My error was a) You have losses with ac/dc conversion (at least 25%) b) You have to support the electronics and MOST IMPORTANTLY its lumen/Watt, not cd/Watt. cd is intensity per square radian, so a laserpointer would have a few thousand cd/watt in its beamline and 0 everywhere else. Because modern lcds have a very wide field of vision, you would need to integrate of the whole hemisphere to get the real efficiency.(which isnt that easy)
The day the first IPOD was released, it was CHEAPER than the grey market price of the 1.8" Hard Disc it included. We are talking about a non-brainer design win here. If the company gets it, it can stop marketing/ect and just produce knowing apple will buy truckloads of the drives... This can do wonders to margin calculations...
Memory power requirements are forgettable. Or have you ever seen Ram or 2.5"discs in notebooks with fans? No? Guess why... If you arent using your "corsair golden eagle fishing thuna blabla 500 ultra pro" overclocker Ram, you can get away with 1-3 Watt for 512 MB RAM in a notebook. At least with 266 Mhz ddr and 256mbit chips. And modern harddiscs are quite inexpensive, powerwise. Heck, even normal Desktop Drives are rated at about 6-7 Watt. Laptop drives optimized for low power are more likely to use a third of that.
What you fail to recognice is the Screen as single most demanding component besides the cpu. People want bigger and brighter screens, and to create photons you need power. You cant just do a die-shrink like with ram or cpus to reduce the power requirements, you have to live with them. You can get 60 Lumen/W from your flouroszent illumination (but only on your happy day), you block 2/3 of it because you need colour filters, and another 1/3 because absorbtion/ect,and more for the space between the pixels, ect, and you have 10 cd/watt output at most.(in reality it should be even worst. Wall-plug->eye efficiency could be as low as 2-3 cd/watt) And people like displays with at least 100cd/m^2 because else its unreadable in bright daylight outside. DO the math....
Dont underestimate the power requirements of the Pentium M. Yes, its a lot friendlier than all other "big" cpus, but if you use a lot of cpu-power, it still needs >25Watt. Thats a lot more than the whole rest of the system (ok, not if you are dvd-burning while using your mobile geforece 5700 to play doom3 on your 17" widescreen high brighness lcd, but you get the point...) Of course most of the time you dont need full-power, but still when idling it uses 5-7 Watt, more than the Transmeta with 100% load.
The only problem is that the transmetas have limited performance. While pentium M can deliver in peak situation (but with a lot of power), the transmeta cannot.
And your numbers are from soviet russia, arent they? (IAW: bullshit)
10-20W would be a normal desktop board. 3-8 watt for normal Laptop(with ram, but without fance gfx). 10 Watt for a hd is normal for a 10000rpm 3.5" disc. A 2.5" laptop disc is more likely to use 1.5-3 Watt, if its running at all. And 20-30 Watt would be a bad 15" or a very good 17" Lcd monitor with 200+ cd/m^2. For a 15" high brightness destop replacement Notebook, 15 Watt, perhaps 20 watt with max brightness. But your "long running" subnotebook with 10.4" 75cd/m^2 screen wont use much more than 5-7 Watt.
I remember years ob bitching around and 2 rival formats until they finally agreed on the dvd. Just like now. I woundnt be surprised if next summer a colaboration is announced...
That would be a sulution, yes. But also overkill:) And actually people start complaining if you create a miniature blast furnance in your backyard, you know:)
a fire is good for a few papers, but not if you have a lot of paper in neat stacks. A few years ago i burned around 10KG of old records (they were on some kind of ultra thin paper that made shredding a pain in the ass). It burned quite well, than smoldered and went out. the next day i went through the ashes and there were whole piles that werent burned at all. Paper can be quite a good insulation, and the heat of the fire quickly goes up, not touching the heavy paper stacks at the botton of the light ash.
In the end, it was a really big mess to clean up (i wanted to wash the ash away with water->lots of drenched paper...), so i bought a better shredder.
Re:What happens when it crashes.
on
A.I. Helicopter?
·
· Score: 1
a normal car cant come down from the sky, so your save behind walls.
But he could carry frodo with him on the eagle... Even if Sauron sees him, the eagles are still faster than the nazgul... You know, YOU cant give a good answer because Tolkien himself admitted that he used the eagles as Deus ex Machina.
Do you read? Yes, smaller platters reduce seek time. Yes, even the newer 3.5" cheetas only use 2.7" or so platters. But they keep a high internal radius. And they keep the same big case which leaves enough space for the big actuator magnets whichout them affecting the disc.
