“A Microsoft rocket would ”

[Rocketeer]

Ok, I put too much effort into this to leave it buried down in the vendor’s thread where few would probably go…

“A Microsoft rocket would…”

A Microsoft rocket would weigh several time more then most model rockets its size because MS engineers have no idea how to develop an efficient design. Because of this you would be required to upgrade an M motor to lift a three foot long, 2.6” diameter rocket to 500 feet.

You would also have to upgrade the parachute to a 28ft T-10 parachute, and the ejection charge would require TNT instead of black powder.

The Microsoft rocket motor would suddenly stop mid-flight and then continue after an unspecified delay. The engine would also require electronics to perform an ‘air-restart’ for those occasions when the motor stops completely. Strangely, you would consider this normal.

Launching a Microsoft rocket would require waiting three minutes after pressing the launch button, while the motor smolders, putts and coughs. If you upgraded to a higher power Intel igniter, this time would be reduced to approximately 15 seconds.

The ejection charge on the Microsoft rocket would ask you “Are you sure” before deploying.

You would be required to press the ‘Launch’ button to stop the motor.

After the rocket lands, you would not be able to touch it for two minutes while the motor smolders, putts and coughs.

Microsoft would define a new standard for launch rods and launch controllers, requiring you to replace all your equipment.

The Microsoft Rocket could not be flown on more then one launch pad, unless you paid for additional licensing fees. It could only be flown for 30 days before requiring you to spend half an hour on the telephone entering its serial number, and all your personal information including SS number and mother’s maiden name, to complete the registration process.

If you repainted your Microsoft rocket, you would have to repeat the registration process.

Microsoft would obsolete your rocket in six months and require you to upgrade to MS Rocket 2.0

With the release of Rocket 2.0, Microsoft will completely re-write the assembly instructions so that nothing goes where it did before.

The Microsoft Rocket would constantly shift both its CG and CP, independently, during flight. Microsoft would market this as a feature.

Microsoft will convince the general public that they need to buy a rocket with more thrust then a Saturn V just to fly at their local Boy Scout club launch in the city park

Microsoft’s marketing campaign will get people excited about the new features on their rocket while making them forget that the same features have been available on other rockets for years.

On the plus side, Microsoft would simplify the rocket so that any idiot could fly one. Then all rocket geeks will have to tolerate their friends constantly bothering them with questions like “Does the pointy end go up?”

Microsoft will attempt to shut down all other rocket companies by including copies of their most popular kits for free when you spend $999 on a Microsoft kit.

Microsoft will produce only two version of their rocket – Rocket Home and Rocket Professional. Professional will cost twice as much Home, but no one at Microsoft will be able to tell you what the difference is.

And finally (I could go on about this for a long time…)

Microsoft Rocket 2006 will be available in the second quarter of 2007.


By a Linux loving Engineer…

 

[TWRackers]

Originally posted by Rocketeer
Ok, I put too much effort into this to leave it buried down in the vendor’s thread where few would probably go…

“A Microsoft rocket would…”

{ Microsoft-bashing goodness snipped here }

By a Linux loving Engineer…

Excellent stuff. Tomorrow, when it's not quite so late at night as it is now, I'll have a few bits to add about Microsoft Rocket tech support.

From a Linux-loving physicist .

Who also owns more rockets than socks .

 

[cydermaster]

"An Open Source/Free rocket would...."

Have everything you need in the bag; paints, glues, rocket parts, hand cleaners, motors ... everything. And if it doesn't have the bit you need in the standard kit, it can be obtained (pre-configured) through a package manager.

Each kit is released in differant versions for differant launch hardware/GSE.

Theres two main camps of how to decorate your rocket: The GPaintScheme and the KPaintScheme. Neither of these camps ever see eye to eye, but they both work just as well as each other. There is a 3rd way: XfPaintScheme, which is really fast but feels like something Microsoft Rocketry(TM) releaseed in the mid-to-late 90s.

