When chips can explode

I realise I'm opening myself up to more pendantry than I can muster with this, so I'll stick to the basics.

DJKyp wrote to you today with the wolloing diatrabe: "There's no way Intel CPUs would cause batteries to explode, period. If it draws too much power, it's just going to shut down, not explode."

He goes on to say that too much wattage will, paraphrasing, blow a fuse and shut down your box. What Mr DJ seems to forget is that there is no fused connection between the batteries and the rest of a computer in a laptop.

Lets take a typical scenario with a desktop. You plug it in, switch it on and, for some reason, there's a power spike as the CPU draws power. At best it'll simply shut down before it draws too much power - a notable safety feature in most modern computers, or indeed any electronic device. HOwever, now and then this mechanism fails. The spike might be too big or go on too long, and suddenly the magic smoke is let out of your transformer. I had this happen a few times, once in a very spectacular way as the transformer spat sparks across the room and almost set fire to the carpet. It stank.

Now, a laptop is powered by batteries. THose batteries are designed to putput power at specific voltages and specific amperages. IF they are exceeded they will overheat. It's simple as that. Of course modern battery packs have built-in surge protector curcuits and the like, in order to prevent them blowing, but sometimes that power spike I mentioned can be too pwoerful or go on too long...

Batteries are made of what is essentially an low grade explosive. If they are overloaded they *will* explode, and since Intel chips tend to draw a lot more power than AMD chips, they are more likely to cause an explosion. Of course all modern chips can spike. All my computers are AMD, and I've had three of them blow out a PSU or two over the years, incidentally wrecking the motherboard in the process... the point is, a battery will explode if it's overloaded, so DJKryp is talking out of his arse.

Graham Dawson

Subject: When you can't bring a laptop on a plane.

I found something cool browsing OSnews ... http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=15995

I know there have been quite a few portable USB computers popping up recently, but they all seem to come as a minor value addition to help sell USB keys. This past week moka5, a Vinod Kholsa funded startup, released free software to let anyone turn their USB keys (or iPods) into portable operating environments. There is a beta garage that is full of different operating systems and bundles of software built on top of them which are all free to download. The LivePC technology uses on-demand paging of disk blocks over the internet to allow the system to run before you even finish downloading the image. Its built off of VMWare's x86 virtualization technology so the downloaded software runs in a secure sandbox using the host drivers. This means that you get basic graphics acceleration and don't have to rely on a pitiful VESA compliant X-Windows driver.

The software allows updates to be automatically distributed via RSS to anyone who downloaded the LivePC. This doesn't interfere with keeping your own personal files on the stick because there is a segregation between system and local files. You can keep your files inside the virtual machine or on the USB stick filesystem. Although the documentation is confusing, its easy to tell the engine to completely cache an operating environment onto the USB stick by clicking the down arrow next to the LivePC title in the UI. Once an environment is fully cached, you can use it anywhere without the internet. I pretty much always have internet access, so I can use a much smaller USB key to carry around the stuff I use.

I posted a bunch of LivePC to their BetaGarage based on Gentoo linux and Ubuntu. Others have posted more unique additions such as Haiku and Syllable. There are even bundles of tools for doing JAVA development and an up-to-date version of KDE. When are the distro maintainers going to adopt this method of distribution to rope in more users? You can see the list of tools for yourself at http://www.moka5.com/livepc.

I can't wait to get a Zune and use it to carry around linux.

T.J. Purtell Subject: intel BS

"Subject: Big M and the Intel Claim There's no way Intel CPUs would cause batteries to explode, period. If it draws too much power, it's just going to shut down, not explode. I don't know if you've ever hosted a LAN or anything, but when you get too many watts coming out of only so much voltage, BAM, it goes out. And your house doesn't explode. In fact, nothing explodes. At all.
These CPUs use a LOT less battery power than, say, Pentium 4's, and those were thrown in laptops at 3.6 GHz by Alienware, and everyone knows the type of power draw they have.
Don't blame Intel because you're an AMD fanboy.
DJKryp"

There's always a way for Intel CPUs (or any other electrical device) to cause an explosion. Regardless of it being a battery, an electrical outlet or anything else. That's why fuses were invented. If the only electrical background you have is from LAN parties then you really don't know much about electrical engineering, do you?...