In ultrasmall drives, you get a smaller platter size. But the internal regiens have VERY litte data per track, meaning a random search is much likly to cower grater parts of the platter than with "larger" discs. You just get less data per "head moving distance"
Also, the low rpm create a lot of latency that is intependent of platter size: 5000rmp mean 6ms rotation latency PLUS the seek latency. Thats more than a 15rpm cheeta has in total. You cant easily spin the small drives higher because a) it hard to fit such a high speed motor in the few mm^3 available. b) power consumption c) heat (you get very little surface on the package and usually NO airflow.
Combine that with the slower actuators, you get seek times slightly worse than a normal hd, rotation latencies that are a lot higher and of course less performance...
I tell you again: Its an ADAPTION. Its CANT BE THE SAME, so it is different. It uses a totally different media, compresses 100hours of reading into 10 hours of watching, its has to be changed dramatically. Thats the fate of any book adaption. Look at harry poter, they tried to fit every chapter of the book 1to1 into a movie and it just didnt work...
???? Could you explain wtf this has to do with access time? If you can track to a film with audio sync or not is purely dependent on the container and the audio codec. Ogg or avi mit vbr mp3 can create problems, seek times dont (your blockindey is already in hd-cache, and if you dont jump into an i frame, decoding a lot of b/p frames (up to 11 in mpeg2 up to 100s in mpeg4) will take a lot longer than seek time.
But even if seek time would be important for that stuff: Your 0.85" hd will have a lot worse seek time than any normal 3.5" drive. Because of the simple fact that you cant fit very powerfull magnets / coils in such a small package. If your reasoning would be true, we would have servers running of microdrive raids for years...
Peter Jackson is CERTAINLY better in filmmaking than Tolkien. Because Tolkien was a WRITER.
You see book=|movie. You can write things that are cool but would be stupid in a movie. in fact, if you take the room in the book, the shire would be at least 1hour long. As much as i like that part of the book (the book, not the "trilogy", only because a fucking company decices 1200 pages are too much for one book doesnt make it a trilogy) (setting it apart from the others, especially the hobbit, by showing people cant go away to adventure and suffer no consequences).
Another bit: the most moving part of the book (imho) where the 3-4 pages of future history in the appendix. its just so sad reading about all the characters future lives and deaths, and then reading about gimly goint to the west with legolas... But it would be utterly stupid if filmed...
stirling isnt a very good choice for thermoelectric nuclear batteries. Use a modern "reverse peltier", there are some really nifty semiconductur ones on the market that would be nearly as efficent and no moving parts...
do you know how dangerous Lithium near hot electronic stuff is? If not, get some and heat it up a bit.... On the other hand, how many explosions from whiskey bottles have been recorded, even in a hot enviroment? Its has 2 times the alcohol percentage than the mixture those cells are running at... EVERYTHING is dangerous if it isnt done correct.
the speed of light slows down by 30% if it enters water or glass. This is nothing new. But interstellar space is mostly vacuum, so n is nearly 1, thus c is mostly correct.
well, your dvd has only half res for colour, too. Even your TV. IIRC even HDTV. And nobody cries "but dvd has only 352x288, the 704x576 is only for grayscale..."
But in 10 years, when he (the worker) can (hey, your blue collar worker and buy a car, too, and its probably more expensive than a 62" plasma tv today), there will be 112" superplan^tm hyperdisplays, or new organic 3d displays, or virtual reality devices for a brainplug (all $10000+, of course), and you will be bitching again....
3 years ago you would have spend $2,500 for a LCD of the same quality (if something compareable was even available). Why do you think that in 3 years people wont look back and say "back than lcds were expensive, a 300$ 20" did cost 1000$ back then...."?
After all, people can make a 19" CRT for 150$, and if you look at the materials and needed manufacturing steps, they arent much simpler than LCDs. But today, the companys are still paying for their fabs they had to build to supply the increasing demand. Once lcds have replaced crt, demand will stagnate, there wont be any new expensive fabs needed (or at least not as much as now), and prices will be dropping....
Slashdot Mirror
My error was
a) You have losses with ac/dc conversion (at least 25%)
b) You have to support the electronics
and
MOST IMPORTANTLY
its lumen/Watt, not cd/Watt.
cd is intensity per square radian, so a laserpointer would have a few thousand cd/watt in its beamline and 0 everywhere else.