'SE' parts for harsh environments (tarmac landings, strong wind, etc) which need to be added at build time. If the rocketeer has more beard than face visable, they may chose to use BSD componants.

The is an emulator available to use M$ parts with Free parts, but its so much hastle to use/configure that its often better just to make your own parts.

Some kits are available in Ready to Fly versions, these are called 'live' kits.

Users can only prep and fly the rockets, you need to be root to change them structually.

Crap ignitors? Just get the bits you need and make your own!

Documentation is a bid sparse, but there are plenty of community run Wikis and #IRC channels for help. Whatever you do, DON'T call the helpline! You'll find yourself talking to somebody who just keeps telling you to "Announciate your vowels!"

The Ubuntu line of kits are partly designed by a REAL spaceman.

Has a superb once-fortnightly podcast dedicated to it: RugRadio; where a beardy bloke, a baldy bloke, a ging, and a short & angry bloke take the mickey out of things names, and each other, for an hour and a half.



From a Linux-loving home user.

 

[spacecadet]

Wouldn't you have to mix your own propellant? Though I suppose you'd get to keep your fingers.

 

[paulk]

Originally posted by Rocketeer
You would be required to press the ‘Launch’ button to stop the motor.

ROTFL! That is the best one!

-Paul

 

[rokitflite]

Crash.

 

[WiK]

Don't forget Sparky, they ever so helpful talking ignitor that comes with Microsoft Rocket.

From another Linux-loving home user.

 

[cydermaster]

Originally posted by WiK
Don't forget Sparky, they ever so helpful talking ignitor that comes with Microsoft Rocket.

I can see it now .... A paper clip with pyrogen on the top popping up and scaring you to death by saying "Are you launching a rocket?", as you drive along the M5!

 

[Rocketeer]

Originally posted by cydermaster
"An Open Source/Free rocket would...."

Users can only prep and fly the rockets, you need to be root to change them structually.

From a Linux-loving home user.

Ok Dan, you beat me to the Open Source commentary. I could only waste so much time at work
But I liked the root reference

And the observation that the Open Source Rocket doesn’t include an annoying cartoon that provides worthless information…:kill:

Here’s one of mine on the subject –
If you have any questions while building your Open Source Rocket, you can use ‘man’ or ‘apropos’ followed by the name of the part and instantly find cross referenced information on how to assemble the part.

 

[ounderfla69]

You forgot this one:

If you read the first 1000 pages of the End User License Agreement Instruction Manual(EULAIM) you would discover that you did not own the Microsoft Rocket and that you entered into a rocket launch license agreement with microsoft. This agreement can be cancelled at any time by microsoft causing the rocket to shut down and become unusable. To accept these terms please push the launch button.

 

[cjl]

Hey - at least it works more often than a mac rocket would

 

[vjp]

Sorry, I couldn't help myself...

 

[ounderfla69]

Originally posted by cjl
Hey - at least it works more often than a mac rocket would

Ah the Mac Rocket: The Mac Rocket is a rocket that cost 5 times as much as any other rocket, uses a special oval motor that is not compatible with the Microsoft engines unless you have pay more to upgrade to the newest release, and never crashes, or at least that what the 9% of the rocket owners who only buy Mac Rockets say.

Hey at least the updates to the Microsoft rocket is free as long as you have a Genuine Microsoft Rocket and not a pirated version.

MArk

 

[BlueNinja]

Originally posted by ounderfla69
Ah the Mac Rocket: The Mac Rocket is a rocket that cost 5 times as much as any other rocket, uses a special oval motor that is not compatible with the Microsoft engines unless you have pay more to upgrade to the newest release, and never crashes, or at least that what the 9% of the rocket owners who only buy Mac Rockets say.

Hey at least the updates to the Microsoft rocket is free as long as you have a Genuine Microsoft Rocket and not a pirated version.

