|
06-21-2009, 02:03 AM
|
|
Panther
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 103
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by clayjar
"It's entirely possible" ? I guess Wired is short on staff to do a detailed analysis of a simple diff of AppleIntelCPUPowerManagement.kext, AppleGraphicsPowerManagement.kext, and AppleFan.kext, and probably one or two others.
|
Are you sure the source is available?
Quote:
Originally Posted by clayjar
Instead of being complacent with a battery technology that is a half-century old, and getting excited for a couple more hours of battery life, more people should be informed and adding some more stimuli to develop better battery technology. It's understandably slow due to its inherent chemical identity, but this type of news only amplifies the fact that we have over-abundance of EE majors and engineers, w/o equal enthusiasm for chemistry. Now, how can we make chemistry sexy again?
|
clayjar, I think it's more than that. I know a lot of smart people who went and are still going into policy, business, law-- even with advanced degrees. It's almost like were turning our back on what made America great. Sigh.
Anyway, I'd put my bets less on the chemical technology, than on the nanotech hybrid battery-capacitor technology that's been demonstrated in several labs. Once they get the density up-- you'd have much of the bennies of fast charge caps, with the storage capacity of batteries...
--
MacBook Pro - have allergy to nickel in the aluminum casing. So my kid gets an expensive toy! 
Gateway MX 8738 - Retail, vanilla Snow Leopard 10.6.2 (thanks kizwan!) with Chameleon RC4, modified DSDT. Upgraded to Core 2 CPU (easy to do). Upgraded to 640GB drive. Everything but SD card working. Minor niggles. GMA950 with QE/CI and *no* artifacts. 
iMac (luxo/lamp) G4 with Tiger.
|