<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Technifrique</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.technifrique.co.za/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.technifrique.co.za</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:21:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Is the new Amazon Kindle Fire the iPad 3 killer? by Delwar</title>
		<link>http://www.technifrique.co.za/is-the-new-amazon-kindle-fire-the-ipad-3-killer/comment-page-1/#comment-938</link>
		<dc:creator>Delwar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:21:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.technifrique.co.za/?p=600#comment-938</guid>
		<description>KIndle has got better than the previous ones and new fire is actually steaming up. But it can&#039;t be surely judged that the two kindle fire and iPad3 are competing. Both of them have their own type of users and very little number will try to compare.

iPad users are solely depended on the apps and gear, the love the apple things. Otherwise if you are a tech savvy person and love the internet based software the Kindle is for you. Go with your library anywhere.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>KIndle has got better than the previous ones and new fire is actually steaming up. But it can&#8217;t be surely judged that the two kindle fire and iPad3 are competing. Both of them have their own type of users and very little number will try to compare.</p>
<p>iPad users are solely depended on the apps and gear, the love the apple things. Otherwise if you are a tech savvy person and love the internet based software the Kindle is for you. Go with your library anywhere.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Is a memory upgrade really necessary? by marc</title>
		<link>http://www.technifrique.co.za/is-a-memory-upgrade-really-necessary/comment-page-1/#comment-76</link>
		<dc:creator>marc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Dec 2010 06:01:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.technifrique.co.za/?p=85#comment-76</guid>
		<description>maybe those memory sticks don&#039;t cost much in your area but here, in Canada,in particular in Québec province,the prices dosent go down,they go up instead...in this province,we always pay 50% more than any other place in north america...double taxing on everything,plus the profit of the retailers,makes all the nice things verry difficult to get because they&#039;re too expensive..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>maybe those memory sticks don&#8217;t cost much in your area but here, in Canada,in particular in Québec province,the prices dosent go down,they go up instead&#8230;in this province,we always pay 50% more than any other place in north america&#8230;double taxing on everything,plus the profit of the retailers,makes all the nice things verry difficult to get because they&#8217;re too expensive..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Is a memory upgrade really necessary? by SuperSparky</title>
		<link>http://www.technifrique.co.za/is-a-memory-upgrade-really-necessary/comment-page-1/#comment-75</link>
		<dc:creator>SuperSparky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2010 21:11:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.technifrique.co.za/?p=85#comment-75</guid>
		<description>Oh, one more thing.  If you have a 64 bit system, but it only runs a 32 bit operating system, then you are still limited to 4GB of ACCESSIBLE RAM.  This limitation this time is the operating system and the software.

Frankly, in my opinion, 32 bit operating systems should be left to the dung heap of history.  You will always be better off running the 64 bit variant, unless you have ancient 32 bit software that just wont run on it, and in that case I say upgrade it anyway.

Another automobile analogy:

Running a 32 bit operating system on a 64 bit system is like driving a Ford Model T on the Autobahn.  Sure, you can do it, but what a waste of capability and potential.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, one more thing.  If you have a 64 bit system, but it only runs a 32 bit operating system, then you are still limited to 4GB of ACCESSIBLE RAM.  This limitation this time is the operating system and the software.</p>
<p>Frankly, in my opinion, 32 bit operating systems should be left to the dung heap of history.  You will always be better off running the 64 bit variant, unless you have ancient 32 bit software that just wont run on it, and in that case I say upgrade it anyway.</p>
<p>Another automobile analogy:</p>
<p>Running a 32 bit operating system on a 64 bit system is like driving a Ford Model T on the Autobahn.  Sure, you can do it, but what a waste of capability and potential.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Is a memory upgrade really necessary? by SuperSparky</title>
		<link>http://www.technifrique.co.za/is-a-memory-upgrade-really-necessary/comment-page-1/#comment-74</link>
		<dc:creator>SuperSparky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2010 20:59:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.technifrique.co.za/?p=85#comment-74</guid>
		<description>Umm... Your claim of &quot;32-bit programmes in 32-bit environments with 4 GB of RAM installed might benefit more from going to 8 GB (or higher) than some of the 64-bit applications in 64-bit environments&quot; suffers from a very obvious flaw.  The 32 bit systems cannot access more than 4GB of RAM total, and in Windows systems the operating system (kernel) reserves 1GB for itself.  So 32 bit programs are only allowed 3GB (at most).  You see, &quot;32 bits&quot; are the key here because you&#039;ll find 4 gigabytes are what 32 bit CPUs are capable of addressing and no more (2 to the 32 power).  So, expanding a 32 bit system beyond 4GB is basically impossible.   Some older 32 bit servers had special paging systems that allowed them to switch in and out extra pages of RAM (bank select), but you couldn&#039;t have all of the memory accessible at once.

