According to the benchmarks there is almost a 20% speed reduction between the clean and dirty states of the ssd for the 1024KB random write test. That seems like a noticeable reduction, maybe the hardware garbage collection implemented in these ssds is not as good for large writes?
There's a couple of points I'd like to raise about your working.
According to the article the CFLs that they tested have a power factor of 0.45-0.50. An incandescent light bulb, being purely resistive, has a power factor of 1. Running at the same voltage twice the current will be required and this will manifest itself in I^2/R loses in the transmission lines and VA being required from the coal plant.
The internet tells me that a 23W CFL is about equivalent to a 100W incandescent. The CFL will still need to be powered by something, so powering for the 20,000 hour lifetime you assumed before, the coal plant will still produce ~35mg of mercury from said coal. So ignoring the impact of the reactive load of the CFL the amount of mercury used is 39mg.
However due to the poor power factor the CFLs will require reactive power, hence more current. I don't know the relationship between grams of coal burned and the power factor, but one can assume that the mercury that is produced will be greater.
I'll admit that maybe if I was a short-term investor then Apple would be a hit, but since both companies were listed on the stock exchange I think you'll see that Microsoft has faired better overall.
Slashdot Mirror
Changing your mac address only takes 3 commands. As for surveillance? I dunno, radio signals travel far.
According to the benchmarks there is almost a 20% speed reduction between the clean and dirty states of the ssd for the 1024KB random write test. That seems like a noticeable reduction, maybe the hardware garbage collection implemented in these ssds is not as good for large writes?
You think that FM sounds better than wavetable synthesis? you're crazy man.
There's a couple of points I'd like to raise about your working.
According to the article the CFLs that they tested have a power factor of 0.45-0.50. An incandescent light bulb, being purely resistive, has a power factor of 1. Running at the same voltage twice the current will be required and this will manifest itself in I^2/R loses in the transmission lines and VA being required from the coal plant.
The internet tells me that a 23W CFL is about equivalent to a 100W incandescent. The CFL will still need to be powered by something, so powering for the 20,000 hour lifetime you assumed before, the coal plant will still produce ~35mg of mercury from said coal. So ignoring the impact of the reactive load of the CFL the amount of mercury used is 39mg.
However due to the poor power factor the CFLs will require reactive power, hence more current. I don't know the relationship between grams of coal burned and the power factor, but one can assume that the mercury that is produced will be greater.
I'll admit that maybe if I was a short-term investor then Apple would be a hit, but since both companies were listed on the stock exchange I think you'll see that Microsoft has faired better overall.
l &q=l&c=AAPL
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=MSFT&t=my&l=on&z=