Because modern lcds have a very wide field of vision, you would need to integrate of the whole hemisphere to get the real efficiency.(which isnt that easy)
The day the first IPOD was released, it was CHEAPER than the grey market price of the 1.8" Hard Disc it included.
We are talking about a non-brainer design win here. If the company gets it, it can stop marketing/ect and just produce knowing apple will buy truckloads of the drives... This can do wonders to margin calculations...
Memory power requirements are forgettable.
Or have you ever seen Ram or 2.5"discs in notebooks with fans? No? Guess why...
If you arent using your "corsair golden eagle fishing thuna blabla 500 ultra pro" overclocker Ram, you can get away with 1-3 Watt for 512 MB RAM in a notebook. At least with 266 Mhz ddr and 256mbit chips.
And modern harddiscs are quite inexpensive, powerwise. Heck, even normal Desktop Drives are rated at about 6-7 Watt. Laptop drives optimized for low power are more likely to use a third of that.
What you fail to recognice is the Screen as single most demanding component besides the cpu. People want bigger and brighter screens, and to create photons you need power. You cant just do a die-shrink like with ram or cpus to reduce the power requirements, you have to live with them. You can get 60 Lumen/W from your flouroszent illumination (but only on your happy day), you block 2/3 of it because you need colour filters, and another 1/3 because absorbtion/ect,and more for the space between the pixels, ect, and you have 10 cd/watt output at most.(in reality it should be even worst. Wall-plug->eye efficiency could be as low as 2-3 cd/watt)
And people like displays with at least 100cd/m^2 because else its unreadable in bright daylight outside.
DO the math....
Dont underestimate the power requirements of the Pentium M.
Yes, its a lot friendlier than all other "big" cpus, but if you use a lot of cpu-power, it still needs >25Watt. Thats a lot more than the whole rest of the system (ok, not if you are dvd-burning while using your mobile geforece 5700 to play doom3 on your 17" widescreen high brighness lcd, but you get the point...)
Of course most of the time you dont need full-power, but still when idling it uses 5-7 Watt, more than the Transmeta with 100% load.
The only problem is that the transmetas have limited performance. While pentium M can deliver in peak situation (but with a lot of power), the transmeta cannot.
And your numbers are from soviet russia, arent they? (IAW: bullshit)
10-20W would be a normal desktop board. 3-8 watt for normal Laptop(with ram, but without fance gfx).
10 Watt for a hd is normal for a 10000rpm 3.5" disc. A 2.5" laptop disc is more likely to use 1.5-3 Watt, if its running at all.
And 20-30 Watt would be a bad 15" or a very good 17" Lcd monitor with 200+ cd/m^2. For a 15" high brightness destop replacement Notebook, 15 Watt, perhaps 20 watt with max brightness.
But your "long running" subnotebook with 10.4" 75cd/m^2 screen wont use much more than 5-7 Watt.
I remember years ob bitching around and 2 rival formats until they finally agreed on the dvd. Just like now. I woundnt be surprised if next summer a colaboration is announced...
Well, not since we have hardware T&L and Vertex Shaders...
And how is the government supposed to keep secrects if it cant prohibits people from releasing them?
That would be a sulution, yes. :) :)
But also overkill
And actually people start complaining if you create a miniature blast furnance in your backyard, you know
a fire is good for a few papers, but not if you have a lot of paper in neat stacks.
A few years ago i burned around 10KG of old records (they were on some kind of ultra thin paper that made shredding a pain in the ass).
It burned quite well, than smoldered and went out. the next day i went through the ashes and there were whole piles that werent burned at all. Paper can be quite a good insulation, and the heat of the fire quickly goes up, not touching the heavy paper stacks at the botton of the light ash.
In the end, it was a really big mess to clean up (i wanted to wash the ash away with water->lots of drenched paper...), so i bought a better shredder.
a normal car cant come down from the sky, so your save behind walls.
But he could carry frodo with him on the eagle...
Even if Sauron sees him, the eagles are still faster than the nazgul...
You know, YOU cant give a good answer because Tolkien himself admitted that he used the eagles as Deus ex Machina.
Do you read?
Yes, smaller platters reduce seek time.
Yes, even the newer 3.5" cheetas only use 2.7" or so platters.
But they keep a high internal radius. And they keep the same big case which leaves enough space for the big actuator magnets whichout them affecting the disc.
