JAT
Mar 22, 02:06 PM
I'm glad that RIM and Samsung come with those prices.
Next months will be crucial for me to decide the successor of my iPad 1.
Come: present tense. See: iPad2
Will come: future tense. See: Samsung tablet.
May come: conditional tense. See: RIM tablet.
Next months will be crucial for me to decide the successor of my iPad 1.
Come: present tense. See: iPad2
Will come: future tense. See: Samsung tablet.
May come: conditional tense. See: RIM tablet.
freeny
Jul 20, 08:18 AM
I wonder what they're going to call them, Quad sounds cool but "Octa or Octo" just sounds a bit silly.
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
Ive already trademarked "OctoCore" and "CoreOcto";)
Just keep saying it to yourself. After about the 12th time it just starts rolling off your tongue...
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
Ive already trademarked "OctoCore" and "CoreOcto";)
Just keep saying it to yourself. After about the 12th time it just starts rolling off your tongue...
NJRonbo
Jun 18, 07:32 AM
There has been a lot of speculation that PIN
numbers were given out as early as 7am that
morning -- well in advance of the 12pm CST
preorder start.
If you read posts here on Mac Rumors you
will see that claim is substantiated.
Very unhappy with the way Radio Shack ran
this entire preorder campaign.
numbers were given out as early as 7am that
morning -- well in advance of the 12pm CST
preorder start.
If you read posts here on Mac Rumors you
will see that claim is substantiated.
Very unhappy with the way Radio Shack ran
this entire preorder campaign.
LightSpeed1
Apr 6, 12:08 PM
Looks as if I should hold off on getting an air now.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
FreeState
Mar 4, 06:44 PM
Are they affiliated with WBC?
Nope. But according to Southern Poverty Law Center they are being watched as a hate group.
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/the-hard-liners
Concerned Women for America
Washington, D.C.
San Diego, Calif., activist Beverly LaHaye, whose husband Tim would go on to become famous as co-author of the Left Behind novels depicting the end times, started Concerned Women for America (CWA) in 1979 to create an anti-feminist group that matched the power of the National Organization for Women. Today, CWA claims more than 500,000 members organized into state chapters, a radio program that reaches more than 1 million listeners, and a cadre of attorneys and researchers devoted to the group�s mission of promoting biblical values.
LaHaye has blamed gay people for a �radical leftist crusade� in America and, over the years, has occasionally equated homosexuality with pedophilia. In she hired prominent anti-gay propagandists Robert Knight (now with Coral Ridge Ministries; see below) and Peter LaBarbera (now with Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, above) to launch CWA�s Culture and Family Institute. Matt Barber was CWA�s policy director for cultural issues in 2007 and 2008 before moving on to similar work with the Liberty Counsel (below).
While at CWA, on April 12, Barber suggested against all the evidence that there were only a �miniscule number� of anti-gay hate crimes and most of those �may very well be rooted in fraudulent reports.� In comments that have since disappeared from CWA�s website, Barber demanded a federal probe of �homosexual activists� for their alleged fabrications of hate crime reports.
CWA long relied on and displayed Knight�s articles and talking points, including claims that �homosexuality carries enormous physical and mental health risks� and �gay marriage entices children to experiment with homosexuality.� Most remarkably, Knight cited the utterly discredited work of Paul Cameron (see Family Research Institute, below) to bolster claims that homosexuality is harmful.
Today, CWA continues to make arguments against homosexuality on the basis of dubious claims. President Wendy Wright said this August that gay activists were using same-sex marriage �to indoctrinate children in schools to reject their parents� values and to harass, sue and punish people who disagree.� Last year, CWA accused the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), a group that works to stop anti-gay bullying in schools, of using that mission as a cover to promote homosexuality in schools, adding that �teaching students from a young age that the homosexual lifestyle is perfectly natural � will [cause them to] develop into adults who are desensitized to the harmful, immoral reality of sexual deviance.�
Nope. But according to Southern Poverty Law Center they are being watched as a hate group.
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/the-hard-liners
Concerned Women for America
Washington, D.C.
