3 ms·
I love the graph on that page, where 160-175 "degrees of hydrophobicity" are illustrated as a huge, exponential increase over 110 degrees. To me, more than the
by mattdeboard 15y ago
I love the graph on that page, where 160-175 "degrees of hydrophobicity" are illustrated as a huge, exponential increase over 110 degrees. To me, more than the breathability or durability or whatever other technical issues, that graph is a huge red flag that this is 90% marketing, 10% engineering.
- networkjester 15y agoThe scaling, though not noted seems to be about 10 degrees per line. Which means the 160-175 is actually shy of where it should be (about 5 lines up from the 110). That bar actually shows it's at 150 degrees, which must mean their marketing is actually very conservative if we are to make grand judgement calls from one graph on a company's page. ;)
- inconditus 15y agoThe parent was referring to how they didn't start from 0, so it seems 160 degrees is 5-6 times larger than 90 degrees.
- Ideka 15y agoHere you go, an accurate graph: http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n147/IDKAA/graph.png http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n147/IDKAA/graph.png
- Avshalom 15y agoActually the graph states that 90 degrees is the zero line because anything less doesn't count as hydrophobic. The whole page in fact explains what the graph means.