64 bit systems do not have a 4GB limitation.  You can expand them to the limits of your motherboard&#039;s hardware capability.

What I think needs clarification here is that when 64 bit systems run 32 bit software, they create a 32 bit &quot;virtual environment&quot; and allow them to allocate memory within a 32 bit addressable space (4GB).  Each 32 bit program has its own &quot;virtual space&quot;, thus meaning as long as the 64 bit master has the RAM, each 32 bit process will get to address up to 4GB of its own RAM space.  This has the effect of benefiting each 32 bit program running on a 64 bit system as instead of sharing the space with other 32 bit programs if they were running on a 32 bit CPU with &quot;only&quot; 4GB of addressable RAM, they get to run in their own 4GB space.  This makes it more efficient for the 32 bit program.  Thus, the benefit is greater for 32 bit programs running on a 64 bit machine.

Make no mistakes about it.  32 bit CPUs (unless they are special &quot;address extension&quot; ones for servers) are incapable of addressing more than 4GB of RAM.  64 bit means 2 to the 64th power (18,446,744,073,709,551,616 bytes).  This basically means that with each bit, the system is capable of twice the memory, hence 2^64.  This is why 64 bit systems can run 32 bit software more efficiently.  There&#039;s just more room.

Now, there is always and advantage to having more room to work with.  It all depends on what software you run on your system.  If you run a lot of programs that manipulate a lot of data, then more RAM will benefit you the most.  However, if your software of choice is Solitaire with the occasional web browser and word processor, then more memory will benefit you the least.

The key here is when the system runs out of memory, it has to swap/page out or exchange portions of that memory with data stored on a hard disk.  Hard disks are much slower than RAM, and thus when this happens it slows down the system as it has to wait for the data to be exchanged.  The more this happens, the slower it seems to you.  Simply avoiding this process means a faster system, but only as fast as the CPU and RAM are capable of.

So if you do 3D rendering, manipulate large graphics files (Photoshop), edit high-definition video, play complex 3D video games, etc.; then the more RAM you have, the faster your system will seem.  In other words, it will be more responsive and efficient.

Think of it like this:

Let&#039;s say you have two automobiles that are identical in every way.  Both are the same model and features.  They have the same engines and would both tie in a drag race.  However, one car has a fuel tank that only allows 1 liter of fuel maximum.  The other allows 50 liters.  Now, give them the assignment of driving 800 kilometers and both start at the same time.  Which one will arrive first?  The one with a 50 liter fuel tank of course.  The other car has to stop frequently to refuel, which slows its progress.  The other can make the trip without refueling at all.

This is the same as two identical computers side by side, except one has 512MB of RAM and the other has 4GB or RAM.  Both have to do the same memory intensive task.  The one with more memory will seem faster because it simply does not have to exchange data between the hard drive and memory (as much) to accomplish its task.  Both are capable of the same speeds of calculation, but one is more efficient than the other as it has more room to work with.

So, more RAM will never have negative side effects.  Less RAM will.  However, &quot;too much&quot; RAM only means you have more than the work load you give the system requires, and are thus &quot;wasting&quot; the unused space.

Me, I have 12GB of RAM on my 64 bit system, and have never had to wait for my hard drive to swap data.  If your system is sluggish, and you&#039;ve done everything the geeks have told you to do to make it more efficient (defrag, etc.), then doubling your RAM will definitely benefit you, if your system is capable of such an expansion.  If you run 32 bit Windows, then 4GB of RAM is your maximum.  If you have a 64 bit system, then you are only limited by your computer&#039;s hardware maximum, which is usually 12GB for consumer systems.