When you get too many watts coming out of only so much voltage, BAM, it does go kaboom!! Do you know another name for "watt"? Volt-Ampere. Do you have any concept of "current"? FYY that's the thing that actually heats up electical equipment and kills people in the event of an electrical shock... not voltage. The only reason why it doesn't, is because there's a control system that shuts the batterie down! Witch sometimes happens to be defective...

Just for the fun of it try to power up any laptop with a 10-30W AC-DC adapter. It will be lots of fun, especially if you have an 110V outlet!

Smokeloads of fun!

Not only you are an *insert-your-favorite-brand-here* fanboy you are also an ignorant fool...

David MC Coelho

Subject: Analysts downgrade AMD to sell

Thanks for the info. in your story.

At the end of which you ask it wasn't mentioned that DELL stock might suffer.

There is a resistance in the consumer market to buy AMD based computers, at least the part of the market with some previous experience with AMD.

Microsoft is written for INTEC CPUs. AMD CPUs require "patches" that, if not installed when you buy the pc, make it a real problem. Many people used to build their own pc's and ran into major problems with this and having to get patches for INTEC compatable programs (but NOT AMD compatable).

Now, this may not be such a problem, but many people have heard this neg. even if they haven't had it. They were warned away from AMD for that reason and they remember.

Aside from that, maybe DELL has a bunch of AMD computers that aren't selling after evenyone insisted they use AMD chips?

I'll be interested in the outcome.

Keep up the good work ;-) John Kellers

Subject: Intel Dual-Core Hype

Mike

Is it just me or is it not bizarre that the breathless fawning from both Wall Street and CompuMedia over Intel's latest Dual-Core desktop offerings fails to notice that Intel is still stuck at 32-bits? It is, isn't it?

http://www.intel.com/products/processor/coreduo/ Certainly doesn't mention 64-bits.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,124230-page,1/article.html# Certainly doesn't mention 64-bits.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,125706-page,2/article.html "#1 in 100 best products of the year" Certainly doesn't mention 64-bits.

"We tested AMD-64 vs. Intel Dual-Core with Windoze XP Pro, and Intel is the hot ticket" they gush. But but but what about the fact that XP's a 32-bit system? Is there not a fundamental apples to apples comparison problem here?

Are "analysts"/hacks so, er, "innocent", they can let this somewhat important detail fly right on by? Or is the real story that commercial release of Vista64 is really so far off, the Vole's pals at Intel can release a whole Neanderthal product range into what they know to be the void of (known, but not truthfully declared) ongoing delays - with the hope they can both press-release their way out of their respective problems...?

Unless I'm woefully retarded and completely mistaken, I think this is a story that should be told.

SP

Subject: IBM THINKpad recall

Hi there, I do not see the reason behind the use of "Stinkpad" instead of "Thinkpad".

You are obviously biased in your writing. Sincerely,

Mr. Kok HS

Subject: New digital music contracts inked in the UK

Dear Nick Having picked up on this piece, there's two points I should clarify - You state; "Musicians and composers get eight percent of Gross Revenue less VAT when their music is offered in a digital environment." and that "There had been a deep base rumbling from musicians over the amount of cash the record companies were taking from online sales."

I should first point out that there is a difference between a musician and a songwriter; you should be aware that while songwriters and performers are both musicians - they have different rights.

To clarify, BPI, who represent record labels (who pay performer royalties - one set of rights) disputed the rate that the MCPS (who collect money from music sales for publishers and composers - authors rights) were charging for use in a digital environment.

The copyright tribunal was the upshot of a dispute over what one type of copyright user should pay another. The BPI/ MCPS stand off in this tribunal was therefore not record companies vs. musicians as you seem to imply.

Hope that makes sense.

Also, you say: "However, it does mean that even with the likes of iTunes taking a cut for distribution, the record labels are still getting huge wodges of cash for doing sod all." and: "Some labels were taking 97 percent of sales even though they didn't even have to make a CD to sell it online."

I presume I've misunderstood you here; surely you don't think that selling online is free for record companies?

That's what you seem to imply when you say the labels have done "sod all". I expect you get paid even if your words don't appear in (physical) print so I must have the wrong end of the stick!

Best
Matt Phillips
BPI Comms Manager

Subject: AMD Roadmappery

How is it that a 2.8ghz 90nm 2mb L2 part is an x2 5200+ part and the new 2.8ghz 1mb L2 part is a 5400+? Obviously if there was a process change/HT speed increase this might make some sense, but there isnt. Is AMD making typos in their roadmap or are they going to intro a fancy new inferior part with a higher speed grade than the older faster part?

MM

µ