<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Gizmodo Australia &#187; intel</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/tags/intel/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au</link>
	<description>the Gadget Guide &#124; Technology and consumer electronics news and reviews</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 01:09:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Intel Core i9 Benched: Six Cores Of Pure Joy</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-core-i9-benched-six-cores-of-pure-joy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-core-i9-benched-six-cores-of-pure-joy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:22:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Herrman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[benchmarks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core i7]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core i9]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel core i7]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel core i9]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=368795</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On paper, the Core i9 might not sound that exciting: It&#8217;s a lot like the Core i7, except built with a 32nm fabrication process and two extra cores, for a total of six. Early benchmarks, though, say it flies. Sometimes.
The i9 doesn&#8217;t extract significant advantages from its pumped core count (which brings processing thread count [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_intelcorei9-leaklg.jpg" alt="" class="center" />On paper, the Core i9 might not sound that exciting: It&#8217;s a lot like the <a href="http://gizmodo.com.au/tags/intel-core-i7">Core i7</a>, except built with a 32nm fabrication process and two extra cores, for a total of six. <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/146477==http://pclab.pl/art39718.html">Early benchmarks</a>, though, say it <em>flies</em>. Sometimes.<span id="more-368795"></span></p>
<p>The i9 doesn&#8217;t extract significant advantages from its pumped core count (which brings processing thread count up to 12) in a lot of day-to-day tasks, so don&#8217;t expect to see an increase in game performance, Windows startup speed or other single-core optimised tasks. It&#8217;s when you start rendering video or doing 3D modelling &#8211; tasks that are suited to parallelisation &#8211; that the i9 flexes its muscles.</p>
<p><a rel="lytebox" href="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/11/x264_p2.png"><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_x264_p2.jpg" alt="" class="center" /></a>That&#8217;s roughly a 50 per cent increase in video-encoding performance over a similarly clocked i7 &#8211; already no slouch by any existing standards.</p>
<p>The i9 processors won&#8217;t ship until sometime in early to mid 2010, and when they do, expect them to be a bit on the expensive side. But man, <em>50 per cent</em>. I think I can stand to save up a few more bucks, honestly. [<a href="http://macnn.com/rd/146477==http://pclab.pl/art39718.html">PCLab</a> via <a href="http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/11/23/core.i9s.six.cores.an.edge.in.key.apps/">Electronista</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-core-i9-benched-six-cores-of-pure-joy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Atom Processor To Get The 32nm Treatment In 2011</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/atom-processor-to-get-the-32nm-treatment-in-2011/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/atom-processor-to-get-the-32nm-treatment-in-2011/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:19:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Herrman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cedar trail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cedarview]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel atom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[memory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[processors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=368389</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Attention, people who like to maintain a complete mental taxonomy of every processor: Cedar Trail has been outed as the new Atom platform for 2011, with the name Cedarview going to the processor itself. Along with 32nm fabrication, some goodies:
According to Fudzilla, the platform will include a new memory controller to accommodate DDR3 RAM which, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_intel-atom.jpg" alt="" class="right" />Attention, people who like to maintain a complete mental taxonomy of every processor: Cedar Trail has been outed as the new Atom platform for 2011, with the name Cedarview going to the processor itself. Along with 32nm fabrication, some goodies:<span id="more-368389"></span></p>
<p>According to Fudzilla, the platform will include a new memory controller to accommodate DDR3 RAM which, despite supporting two slots, will remain single-channel. Pineview, the <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/10/rumour-select-intel-atom-cpu-netbooks-to-be-allowed-2gb-ram/">next Atom</a> before Cedarview, hasn&#8217;t even shipped yet &mdash; that&#8217;s expected to be the beginning of next year &mdash; so it&#8217;s interesting to glimpse this far into the future, where Atom, such as it is, will remain positioned almost <em>exactly</em> where it is now. Oh well! [<a href="http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16512/41/">Fudzilla</a>]</p>
<p><em>Disclaimer: That Atom sitting on the penny up there is an older version (not that the new one will look any different).</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/atom-processor-to-get-the-32nm-treatment-in-2011/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Intel Atom&#8217;s Snow Leopard Compatibility Re-Hacked</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-atoms-snow-leopard-compatibility-re-hacked/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-atoms-snow-leopard-compatibility-re-hacked/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 06:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan Nosowitz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hackintosh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hacks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mac os x]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[operating systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[snow leopard]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=368335</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Apple, understandably, broke Atom support in its latest 10.6.2 update for Snow Leopard &#8212; but that&#8217;s not going to keep enterprising Hackintoshers from finding a workaround. 
They promised it last week, and now they&#8217;ve delivered: Atom support is back, although apparently implementing the fix isn&#8217;t the easiest project. Still, the ball&#8217;s in Apple&#8217;s court now. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apple, understandably, broke Atom support in its latest 10.6.2 update for Snow Leopard &mdash; but that&#8217;s not going to keep enterprising Hackintoshers from finding a workaround. <span id="more-368335"></span></p>
<p>They promised it <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/netbook-hackintosh-fix-10-6-2-coming-in-a-few-weeks/">last week</a>, and now they&#8217;ve delivered: Atom support is back, although apparently implementing the fix isn&#8217;t the easiest project. Still, the ball&#8217;s in Apple&#8217;s court now. Is this going to turn into a Palm Pre-iTunes thing, or will Apple just let it lie? [<a href="http://tech.yahoo.com/news/macworld/20091119/tc_macworld/hackbrings1062backtoatomprocessors">Yahoo</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-atoms-snow-leopard-compatibility-re-hacked/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Intel Deems The Dual Core Atom 330 Too Hot For Netbooks</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-deems-the-dual-core-atom-330-too-hot-for-netbooks/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-deems-the-dual-core-atom-330-too-hot-for-netbooks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 01:15:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rosa Golijan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[n330]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[netbooks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[processors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=366701</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We&#8217;ve been curious as to why Intel decided to keep the N330 chip out of netbooks, and now we finally know: The chips are just too damn hot.