San Diego, Calif., activist Beverly LaHaye, whose husband Tim would go on to become famous as co-author of the Left Behind novels depicting the end times, started Concerned Women for America (CWA) in 1979 to create an anti-feminist group that matched the power of the National Organization for Women. Today, CWA claims more than 500,000 members organized into state chapters, a radio program that reaches more than 1 million listeners, and a cadre of attorneys and researchers devoted to the group�s mission of promoting biblical values.
LaHaye has blamed gay people for a �radical leftist crusade� in America and, over the years, has occasionally equated homosexuality with pedophilia. In she hired prominent anti-gay propagandists Robert Knight (now with Coral Ridge Ministries; see below) and Peter LaBarbera (now with Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, above) to launch CWA�s Culture and Family Institute. Matt Barber was CWA�s policy director for cultural issues in 2007 and 2008 before moving on to similar work with the Liberty Counsel (below).
While at CWA, on April 12, Barber suggested against all the evidence that there were only a �miniscule number� of anti-gay hate crimes and most of those �may very well be rooted in fraudulent reports.� In comments that have since disappeared from CWA�s website, Barber demanded a federal probe of �homosexual activists� for their alleged fabrications of hate crime reports.
CWA long relied on and displayed Knight�s articles and talking points, including claims that �homosexuality carries enormous physical and mental health risks� and �gay marriage entices children to experiment with homosexuality.� Most remarkably, Knight cited the utterly discredited work of Paul Cameron (see Family Research Institute, below) to bolster claims that homosexuality is harmful.
Today, CWA continues to make arguments against homosexuality on the basis of dubious claims. President Wendy Wright said this August that gay activists were using same-sex marriage �to indoctrinate children in schools to reject their parents� values and to harass, sue and punish people who disagree.� Last year, CWA accused the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), a group that works to stop anti-gay bullying in schools, of using that mission as a cover to promote homosexuality in schools, adding that �teaching students from a young age that the homosexual lifestyle is perfectly natural � will [cause them to] develop into adults who are desensitized to the harmful, immoral reality of sexual deviance.�
daneoni
Sep 19, 03:36 AM
PowerBook G5 by the holidays.
lilo777
Apr 19, 09:29 PM
Motorola wasn't the first company to create an iProduct and using an Apple may have infringed on The Beatles' production company's logo (not The Beatles' logo) but it was not a US company. Do you really think that Jobs got the idea for using the Apple name from The Beatles?
It does not matter that it was not US company as long as they were registered in US. Remember Apple suing Australian supermarket chain company for using as their log letter W which slightly resembled an apple?
It does not matter that it was not US company as long as they were registered in US. Remember Apple suing Australian supermarket chain company for using as their log letter W which slightly resembled an apple?
BLUELION
Apr 7, 11:29 PM
The price is set by market conditions to some degree and on the other the producer of the product can set the price despite those conditions.
If you think it is overpriced, then don't buy it. Its that simple. If you owned the Apple, you would price things how you saw fit and influenced by the market conditions. Keep in mind the point of the game is to make money.
Apple products are price-locked. No second hand retailer marks up on them, like Bose. Retailers are told what to sell at and they comply or they lose rights to sell the product. If these are overpriced, it is Apples doing.
If you think it is overpriced, then don't buy it. Its that simple. If you owned the Apple, you would price things how you saw fit and influenced by the market conditions. Keep in mind the point of the game is to make money.
Apple products are price-locked. No second hand retailer marks up on them, like Bose. Retailers are told what to sell at and they comply or they lose rights to sell the product. If these are overpriced, it is Apples doing.
Zadillo
Aug 27, 03:59 PM
Finally people who grasp it
It's not that people didn't understand the joke. It's that the joke ceased being funny after the first couple of hundreds of times it was told.
-Zadillo
It's not that people didn't understand the joke. It's that the joke ceased being funny after the first couple of hundreds of times it was told.
-Zadillo
Hugh
Mar 22, 09:33 PM
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
Dianna Agron Sizzles in Her
dianna agron glee. dianna
.jpg "dianna agron hot tub.")
dianna agron hot tub.
