Recent Comments:
MacBook Air review {Engadget}
Jan 25th 2008 5:53PM Well, apple basically isn't the first one to do a "thin" laptop.
Tosh did it years ago, and it went by unnoticed...
The R200 is marginally thicker than MBA, but a bit lighter as well.
http://reviews.cnet.com/laptops/toshiba-portege-r200/4507-3121_7-31341787.html?tag=specs
It had a price even higher than MBA, but at least it had normal connectivity for those times :)
Also before you flame at this product, keep in mind that it is 3 years old design wise, so it's hardware is of course completely obsolete. However I think the MBA will spark a wave of thin laptops, but given what is already offered in the ultraportables market, I think the MBA will be more or less a flop.
v2 could be better though.
Let's wait and see.
MacBook Air reviews in from Apple's starting lineup {Engadget}
Jan 24th 2008 4:12AM @AlphaLog:
Yeah, AAPL beat toshiba by an ubelivable 0,4mm. and that "thinnovation" took them almost 3 years, not to mention that the tosh uses a normal LCD (compared to AAPLs' LED lit LCD), which is bulkier because of the backlight.
About the weight: You failed to observe that the heavier battery is obviously not a replacement, but an addition (the dimensions are completely different, and there is no way that it would into the slot of the original battery), so your assumptions loose their foundations.
I think that the weight is acctually 1.29kg, as that is already "a lot" for ultraportables with a 12" screen.
If at least AAPL would have managed to copy the other more useable features of the tosh, such as an easily replacable battery, or at least the basic connection option, not to mention the option of the allmighty dock.
But we probably have to wait another year, so that AAPL can sell the MBA - "Now with AMAZING connectivity - offering an EXTRA USB port and an ethernet jack" and perhaps another year for them to innovate a 12" screen...
Mirus' $199 Linux PC keeps the trend alive, lands at Sears {Engadget}
Jan 17th 2008 8:03PM Well, perhaps you didn't really know, but a Celeron 420 (it has a Conroe-L core, which is all but ancient), is roughly equivalent to a 2.8GHz P4 Prescott in almost any performance scenario. I've built a ~$240 machine (the extra ~$40 came from me buying a stylish microATX case) for the living room and I used this CPU. With a cheap integrated graphics it runs most games on par if not better then a Geforce 4 MX.
This is perfect for "office" usage (browsing the net, word processing, spreadsheets, etc...) or maybe even light gaming, if you ask me.
AMD's triple-core Phenoms to launch in March? {Engadget}
Dec 26th 2007 1:16PM Yes, the Phenom x4 CPU's are currently not competitive to the C2Q (notice the Q for Quad).
But a potential x3 8xxx CPU is likely to outperform most dual core solutions from intel - C2D (again, notice the D), and it is also likely to be cheaper then the new penryn C2D's. (It is also extremely likely that intel will lower prices if that happens).
I hope I clarified it well.
AMD's triple-core Phenoms to launch in March? {Engadget}
Dec 26th 2007 9:43AM The 3 core chips are not something AMD 'designed'.
They are basically ordinary normal x4 Phenom chips which have one core that doesn't function properly. And AMD won't be producing them per se, they will just sell what is basically the byproduct of their poor 65nm fabrication process combined with the complexity of a 'monolith' quad core. Hence the steppings and core clocks that completely match those of the x4 Phenoms, as do the names (only instead of 9xxx it's 8xxx). I think this will be a good way for AMD to ged rid of defunct products and thus make a little more cash off of the whole Phenom bandwagon.
Not to mention that it is likely that this CPU will outperform intels C2D's (not C2Q ofc) and be cheaper at the same time.
Greenpeace posts latest Guide to Greener Electronics: Sony Ericsson first, Nintendo in dead last {Engadget}
Nov 27th 2007 7:43PM Well, fred, you're terribly wrong with the assumption that "it's not that bad".
I am a meteorologist with specialization in climatology from Slovenia (small backwater country in EU), so I am quite well informed about the current situation.
Basically, there is only one thing to be determined about global warming - Whether we have already reached the point of no return, or not.
