Sean Mirrsen

Sorry mate, I can't hear you over the sound of a good anti-virus program I'm using that iOS will never have. Also, any relevant data I may have is stored up on Google anyway. There are much more direct means to get at my data than trying to install a trojan on my phone.

And your iPhone appears to have run low on CPU cycles and turned off your spellchecker, encoding support, and formatting functions, so it could display your browser. What pit of linguistic hell did you even copypaste that post from? That said, here, I'll re-format this trainwreck into readable form for the purpose of answering it. Ever heard of "it's a long way to England in a rowboat?" The exact processor model doesn't quite matter much, though. It mostly boils down to basic architecture, and almost all Android devices run the same kinds of ARM processor. Graphics chips may differ, but it's a matter of having good drivers. Likewise, many Android manufacturers ship their own software with their hardware - I at least know that Samsung and LG do. Android being an open system means every manufacturer is free to do it. And face it, iPhone's longer battery life primarily comes from a more power-efficient processor and a smaller screen, not any miracle software optimizations. The OS is freely customizable though. It's kinda like Windows. Many developers make use of that fact and either bundle their own software with the devices, or even outright provide whole modded OS variants like CyanogenMod. This also means that upgrading is theoretically possible on any phone, as long as there is a ROM for matching hardware. Which there often is, considering how many cheaper phones are cloned from others. On dedicated sites, I often see threads for old but popular Android phones, with files and procedures required to upgrade its OS to a newer version. So Android has upgrade bases covered. I've yet to see a program impaired by being able to run on more versions of Android but the latest. That's like saying PC programs are worse because they work (or can be made to work) on all Windows machines from 8.1 to XP (and, in extreme-er cases, 98) with the proper setup.Remember, Android is a pan-device system. In most cases, the same games running on a phone will still run just as well on a tablet, a portable mediaplayer (I broke the screen of mine like two months after I bought it ), a TV or a stationary mediaplayer, as long as the hardware is up to snuff. All you sometimes need is a HD version and a low-res version, to accomodate the difference in screen resolutions between a 256x128 mediaplayer and a FullHD tablet. In the rare cases when a game does require an Android version higher than 2.1, the game itself is probably so resource-intensive that no device running such an early OS version will be able to handle it anyway. I don't think I ever saw official upgrades for any of my Android devices. Sure, there's some patches that keep nagging me to install them, but there doesn't seem to be version-changing upgrades. As far as I know, those upgrades are primarily handled by downloading a matching ROM yourself, and applying it. Like I said earlier, there are plenty of people who are willing to provide those ROMs, and help you install them. Personally I never used any of the modded variants like CyanogenMod, but that's because what I have suits me just fine and I don't have a reason to fiddle with it yet. This also means that if you're careful and remember the Sturgeon's Law, you can find much better, more varied, and more interesting apps there. Getting an app into the Apple Store is a chore. Getting it into the App Store is simple. Plus being able to install .apk files means that you can develop and test apps for the Android yourself, and can run stuff that never appears in stores, like homebrew emulators and third-party drivers. Sure, it makes your device more vulnerable, but you have all the same capabilities on your PC - exercise the same caution, and you will be just as safe. That's because it takes effort to become able to install anything at all on an iPhone. Malware on Android appears because of human laziness, just like on PCs. The same difference as between consoles and PCs, really. Don't open suspicious messages, don't install things you aren't absolutely sure are safe and tested, keep an antivirus running for things that aren't absolutely safe, etc, etc. My Android devices are malware-free. Here's a piece of news: most cheap Android phone manufacturers that are the source of the "fragmentation" you mention, don't give a rat's ass about the iPhone. They beat it out by sheer cost, by providing a phone that does what a phone does at a miniscule fraction of the iPhone's price, but still with enough features to be head and heels above any non-Android phone. My little LG Optimus L5 is an example of that. Sure, it won't run some latest God of War clone for the Android, and has very little screen space to be able to comfortably play strategy games. It doesn't have even a dualcore CPU, it has only half a gig of RAM, its internal storage is pitiful, its camera (singular) is basic, and it sure as hell doesn't have a fingerprint scanner. But I can still do a hell of a lot of stuff with it. More than enough stuff, even. I can play my entire collection of strategy and RPG ROMs, from the NES to the PS1, even with the small screen and glitchiness of onscreen gamepad controls. I can watch almost any video I have here, I can browse and post on the 'net, I can play uncountable free timewaster games from the Store, I can even view and edit text documents in a pinch. Spreadsheets... well, view spreadsheets at least. Point is, with Android, I am able to get all that functionality crammed into a simple, reliable, and bloody cheap phone, that still does everything I need it to do. I'd never have been able to get that with any of Apple's products. For me, Android is king. Summing up my points, then: Android is a better system, wherein the user is free to choose his own software, hardware, and price range, and be reasonably safe in knowing that what he's buying is flexible and forgiving enough to do almost anything he wants with it. There's no point comparing an iPhone to "an Android device", because what a device needs to do is subjective. iOS forces you to pay full price for the whole range of features it has, regardless of whether you want them or need them. Android lets you choose exactly what you buy, and doesn't suffer from any of the flaws you mention any more than, say, Windows does. edit: Aand ninja'd. But I'll leave it here, at least so other people can try and read SpaceXRay's post without suffering eye or brain damage.

