Analysis on IT trends and competitive strategies, with emphasis on micro processors, computer systems and networks. Based on latest news, backed up with real data, this site intends to provide a true and realtime picture of the fast changing IT landscape. This journal strives to be accurate on facts and sharp on criticisms. You may email your opinion to sharikou@yahoo.com or post comments here, be cool and intelligent.
Freelance journalist on IT matters. Some of my writings have been published on online IT journals. Any original content on this journal is Copyrighted, but it's free for non-commercial use. Any Trademarks used on this site belong to their respective owners. Some of the pictures are links. If there is any issue with the content of this site, please email sharikou@yahoo.com .
INQ reported that DELL's investigation showed that the Intel laptop explosion was caused by a chip problem, not battery. As I previously analysed, the incident was probably caused by an exploding Intel Core Duo processor.
posted by Sharikou, Ph. D. @ 7/10/2006 12:16:00 PM
12 Comments:
I'll bet the fanbois are sputtering now after this has come out.
Reading the original INQ report and the looking at the pictures of the exploding Intel notebook, it was obvious that the battery was intact. Once we ruled out the battery, the most probable candidate was the CPU.
I was just stating the obvious, as I always do. But Intel fanbois are always in denial.
hi shakirou,
did you already notice, that it's not possible to post to your blog via firefox anymore?
it seems there is a problem with the captcha plugin which sends it's pictures with content type text/html instead of image/jpeg. what about fixing the problem?
Well, when Intel have the 32-core CPU.
That is literally a firework performance!
did you already notice, that it's not possible to post to your blog via firefox anymore?
Strange. I am using firefox most of the time. I am using it now.
If you read the nytimes.com article, it says this about the computer on fire in Japan:
[Dell] concluded that the fire was caused by a faulty lithium ion battery cell, but that the problem was unrelated to a recall last year of notebook batteries by the company and several other computer makers.
You will see this about the smoking notebook in Pennsylvania:
[Dell] found no pattern of battery failure and that the Pennsylvania incident publicized by the Inquirer Web site was caused by a chip problem
This suggests sharikou was wrong about the exploding laptop resulting from each of its cores exploding. Nevertheless, Dell does identify a chip problem as leading to a smoking notebook.
"hi shakirou,
did you already notice, that it's not possible to post to your blog via firefox anymore?
it seems there is a problem with the captcha plugin which sends it's pictures with content type text/html instead of image/jpeg. what about fixing the problem?"
Maybe you are running an Intel chip? :-)
Firefox works fine here on Opteron.
(seriously... if you type in the wrong word more than once or twice... you sometimes have to clear your cache, cookies, etc., to get the damn captcha thing to work properly again)
I think you should read the article that they referenced it from.
The laptop that went on fire was from a problem with a battery cell. Not the chip.
Read the story, read its source and make an educated (and correct) post.
Read the story, read its source and make an educated (and correct) post.
Hmmmmm... as a huge company you don't run out with arms waving saying "our laptops blow up" now do you? Which is why Dell denied issues and did an investigation, relating to the CPU.
You might say they covered their own ass at the expense of Intel.
Strange. I am using firefox most of the time. I am using it now.
ok. i have to allow cookies to see these capcha images....
"[Dell] found no pattern of battery failure and that the Pennsylvania incident publicized by the Inquirer Web site was caused by a chip problem"
The explosion picture/story was in Osaka (FYI - that's not in Pennsylvania); once again you are mishmashing facts together to lead to a conclusion that you want to make.
The "exploding chip" conclusion is actually a different story (this can be found on many websites by googling pennsylvania dell smoking laptop)
"Last Thursday, citing reports of a second smoking laptop, this one in Pennsylvania..."
I guess smoking could equal exploding? There were no pictures of this one and no additional detail I could find. Please try to get your facts straight first or at least have the integrity to update your blog headlines when you are wrong.
The conclusion from Dell is still that the Osaka issue was battery related (the article you linked actually states this if you read it carefully). On the Pennslyvania issue Dell states it as a chip problem.
Mork said: "From all the test ive ever read, and from the fact that i actually own a rotten Turion i can tell u that Core Duo is much cooler then anything AMD has to offer."
That's funny - how can Intel Core Duo with 31W TDP be cooler than Turion-MT with 25W TDP? Even Turion X2 has TDP 31W, and remember AMD's TDP is about 15% stricter than Intel's.
Oh, so you're talking about the ULV Core Duo's? Mind to factor in the price factor for those to make your comparison more sensible?
The hottest spot of my AMD Turion MT notebook happens to be where the Intel 802.11b/g chipset is located. Sadly the vendor offered this crap instead of the proper Broadcom one for ... Intel promotion I guess.
You should check the heat source of your "rotten Turion notebook" before making any judgement.
mork said: "So what you are telling the world is that Intel WiFi puts out 25W+? And is actually warmer then the cpu?"
The CPU has a nice heatsink and a fan; the WiFi chip doesn't. The CPU can lower its clockrate but still work correctly; Intel's WiFi chip starts losing signal when it power-save (thus I could never save power on it except within 5m to the router).
Their is nothing wrong with Intel lan or wifi products.
Except in most benchmarks they trail Broadcom ones, and also take more power. There's really nothing wrong otherwise.
One of the biggest reasons to buy an intel laptop is the compination of well integrated chipsets.
You must be a hardcore Intel fan to say that, because even Intel wireless engineers admit the relative bad performance of their product (I actually learned this from those people, not any website - because no website is capable of doing good wireless benchmark, and they won't publish such things for Intel anyway).
I'm sorry... but that's reality.
Post a Comment
<< Home