If you can afford more RAM, and don&#039;t anticipate the need for a full system replacement for at least a couple years, then yes, get the RAM.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Umm&#8230; Your claim of &#8220;32-bit programmes in 32-bit environments with 4 GB of RAM installed might benefit more from going to 8 GB (or higher) than some of the 64-bit applications in 64-bit environments&#8221; suffers from a very obvious flaw.  The 32 bit systems cannot access more than 4GB of RAM total, and in Windows systems the operating system (kernel) reserves 1GB for itself.  So 32 bit programs are only allowed 3GB (at most).  You see, &#8220;32 bits&#8221; are the key here because you&#8217;ll find 4 gigabytes are what 32 bit CPUs are capable of addressing and no more (2 to the 32 power).  So, expanding a 32 bit system beyond 4GB is basically impossible.   Some older 32 bit servers had special paging systems that allowed them to switch in and out extra pages of RAM (bank select), but you couldn&#8217;t have all of the memory accessible at once.</p>
<p>64 bit systems do not have a 4GB limitation.  You can expand them to the limits of your motherboard&#8217;s hardware capability.</p>
<p>What I think needs clarification here is that when 64 bit systems run 32 bit software, they create a 32 bit &#8220;virtual environment&#8221; and allow them to allocate memory within a 32 bit addressable space (4GB).  Each 32 bit program has its own &#8220;virtual space&#8221;, thus meaning as long as the 64 bit master has the RAM, each 32 bit process will get to address up to 4GB of its own RAM space.  This has the effect of benefiting each 32 bit program running on a 64 bit system as instead of sharing the space with other 32 bit programs if they were running on a 32 bit CPU with &#8220;only&#8221; 4GB of addressable RAM, they get to run in their own 4GB space.  This makes it more efficient for the 32 bit program.  Thus, the benefit is greater for 32 bit programs running on a 64 bit machine.</p>
<p>Make no mistakes about it.  32 bit CPUs (unless they are special &#8220;address extension&#8221; ones for servers) are incapable of addressing more than 4GB of RAM.  64 bit means 2 to the 64th power (18,446,744,073,709,551,616 bytes).  This basically means that with each bit, the system is capable of twice the memory, hence 2^64.  This is why 64 bit systems can run 32 bit software more efficiently.  There&#8217;s just more room.</p>
<p>Now, there is always and advantage to having more room to work with.  It all depends on what software you run on your system.  If you run a lot of programs that manipulate a lot of data, then more RAM will benefit you the most.  However, if your software of choice is Solitaire with the occasional web browser and word processor, then more memory will benefit you the least.</p>
<p>The key here is when the system runs out of memory, it has to swap/page out or exchange portions of that memory with data stored on a hard disk.  Hard disks are much slower than RAM, and thus when this happens it slows down the system as it has to wait for the data to be exchanged.  The more this happens, the slower it seems to you.  Simply avoiding this process means a faster system, but only as fast as the CPU and RAM are capable of.</p>
<p>So if you do 3D rendering, manipulate large graphics files (Photoshop), edit high-definition video, play complex 3D video games, etc.; then the more RAM you have, the faster your system will seem.  In other words, it will be more responsive and efficient.</p>
<p>Think of it like this:</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s say you have two automobiles that are identical in every way.  Both are the same model and features.  They have the same engines and would both tie in a drag race.  However, one car has a fuel tank that only allows 1 liter of fuel maximum.  The other allows 50 liters.  Now, give them the assignment of driving 800 kilometers and both start at the same time.  Which one will arrive first?  The one with a 50 liter fuel tank of course.  The other car has to stop frequently to refuel, which slows its progress.  The other can make the trip without refueling at all.</p>
<p>This is the same as two identical computers side by side, except one has 512MB of RAM and the other has 4GB or RAM.  Both have to do the same memory intensive task.  The one with more memory will seem faster because it simply does not have to exchange data between the hard drive and memory (as much) to accomplish its task.  Both are capable of the same speeds of calculation, but one is more efficient than the other as it has more room to work with.</p>
<p>So, more RAM will never have negative side effects.  Less RAM will.  However, &#8220;too much&#8221; RAM only means you have more than the work load you give the system requires, and are thus &#8220;wasting&#8221; the unused space.</p>
<p>Me, I have 12GB of RAM on my 64 bit system, and have never had to wait for my hard drive to swap data.  If your system is sluggish, and you&#8217;ve done everything the geeks have told you to do to make it more efficient (defrag, etc.), then doubling your RAM will definitely benefit you, if your system is capable of such an expansion.  If you run 32 bit Windows, then 4GB of RAM is your maximum.  If you have a 64 bit system, then you are only limited by your computer&#8217;s hardware maximum, which is usually 12GB for consumer systems.</p>
<p>If you can afford more RAM, and don&#8217;t anticipate the need for a full system replacement for at least a couple years, then yes, get the RAM.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Robot Bartenders by Spectrum IEEE Takes Us Inside Kiva Systems’ Robotic Warehouse &#124; Technifrique</title>
		<link>http://www.technifrique.co.za/robot-bartenders/comment-page-1/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Spectrum IEEE Takes Us Inside Kiva Systems’ Robotic Warehouse &#124; Technifrique</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2010 08:31:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technifrique.co.za/?p=14#comment-15</guid>
		<description>[...] robotic revolution has already begun as we spoke about the robot-bartenders in a previous post, and it seems the “takeover” has only just [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] robotic revolution has already begun as we spoke about the robot-bartenders in a previous post, and it seems the “takeover” has only just [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