Dianna Agron is an American
Four#39; Hot Topic Event
#6699438 Dianna Agron and Alex
dianna agron hot topic.
dianna agron hot pictures.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
iJohnHenry
Mar 19, 05:52 PM
It's a known fact the Obama Administration monitors MacRumors forums for a populist read on issues... ;)
OMG. I guess I should not have deleted those White House E-mails as spam. :eek:
OMG. I guess I should not have deleted those White House E-mails as spam. :eek:
fivepoint
Apr 27, 02:27 PM
I am fairly confident that rather than pointing to a conspiracy, this simply shows that when scanned, the operator had enabled some sort of "auto-text" option that attempted to read and convert then embed the raw text info in the PDF, as to make the text "selectable" in preview programs.
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
Hopefully you're not insinuating that I am pointing to a conspiracy, I'm pretty sure I was quite clear on that account.
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
Hopefully you're not insinuating that I am pointing to a conspiracy, I'm pretty sure I was quite clear on that account.
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
aafuss1
Aug 5, 10:56 PM
To me the answer to the whole IR/Mac Pro/Front Row thing is obvious - put an integrated IR receiver into the keyboard. The keyboard would come with the Mac Pro (unlike the display) and is rarely under the desk. :)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
A redesigned keyboard-should come in Mac Pro and white colors
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
A redesigned keyboard-should come in Mac Pro and white colors
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 01:55 PM
They would have to: otherwise MBA users wouldn't be able to upgrade.
No, they could go DVD or Mac App Store. I hope we get a USB version, but I don't think it'll happen.
No, they could go DVD or Mac App Store. I hope we get a USB version, but I don't think it'll happen.
Al Coholic
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
They also note that findings that the database continues to grow despite Location services being off as a bug that will soon be addressed.
???
The MRbot needs some lessons in basic sentence structure.
Apple is planning on releasing a free iOS update in the next few weeks that performs the following:
- ceases backing up this cache, and
- deletes this cache entirely when Location Services is turned off.
Oh joy. Now AT&T's lightening-fast EDGE network will seek mindlessly for hours trying to find that lone cell tower as I drive across rural-ass USA. It'll probably take me days to dial out as well.
Thanks Al Franken! Glad you got your useless staff to address this useless matter because there's nothing else you should be doing right now. (Enjoy your short senate term).
???
The MRbot needs some lessons in basic sentence structure.
Apple is planning on releasing a free iOS update in the next few weeks that performs the following:
- ceases backing up this cache, and
- deletes this cache entirely when Location Services is turned off.
Oh joy. Now AT&T's lightening-fast EDGE network will seek mindlessly for hours trying to find that lone cell tower as I drive across rural-ass USA. It'll probably take me days to dial out as well.
Thanks Al Franken! Glad you got your useless staff to address this useless matter because there's nothing else you should be doing right now. (Enjoy your short senate term).
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 06:12 PM
The new Launcher is just one of those eye-candy apps. It'll be the first thing I delete.
Except that you can't delete it. In the beta, at least. It's hard-coded in the dock.
Except that you can't delete it. In the beta, at least. It's hard-coded in the dock.
maclaptop
Apr 14, 04:48 PM
still, you cannot say the iphone is the best smartphone on the market, just as someone else can't say the atrix is the best. Different strokes for different folks!
+1
+1
mccldwll
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
No it's not.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Yes, it is. It's hardly tracking if distant towers are also logged. It's a minor issue. Logs need to be deleted after a short period of time. It will be done.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Yes, it is. It's hardly tracking if distant towers are also logged. It's a minor issue. Logs need to be deleted after a short period of time. It will be done.
hismikeness
Apr 6, 01:29 PM
If tablet sales were Little League baseball, the game would be over because of the mercy rule.
amin
Sep 14, 10:53 PM
I have noticed this emphasis as well; not being an expert on this issue myself though, would you care to shed light on how their coverage is an exaggeration and why we shouldn't be worried about it?