This. Very much this. Comparing high-end Android devices is usually a battle of nitpicking and brand preference - there's hardly any decisionmaking involved, it's all in which "feels better" for you. Unless of course you want a stylus, in which case a Note is pretty much your best choice. It's when you're trying to fit into a budget that you start to look through various chinese and korean manufacturers to see if they packed what you want into the price range you want. Ultimately, the difference between buying an iOS device and an Android device, is the same as between buying a console and a PC (or Mac even). Consoles upgrade linearly, are very closed and limited in modification, have their own sets of accessories and exclusive "killer apps", and each iteration of a given console "keeps with the times", ensuring that you own a device of generation-appropriate power at a fixed (high) cost. PCs have specs and prices all over the place, ranging from cheapest bare-minimum office workstations to ludicrously powerful gaming rigs, so the buyer is free to pick one best suited to his needs and customize it to hell and back afterwards; plus the PCs tend to have no "generations" and are often easily backwards- and forwards-compatible in regards to new software - it may not always work well, it may have bugs and glitches as a result of the tinkering, but it can work or it can be made to work.

I am indeed far less likely to lose my fingers while they are attached to me, but that's the reason all Note (and ATIV) devices have stylus docks inside the device body. Unless you're using it, it's never out. I do quite well with my own device, thanks. Do recall I have an LG phone (an old Optimus L5... yes I am a cheap person), which does not have a stylus. And they need a Wacom sensor for the same reason people want mock pressure sensitivity on the iPad, achieved with a special stylus and detecting the size of the contact area (it flattens as you push down on it). If you don't draw, you'll never understand the difference between having a parametrized block brush and a pressure-sensitive dynamic brush. Plus pointer hover function if you want to make sure you're pressing on the exact spot you need or want to read alt text on pictures or tooltips. And on the subject of flexibility, when was the last time you've seen an iPhone with an SD card slot? My L5 has a hilariously small internal memory - 4GB, with only 2.5 actually available. But unlike certain iDevices which shall not be named, I can and do actually have a 32GB microSD card stabbed into it, giving me more internal storage space than a middle-tier iPhone 5. For so much less money that I could easily carry half a terabyte in interchangeable 32GB microSD's, had the L5 had a microSD slot that's not inside of its casing. *glares at his phone*

Thanks for the vote of confidence in my artistry abilities. But art aside (even if that was the major deciding factor in getting a Galaxy Note instead of a Galaxy Tab, and an ATIV Tab 7 instead of an Acer W511), exactly how much accuracy do your regular greasy fingers have? Forget clicking links, how about selecting text paragraphs in a document you might be working on? You might get by if your tablet screen is at least 11'', but you're obscuring whatever it is you're aiming at with your hand regardless. A stylus is at least a thin enough item that you can point it at anything you want with good precision. And excuse you, Apple doesn't use styluses because their iPhings don't have a Wacom stylus sensor. That gives you accurate pointer position on hover, provides a right-click function that works instantaneously (even without touching the screen), and has... er, I forget. 512 pressure levels? 1024? Probably 1024, at least for the ATIV tablets. And of course they function equally well in cold conditions and don't make you wear special-made accessory gloves on the off chance you might need to make a long-distance call in snot-freezing weather.