MArk

The updates to the Open Source rocket wouldn't either, and you pay *NO* tax for the initial rocket

 

[WiK]

The Mac iLauncher launch controller only has one button that both checks continuity and launches the rocket. To check continuity, press the button all the way down. To launch, you need to purchase the iLauncher Keyboard unit, and hold down the Ctrl button whilst pressing the continuity button.

Apple Rocket Motors purchased from the iMotors online store (the only place to get them), come encrypted with RMRM (Rocket Motor Rights Management). You can only launch iMotors on Apple launch sites, which have insanely high launch fees.
Giving/swapping/selling iMotors to anybody else renders them useless.
You can also purchase a subscription service, which allows you to take as many iMotors as you can use. However, once you stop paying the monthly fee any rocket you have flown on a subscription iMotor self destructs.
It is possible to remove the RMRM with a simple tool, but it is against the NAR/TRA safety codes, and Apple would sue your arse if you did.
iRangeBoxes are available to store your iMotors in, and come in several different models, such as the iRangeBox Photo and the iRangeBox Video. There are far better, far cheaper Range Boxes on the market, but the majority of iRocketeers have one as a fashion accessory.

iRocket GSE has recently changed internal hardware manufacturers, which makes them compatible with Microsoft Rocket components. Apple's Rocket Scientists originally claimed it was impossible to use Microsoft Rocket components with the new GSE hardware, a group of Ex rocketeers quickly discovered otherwise.
After letting others do the hard work for them, Apple now offer an official tool to help iRocketeers use Microsoft Rocket components with iRocket GSE.

Phil - Still a linux loving home user

 

[ounderfla69]

when I first got into this hobby my first rocket was a DOS rocket in its first release, the Alpha!!!

Mark

 

[Elapid]

they never crashed, fit a tiny footprint, and didn't sap your resources...they were fast and cheap...

 

[KermieD]

The Linux rocket requires an actual degree in rocket science to use with any launcher that's not designed for the Linux rocket. Attempts to mimic launches that are run on 90% of the rest of the world's hardware have resulted mostly in rockets that advance at extremely erratic acceleration/deceleration rates if they clear the launch rod at all. On the bright side, it's not difficult to synchronize a camera with the Linux habit of stalling on physical and visual processes, so you can capture exceptionally clear, blur-free launch pictures as you can capture a completely non-moving grapic image, regardless of the intended velocity of the subject of said image.

Unfortunately, the makeup acceleration to catch the rocket up with the physics that require it to eventually average to real world velocity and altitude tends to shred fins and cause timed events to get skipped.

Timed events requiring visual confirmation are stongly discouraged on Linux rockets.

 

[Rocketeer]

Originally posted by vjp
Sorry, I couldn't help myself...

LOL! And I thought I spent too much time on my post...
Very nice!

 

[Rocketeer]

Originally posted by ounderfla69
Ah the Mac Rocket: The Mac Rocket is a rocket that cost 5 times as much as any other rocket, uses a special oval motor that is not compatible with the Microsoft engines unless you have pay more to upgrade to the newest release, and never crashes, or at least that what the 9% of the rocket owners who only buy Mac Rockets say.
MArk

Not only would the Mac rocket cost much more, but it would be an ‘Easy To Assemble’ (iETX) kit and flown primarily by artistic types that find a regular rocket to difficult to use.
And of course Apple would claim to be the originator of the ETX kit and would attempt to sue other companies that make one, despite the fact that Steve Jobs got the idea for the iETX after he went to watch the Xerox Park Rocket fly…

 

[Rocketeer]

Originally posted by Elapid
they never crashed, fit a tiny footprint, and didn't sap your resources...they were fast and cheap...

Ah yes, the DOS rocket. Those were the days. When you pushed the launch button, the motor always ignited. It would fly to a thousand feet on a 1/2A and the parachute always opened and landed the rocket safely. You didn’t have to deal with a bloated Microsoft API and could easily modify the rocket to do anything you wanted by dealing with the hardware directly. GUI? No one needed a stinking GUI to build a rocket. We had a command prompt and we *liked* it.
The DOS rocket... sigh...
I think I will go sand a Balsa Nose cone and reminisce ...

