Thunderbolt display had USB 2, not USB 3. It was never updated to my knowledge.
43 posts • joined 22 Aug 2007
I reckon monkeys don't type randomly. I mean, the chance of getting SSSSSSSSS is rather more likely than getting ABCDEFGHI or hello there. Not all 9 character sequences are statistically equal, but if this experiment is using a pseudo-random number generator without any additional logic, to me, it's not sufficiently monkey-like in behaviour.
I don't have first experience of monkeys, though my brother once did when an escaped circus money locked himself in my brother's hotel room bathroom. Explaining that to reception was, er, interesting. I digress.
It's the 74LS** chip numbers you should be looking at.
The K8241 = 74LS00 contains four 2-input NAND gates.
The K8243 = 74LS04 contains six inverters (NOT gates).
These are 5V TTL (transister transistor logic) lower-power Schottky chips. I used to play with them as a kid. Happy days, when some chips contained < 100 transistors!
Started at the age of 10 with an '81, followed by a ZX-Spectrum (the "big" one, 48K) a year later which I then used for six years.
This thing started my IT career and radically changed my life and those of many others. In a parallel universe someone else would have made the first popular UK low-cost machine, but Sir Clive actually did it in ours. Bravo.
From their website:
"For a single display panel or tile of 55 inch size the system consumes less than a single light bulb"
Even if that's 100W, it's not bad... note they say 'tile', so you can mosaic these things together. It would be a bit dishonest if they were talking about some 1kW halogen bulb :)
I doubt lasers need a vacuum, light travels better in air than free electrons!
Yes, it costs a lot to keep afloat. The orbit degrades due to air friction, even at that altitude, and if left to its' own devices it would impact... somewhere. Now 300 tonnes could well hurt if it impacted in the wrong place (much of it will survive re-entry), so when the day comes (hopefully not in 2015/16), it needs to be de-orbited in a controlled manner. Just like Mir was.
I don't understand why when it needs to be de-orbited that operation costs a lot, can't a Soyuz do the job?
Surely what matters when comparing systems is the performance for given required load, and the total cost i.e. hardware cost, software and support costs, energy consumption etc. Details like core count, amount of memory, disk etc. - who cares*? If system A performs twice as well as system B, it doesn't matter if it has 2x as much disk or half as much. Unless of course disk space is part of your performance criteria.
* ok I care, but I'm just interested, I'm not in purchasing :)
Nope, Larrabee is based on the good ol' Pentium P54C with some nice mods:
Still, take an old Pentium chip, add some nice 512 bit vector stuff, clock it at... who knows, but more than 233MHz... then 32+ of them in parallel... it'll be nice.
I visited this place a while ago: http://www.fhc.co.uk/dinorwig.htm
They were proud to claim 40% efficiency, much more than coal fired power stations. Except when you realise they are storing energy (40% efficiency = they're losing 60% of the energy pumping the water back) vs creating energy (ok, converting to electricity for those pedants!).
That said, I agree with the above comments about ecomomy of scale and the fact it'll reduce demand elsewhere in the system. Storage is only really needed if we (fat chance) go 80% renewable soon or peak demands, yes, the end of Eastenders.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019