Well now we see where your inspiration comes from. Hive mind? And I don't know, does Apple have tablets or smartphones with pressure-sensitive precision stylus sensors? You know, for sketching things that don't end up looking made with a mouse in Paint? Me, I've got a Samsung tablet PC for less than I would have gotten an iPad, and Win8 quirks disregarded it's the best thing for working on the go. My mother has a 2010 model 11'' Note, and there's nothing to complain about so far. Samsung just happens to make a lot more than just tablets, so it has some broadness of experience to apply, while Apple... well, like I said, they're kind of stuck in their own furrow. I can't fault their business model, it's pretty apparent that it works, but right now they look like Nintendo, if Nintendo got to the Gameboy Advance and just kept "updating" it and adding bells and whistles to it without innovating further or expanding. Granted, they seem to be doing that with the DS right now, but still. Profitable? Yes. Works for a lot of people? Apparently. But flexible and adaptable it ain't.

The accessories are the bane of the product line, I think. They're neat on the level of USB doodads you can plug into your computer, but ultimately that's all they are. And the practical upshot of them is that when you inevitably upgrade to a new device, you have to buy them all over again because they no longer fit your device. Android-based doodads at least have the decency to not be device-specific. Like this gamepad/mouse/multimedia controller I have here. Works for anything running Android, from a cellphone to a tablet to a TV. Android-based devices may not have the same hardware all around, but that's the beauty of it. Android runs on anything. Just like an OS, for any hardware doodad there are drivers. And unlike iOS, people are free to try and come up with new ways of using them. Keeping the hardware and the software bound may be good from a quality and stability standpoint, but the OS does not evolve without the device, and vice versa, whereas Android constantly improves because of how many devices use it. And AirPlay probably only works with compatible devices. I can name a few Android-powered TVs that offer similar functions, for instance LG's Smart TV series. Really, the thing with Android is that it's an open system, so there's a high chance of somebody noticing something interesting that can be done with it, and just making it work because he can.

This, right here, is the primary sticking point and the primary difference. iOS is a powerful multimedia engine with device management functions. Android is a broad-use operating system, with every good and bad thing that entails. I, for instance, don't want a mediaplayer I can make calls on in my pocket. I can get a decent noname mediaplayer and a decent phone separately for much less. I want a personal computer - not necessarily a PC, but a personal computer. Curiously, I don't have a Samsung smartphone, seeing as I wanted something cheap to replace my... er, Nokia 6670. So I have an LG smartphone with Android. As far as Samsung, I am typing this from an ATIV Tab 7 in laptop mode, purchased for less than a iPad would cost me, and with far more functions, seeing as it has a Wacom stylus sensor and runs Windows 8. Apple is stuck in its own furrow. They have good devices and decent software, but they are keeping both bound together and closed. Samsung and Android are not bound together, and are much more flexible as a result.

The final few meters is easy. The problem is getting yourself aligned. If your ship is more than some twenty tons, you'll have a heck of a time putting yourself on the right trajectory and at the right speed to come within those last few meters. Once you're there though, it's easy enough. Especially if what you're docking to has RCS.

And I use them for a different reason, and on a different kind of airplane - SSTO spaceplanes. Before verniers, if you wanted to have some maneuverability for your spaceplane, you had to bring monopropellant along. And you usually want to have some maneuverability, because a lot of the times you'll be doing some docking to refuel. The problem is, you don't want to bring too little monopropellant, for fear of running out - so when you inevitably return, you're almost certain to have some left over. You're essentially lugging around dead weight and reducing dV. With verniers, all of that is gone. Your only fuel is kerolox - used for both main thrusters and reaction control. Of course, if you run out of fuel now, you are really dead in the water, but you no longer have a separate supply of maneuvering fuel that you're almost guaranteed to be carrying an excess of.

The front gear no longer contact the tarmac when you lift the nose. If you really have a problem with the gear wiggling under pressure, maybe you could try running off the edge of the runway? Or better yet, redesign the landing gear so that you don't use tailstrike guards, but rather the whole aircraft is angled upwards while parked. This way you will take off at a certain speed without applying pitch, and won't have landing gear wiggling issues because you'll lift off evenly.

Er... it's standard in KSP now. Rightmost tab in the part menu in the VAB.

