer. Every rig has its own strengths. Vector has excellent reserve pin coverage, but not the best. For Great Deals on Gear

Time will tell. Just a few years ago there was a pretty big difference in different model rigs with respect to freefall security. Today those differences are getting smaller and smaller. I know of no major sport container being offered in the US today that is not freefly friendly, especially when compared to even the most secure rigs from a few years back. I have a feeling that the higher priced manufacturers are going to have a harder and harder time in the years to come justifying huge price differences in products that are so similar. There seems to be a growing demand for less expensive rigs, and if that continues, the manufacturers that can deliver a quality product at a lower price are going to win the customers' business. I am not pointing out RWS in particular; other skydiving manufacturers have raised their prices as well. But I don't believe for a second that the (higher priced) container manufacturers are not making money. That's just BS. For Great Deals on Gear

I f I remember correctly, the Set 400 is made that way, but I think two cells on each end are tri chambered. For Great Deals on Gear

I checked it out on a Windows machine with IE. It is indeed a very cool addition to your site. The ask Skygod was a very good idea, IMO. I hope the Mac version comes out soon though! I'll stop in tomorrow anyway. It's gonna be tough finding real chocolate on such short notice, though.

Apparently all you have to do is make 10,000 skydives, fly the Velocity for the first ever wingsuit / canopy dock, BASE jump into a cave and turn LOTS of people on to skydiving. (Congrats to Vladi for being featured. He's definitely worthy of the recognition.) For Great Deals on Gear