In ultrasmall drives, you get a smaller platter size. But the internal regiens have VERY litte data per track, meaning a random search is much likly to cower grater parts of the platter than with "larger" discs.
You just get less data per "head moving distance"
Also, the low rpm create a lot of latency that is intependent of platter size: 5000rmp mean 6ms rotation latency PLUS the seek latency. Thats more than a 15rpm cheeta has in total.
You cant easily spin the small drives higher because
a) it hard to fit such a high speed motor in the few mm^3 available.
b) power consumption
c) heat (you get very little surface on the package and usually NO airflow.
Combine that with the slower actuators, you get seek times slightly worse than a normal hd, rotation latencies that are a lot higher and of course less performance...
I tell you again: Its an ADAPTION.
Its CANT BE THE SAME, so it is different. It uses a totally different media, compresses 100hours of reading into 10 hours of watching, its has to be changed dramatically. Thats the fate of any book adaption. Look at harry poter, they tried to fit every chapter of the book 1to1 into a movie and it just didnt work...
????
Could you explain wtf this has to do with access time?
If you can track to a film with audio sync or not is purely dependent on the container and the audio codec. Ogg or avi mit vbr mp3 can create problems, seek times dont (your blockindey is already in hd-cache, and if you dont jump into an i frame, decoding a lot of b/p frames (up to 11 in mpeg2 up to 100s in mpeg4) will take a lot longer than seek time.
But even if seek time would be important for that stuff: Your 0.85" hd will have a lot worse seek time than any normal 3.5" drive. Because of the simple fact that you cant fit very powerfull magnets / coils in such a small package.
If your reasoning would be true, we would have servers running of microdrive raids for years...
Peter Jackson is CERTAINLY better in filmmaking than Tolkien. Because Tolkien was a WRITER.
You see book=|movie.
You can write things that are cool but would be stupid in a movie. in fact, if you take the room in the book, the shire would be at least 1hour long. As much as i like that part of the book (the book, not the "trilogy", only because a fucking company decices 1200 pages are too much for one book doesnt make it a trilogy) (setting it apart from the others, especially the hobbit, by showing people cant go away to adventure and suffer no consequences).
Another bit: the most moving part of the book (imho) where the 3-4 pages of future history in the appendix. its just so sad reading about all the characters future lives and deaths, and then reading about gimly goint to the west with legolas...
But it would be utterly stupid if filmed...
stirling isnt a very good choice for thermoelectric nuclear batteries. Use a modern "reverse peltier", there are some really nifty semiconductur ones on the market that would be nearly as efficent and no moving parts...
do you know how dangerous Lithium near hot electronic stuff is? If not, get some and heat it up a bit....
On the other hand, how many explosions from whiskey bottles have been recorded, even in a hot enviroment? Its has 2 times the alcohol percentage than the mixture those cells are running at...
EVERYTHING is dangerous if it isnt done correct.
the speed of light slows down by 30% if it enters water or glass. This is nothing new.
But interstellar space is mostly vacuum, so n is nearly 1, thus c is mostly correct.
do you really think his internet explorer knows how to round correctly...? :)
A decibell IS a unit.
Its not only 1/10 of the log10(x), but 1/10*log10(x/10^-12 w/m^2).
I ATTACK DARKNESS :)
But you will NEVER get more than 150-250 lines/mm in reality, not even with 35mm lenses.
Unless you live in a monochromatic, coherently lit world...
well, your dvd has only half res for colour, too. Even your TV. IIRC even HDTV. And nobody cries "but dvd has only 352x288, the 704x576 is only for grayscale..."
But in 10 years, when he (the worker) can (hey, your blue collar worker and buy a car, too, and its probably more expensive than a 62" plasma tv today), there will be 112" superplan^tm hyperdisplays, or new organic 3d displays, or virtual reality devices for a brainplug (all $10000+, of course), and you will be bitching again....
3 years ago you would have spend $2,500 for a LCD of the same quality (if something compareable was even available).
Why do you think that in 3 years people wont look back and say "back than lcds were expensive, a 300$ 20" did cost 1000$ back then...."?
After all, people can make a 19" CRT for 150$, and if you look at the materials and needed manufacturing steps, they arent much simpler than LCDs.
But today, the companys are still paying for their fabs they had to build to supply the increasing demand. Once lcds have replaced crt, demand will stagnate, there wont be any new expensive fabs needed (or at least not as much as now), and prices will be dropping....