Chiming in as a Steam user, I'd like to say that KSP is one of those games where, if you want to do it, using Steam has no downsides whatsoever. I use Steam regularly as most of the games I own are there, but I have it set up so that it doesn't start with the OS, and in effect I don't see Steam at all unless I want to. So you could use Steam to download the game, and then just completely turn it off and never see it again until there is an update, when you'd log back in - this way you get all the benefits of Steam's better update servers, and none of whatever you see as Steam's drawbacks because you hardly ever even have it running. Move your default Steam library to something accessible like C:\SteamGames like I did, and you'll never have trouble finding your game files either.

Here's what my space program has been up to today: Yes, that's a Mun lander, and yes, it's stranded. Thankfully the contracts don't care for returning the data, and it's got plenty of power to transmit. Brief history of why it has a probe unit on top and why it's hilarious, summed up with the list of active contracts at launch: * Return or transmit data from space around the Mun. (Complete!) * Explore the Mun: - Establish orbit around the Mun. (Complete!) - Return or transmit science data from orbit around the Mun. (Complete!) - Land on the Mun. (Complete!) - Return or transmit data from the surface of the Mun. (Complete!) * Plant a flag on the Mun. (Complete!) * Rescue Mitnard Kerman from orbit around Kerbin: - Get Mitnard Kerman aboard a vessel. (Complete!) - Return home and recover Mitnard Kerman. (Uh...)

Actually, the difference used to be cosmetic, weight, and number of attach nodes. The raised platform on the bases is actually useful sometimes though - saves having to attach a strut to raise a wide payload, so it's not entirely cosmetic either.

Why settle for optimal transfer when you can do better and sooner, just with more dV? Try a straight transfer and see whether you end up ahead or behind of Jool. If you're ahead, half-Hohmann to a (much) higher orbit, pick a fitting point, then transfer back to Jool. If you're behind, do the opposite - drop below Jool orbit, then come back up. It's doable, it just takes more fuel and more time in flight - but less time waiting.

My solution for the problem last time it happened was to extend the apoapsis towards the asteroid, then adjust inclination at the apoapsis and catch the asteroid somewhere on the return. It takes some fiddling with the maneuver nodes to properly plan, but you want your time to apoapsis to be half the time to asteroid's periapsis at most, otherwise you'll miss it. If you've aligned the orbit correctly, once you're at the apoapsis of your orbit it should be much easier to plan an intercept.

You'd think there wasn't much need to store negative time...

I don't suppose I am the only one who thinks that the current parts look excruciatingly out of place on a stock KSP craft? Is there an art pass somewhere in the nebulous plans for the future? ... Failing that, is there anything specific to this mod that one would need to know to make an art pass? And good job on the upgrade! It's good to see this mod working again.

*grumblegrumbleunclearrules* Alright then, entering re-mission! Now with stock RCS blocks, that I didn't even need to use except for maneuvering this time! Even landed back at KSC. Well actually almost landed, then decided to buzz the tower and do a lap around KSC to burn off remaining fuel, and then landed.

And time to chime in with a proper entry. The Rocketship Pretty Fly is not entirely unmodded, but all lift surfaces, tanks, and engines are stock. Mods used are Procedural Fairings for the smooth nosecone and ejectable parachute cover (behind the cockpit), Near Future Propulsion for the aerodynamic-looking RCS blocks and the neat radial stack couplers for the engine pylons, and the mod with the miniature lights the name of which I can't for the life of me remember. And the wonderful Mk2 Cockpit IVA view, of course, but it's not craft-specific.

That's Near Future Propulsion, part of the "Near Future Technologies" set Nertea started to make. I use it for the looks, but it's slightly more efficient, and less powerful.

The problem (as I've found) is that fairing nodes face "up"/"forward", while most if not all powered hinges in IR face "out". You can't make a fairing that looks smooth, like a nosecone, which then unfolds into a service boom or docking node, because you'll have the hinges poking out. It can work mechanically, but it won't work aesthetically. And I like aesthetics.

You could use the powered hinges from the infernal robotics mod, but it'd take some setting up and wouldn't actually look very good.Hmm, I wonder if this mod can have an infernal robotics-based procedural fairing base that has a custom radius and unfolds instead of decoupling?

Trying to make a compact, minimally-modded SSTO with over-the-wing engine pods. It just looks better that way. And unfortunately, looking good is all it's good for at the moment, it can still only make suborbital. But I'm getting there!