I am no expert, and I am not denying that this issue matters. However, I see no cause for concern unless someone provides some decent evidence that it matters. It strikes me as odd that they (at AnandTech) put so much emphasis on explaining the theory behind a "problem" without making any competent effort at illustrating an example of the problem. When you go to configure a Mac Pro, the Apple page says the following about memory: "Mac Pro uses 667MHz DDR2 fully buffered ECC memory, a new industry-standard memory technology that allows for more memory capacity, higher speeds, and better reliability. To take full advantage of the 256-bit wide memory architecture, four or more FB-DIMMs should be installed in Mac Pro." Yet AnandTech chose a 1GB x 2 RAM arrangement to compare the Core 2 Extreme and Xeon processors. Using this setup, which effectively cripples the Mac Pro memory system, they find it to be at worst 10% slower than the Conroe Extreme (in a single non real world usage benchmark). Meanwhile in any comparison that utilizes the four cores, the quad Xeon whoops ass by a large margin.
I am no expert, and I am not denying that this issue matters. However, I see no cause for concern unless someone provides some decent evidence that it matters. It strikes me as odd that they (at AnandTech) put so much emphasis on explaining the theory behind a "problem" without making any competent effort at illustrating an example of the problem. When you go to configure a Mac Pro, the Apple page says the following about memory: "Mac Pro uses 667MHz DDR2 fully buffered ECC memory, a new industry-standard memory technology that allows for more memory capacity, higher speeds, and better reliability. To take full advantage of the 256-bit wide memory architecture, four or more FB-DIMMs should be installed in Mac Pro." Yet AnandTech chose a 1GB x 2 RAM arrangement to compare the Core 2 Extreme and Xeon processors. Using this setup, which effectively cripples the Mac Pro memory system, they find it to be at worst 10% slower than the Conroe Extreme (in a single non real world usage benchmark). Meanwhile in any comparison that utilizes the four cores, the quad Xeon whoops ass by a large margin.
jmsait19
Sep 19, 02:46 AM
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
You should thouroughly read a post before you quote and attempt to disprove it, or in this case, call the poster a name like fanboy...
The poster before you mentioned how these "sub-$1000" laptops are JUST starting to ship THIS WEEK, not a month ago as you claim. If Apple were to release new MBP on Monday and announce them as "shipping today," then Apple would only mere days behind, not a month.
Sincerely,
Fanboy
P.S. If you skipped to the end of this post again and are about to reply angrily, please go back and read the post as you will better understand what I am trying to say...
You should thouroughly read a post before you quote and attempt to disprove it, or in this case, call the poster a name like fanboy...
The poster before you mentioned how these "sub-$1000" laptops are JUST starting to ship THIS WEEK, not a month ago as you claim. If Apple were to release new MBP on Monday and announce them as "shipping today," then Apple would only mere days behind, not a month.
Sincerely,
Fanboy
P.S. If you skipped to the end of this post again and are about to reply angrily, please go back and read the post as you will better understand what I am trying to say...
Jcoz
Mar 31, 05:22 PM
There is nothing open about having to run everything you do past an authority for approval.
Not that I really care, as the term "open" has been grossly misused by Android fans for a long, long time.
The part I think is really funny, is that all the reasons for doing what google is doing right now, are the clear and distinct flaws that Android fans have been universally denying the existence of for years.
So all I'm saying is, no real difference between the worst of each camps fans.
Complete denial of these problems, until they suddenly are getting "fixed", and then its all "hail to the victors" for conquering long standing issues they've been dreaming would get fixed all along. (in their closets apparently, I mean, fragmentation was never an issue, right? :cool:)
Not that I really care, as the term "open" has been grossly misused by Android fans for a long, long time.
The part I think is really funny, is that all the reasons for doing what google is doing right now, are the clear and distinct flaws that Android fans have been universally denying the existence of for years.
So all I'm saying is, no real difference between the worst of each camps fans.
Complete denial of these problems, until they suddenly are getting "fixed", and then its all "hail to the victors" for conquering long standing issues they've been dreaming would get fixed all along. (in their closets apparently, I mean, fragmentation was never an issue, right? :cool:)
After G
Aug 26, 04:09 PM
If the power consumption is the same... does that mean that the Merom and the current chips suck the same amount energy while going full throttle?
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512keThey'd draw the same power, but the Merom would be done faster at the same clock rate. So you use less power by taking less time to do your work. That and better power saving modes.
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512keThey'd draw the same power, but the Merom would be done faster at the same clock rate. So you use less power by taking less time to do your work. That and better power saving modes.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น