 

[cydermaster]

SECURITY ALERT!

It has come to light that there are some rogue componants out there which allow a script kiddie, on the other side of the world, to take contorl of your Microsoft Rocketry(TM) launcher and fire it off when he/she fancies. It is advised that you upgrade to the latest version of the motor-mount. Unfortunatly, installing this update will stop the 'chute working. On the bright side; this upgrade will stop your rocket spamming off lots of little rockets, an exploitable 'feature' used by a previous rogue componant, fixing a flaw that should have been plugged 6 months ago. Third party componants, such as RocAware, can be installed to help you find and remove these rogue componants.

 

[adrian]

Microsoft -> Estes
Apple -> Quest
Open Source -> independent manufacturers e.g. Fliskits

Here's how some Linux users built a Microsoft rocket to commemorate the launch of Windows 98.

Possible Microsoft rocket problems:
"Safety key not found. Press 'launch' to continue"
"Ignitor failure. (A)bort, (R)etry, (I)nsert new ignitor"
"The rocket has performed an illegal operation and will be shot down"

As for a rocket which spams off lots of little rockets, I have to plead guilty to that one - here's my "spammer".

General comparison of rockets to software:
You do not own your rocket, only a licence to use it. You may not copy, modify, lend or resell the rocket. The manufacturer is not responsible in any way for any damage to people or property caused by the rocket. The rocket may only be installed on and used with one launch system. The rocket is fitted with a device designed to prevent copying which may not work with your launch system and may even prevent your launch system from working with other rockets.

 

[jimn]

"Your rocket was not shut down properly. Please wait while a Microsoft technician examines your rocket for damage. To avoid this problem, in the future alaways make shure that your rocket is shut down properly."

 

[Bigander]

Microsoft would copyright the rocket and become a monopoly putting estes, quest, and aerotech out of business

 

[Bigander]

Sorry we did not install a big enough motor please install a bigger one and pay $500 for it.-Power supply.

 

[matthew]

An Open Source rocket:-

- makes a great platform for clustering, staging, load balancing, and deploying big commercial payloads using cheap off the shelf components.
- has an enthusiastic vendor community that develop kits for all skill levels.
- encourages you to share your rockets with others.
- deploys easily, but requires more initial knowledge.
- ditto recovery.

A Linux Professional.

"I don't do Windows."

 

[KermieD]

Hehe. Linux professionals always say that:

"A Linux rocket will function flawlessly, be invulnerable to outside factors such as wind, stability, deployment failure, ballistic and/or nuclear attack and sabotage, so long as the person launching the Linux rocket is being paid to learn how to do so properly, has put at least 30 hours into properly setting up the launch apparatus, and has been properly trained to advertise such flawless functionality, even in the face of contradictory evidence of success or lack thereof. Such users have even been known to find ways to make the Linux rocket work with the rest of the world's launch systems, so long as they're willing to accept unusual flight events and moderate to significant timing errors."

 

[matthew]

Originally posted by KermieD
Hehe. Linux professionals always say that:

"A Linux rocket will function flawlessly, be invulnerable to outside factors such as wind, stability, deployment failure, ballistic and/or nuclear attack and sabotage, so long as the person launching the Linux rocket is being paid to learn how to do so properly, has put at least 30 hours into properly setting up the launch apparatus, and has been properly trained to advertise such flawless functionality, even in the face of contradictory evidence of success or lack thereof. Such users have even been known to find ways to make the Linux rocket work with the rest of the world's launch systems, so long as they're willing to accept unusual flight events and moderate to significant timing errors."

You're either into Embedded Rockets, or you should try a kit with an easier skill level. You need to learn the craft in LP before you can join the big boys in HP.

 

[KermieD]

I was waiting for someone to take the "computers should only belong to the 1337" bait.