Some examples of what has already happened:
There are plenty of children 10 years old and younger in central China who have NEVER seen the sun, as they live under perpetual smog clouds, so thick that the sun is not clearly visible. Those parts of China are actually cooling down (basically a nuclear winter effect) in contrast to the rest of the earth.
The oceans around the equator are heating up extremely fast. In southeastern asia, the ocean is about 1,5 degree celsius warmer compared to about 25 years ago. Once it becomes too warm, more algae will appear and they will drain oxygen from the ocean water (aerobic algae of course). Warmer waters also help create MUCH stronger hurricanes/cyclones, (a difference of half a degree celsius, can mean a difference of about 20-30km/h in maxium wind velocity) not to mention that a lot of sea life there will die out because the algae will limit the sun light only to the surface and most oxygen will be drained from the water. On the other hand some of that algae will also feed on CO2, but we can't really rely on that, eh? (Also cutting down CO2 wouldn't really help in the long run)
Another scary thing is that once the gulf stream will stop working (which it will, if the water temperature rises too much) a third of europe will loose their 'good' climate (eg, Norway, baltic states, UK, northern germany and poland, denmark, etc...) and they will all have very harsh winters and dry summers, wihch will extremely reduce crop yields. This situation can be expected within decades, so it is likely that our generation (around 30 years now) will be affected.
If I return to the chinese smog problems for a bit - that is probably the only reason why the average temperature of the earth's atmosphere is 'not rising too much'. Some areas already face +0.5,+0.75, and somewhere almost +1 degree Celsius increase in the last couple decades. A very basic calculation reveals that at current emissions, we will gain another +1 degree in less than 10 years. Some (imho a bit too pesimistic) predictions also say +6 degrees in about 25 years.
+6 degrees celsius increase of the average tempareture, give in layman terms means that most of the so called mid-west in the US would become an arid wasteland, cutting down US crop production by at least 50%. Basically that would mean that there wouldn't be enough food for about 33% of US citizens if not more, since other areas would see decrease in production as well. Not to mention that most of the world's coastal cities would be below water levels.
+6 degrees is easily reachable within 100 years, even if we start drastically cutting down CO2 emissions.
Why you might wonder?
Well, since CO2 is not the biggest culprit of global warming. Basically it's methane (CH4), which is the 2nd biggest factor for the current greenhouse effect. (The biggest is H2O aka water vapour, but that is 'natural'). And believe it or not, most of methane today is 'produced' by cows (farting, manure and similar stuff). And to feed more and more population every day we need more and more meat (which also means cows and other methane producing animals - basically anything that shits).
And the point of no return will likely be reached once we get enough water vapour into our atmosphere that there won't be any need for CO2 or methane to keep the greenhouse effect going on, the water itself would be enough, and there would be very little we could actually do. And we get more and more water vapour into the air everyday as the temperature inches its way up.
Also notable is that global warming didn't just happen overnight like some of you see it (and hence believe that it is a hype). It was basically kept from the public for a VERY long time. The data we have today clearly shows that official predictions from 20 years ago undershot the current situation by a HUGE margin. Those predictions which were not really favoured and thus remained in obscurity, were more on par with the real situation. Basically GW was 'unleashed' onto the public simply because even the regular masses began to notice that it's considerably warmer compared to 10 years ago.
Ok, to sum up (before I make a small scientific disertation out of this :)):
It's not as bad as the most pesimistic people say, but it's a LONG way from being OK at all. At current rates, we will foobar the earth within 50 years.
Regards,
bliki
NBC Direct launches, everybody still misses iTunes {Engadget}
Nov 11th 2007 7:30AM Negative on that Houston!
You violate several laws while downloading anything copyrighted from p2p networks. That is a fact in any case.
Fair use however does not apply in you example, becuase you also share (seed) parts of the file while you download it - and that is considered illegal distribution.
Technically you could disable upload while downloading or you could just tweak your favourite p2p client to not share stuff that you download and thus avoid most bigger legal consequences...
Downloading copyrighted content from p2p is still just theft, whichever way you look at it...