On top of those thermal issues, testing done by computer builder Haleron revealed that the N330 was also a killer on batteries in comparison to the, now used, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;ve been curious as to why Intel decided to keep the N330 chip out of netbooks, and now we finally know: The chips are just too damn hot.<span id="more-366701"></span></p>
<p>On top of those thermal issues, testing done by computer builder Haleron revealed that the N330 was also a killer on batteries in comparison to the, now used, two-chip N270 processor. Guess that explains why resellers have been trying to get rid of the N330 as quickly as possible. [<a href="http://www.newswireless.net/index.cfm/article/7633">Newswireless</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-deems-the-dual-core-atom-330-too-hot-for-netbooks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Intel&#8217;s 32nm Arrandale Core i5 And i7 Chips For Anorexic Notebooks</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intels-32nm-arrandale-core-i5-and-i7-chips-for-anorexic-notebooks/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intels-32nm-arrandale-core-i5-and-i7-chips-for-anorexic-notebooks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arrandale]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Computers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core i5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core i7]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cpus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[laptops]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[notebooks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[processors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rumours]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconfirmed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=366571</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We know, the Core i7-i5-i3 stuff is confusing. Not to make it worse, but Digitimes outs some of Intel&#8217;s notebooks plans for next year: a triplet of processors of Core i7 and i5 processors, codenamed Arrandale, for skinny laptops.
The key feature about Arrandale, versus current Core i5/i7 processors, is that it&#8217;s manufactured using a 32nm [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_intelshot.jpg" alt="" class="left" />We know, the Core i7-i5-i3 stuff <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/10/giz-explains-intels-entire-confusing-armada-of-chips/">is confusing</a>. Not to make it worse, but <a href="http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20091112PD202.html">Digitimes outs</a> some of Intel&#8217;s notebooks plans for next year: a triplet of processors of Core i7 and i5 processors, codenamed Arrandale, for skinny laptops.<span id="more-366571"></span></p>
<p>The key feature about Arrandale, versus current Core i5/i7 processors, is that it&#8217;s manufactured using a 32nm process, meaning it&#8217;ll be less power hungry. Remember the jump to the Penryn Core 2 chips a couple of years ago? Same speeds, better efficiency? Like that. The three coming out in the first half of 2010 are the Core i7-640UM (1.2GHz), Core i7-620UM (1.06GHz) and Core i5-520UM, all for &#8220;ultra thin&#8221; laptops.</p>
<p>We&#8217;ll also see some 32nm chips for the desktop, codenamed Clarksdale, announced in January. Mmm, chips. [<a href="http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20091112PD202.html">Digitimes</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intels-32nm-arrandale-core-i5-and-i7-chips-for-anorexic-notebooks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AMD&#8217;s Atom-Mauling Bobcat And High-End Bulldozer Chips</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/amds-atom-mauling-bobcat-and-high-end-bulldozer-chips/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/amds-atom-mauling-bobcat-and-high-end-bulldozer-chips/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:39:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bobcat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bulldozer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cpus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[processors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=366568</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sure, AMD&#8217;s sorta revelling in getting handed $US1.25 billion by Intel, but more importantly, they&#8217;ve just revealed the future of AMD chips: The promised Atom competitor Bobcat and a new high-end architecture called Bulldozer.
Bobcat&#8217;s a low power chip at Atom, like for netbooks, that can run using less than 1W of power. It&#8217;ll be manufactured [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_boooobcat.jpg" alt="" class="center" />Sure, AMD&#8217;s sorta revelling in <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-pays-amd-1-25-billion-to-end-antitrust-patent-wars/">getting handed $US1.25 billion by Intel</a>, but more importantly, they&#8217;ve just revealed the future of AMD chips: The promised <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2008/07/amd_revealing_atomkiller_plans_in_november-2/">Atom competitor Bobcat</a> and a new <a href="http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2009/11/amd-bobcat-bulldozer.ars">high-end architecture called Bulldozer</a>.<span id="more-366568"></span></p>
<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/11/bobbycat.jpeg" alt="" class="center" />Bobcat&#8217;s a low power chip at Atom, like for netbooks, that can run using less than 1W of power. It&#8217;ll be manufactured using a 32nm process. It&#8217;s not hitting until 2011 though, and as Ars&#8217; Jon Stokes points out, by then Intel will have been at 32nm with Atom for a while, and already close to going to 22nm.</p>
<p>Bulldozer is AMD&#8217;s new server architecture, also slated for 2011 which uses a new design with two &#8220;tightly linked cores&#8221; as the heart. You can read about it in way more detail over at Ars, though for now, Stokes says it&#8217;s still hard to tell how competitive they&#8217;re going to be with Intel&#8217;s 2011 lineup. Guess we&#8217;ll see. [<a href="http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2009/11/amd-bobcat-bulldozer.ars">Ars</a>, <em>Image via <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/flasporty/2752012164/">Michele Eve</a>/Flickr</em>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/amds-atom-mauling-bobcat-and-high-end-bulldozer-chips/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Intel Pays AMD $US1.25 Billion To End Antitrust, Patent Wars</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-pays-amd-1-25-billion-to-end-antitrust-patent-wars/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-pays-amd-1-25-billion-to-end-antitrust-patent-wars/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:23:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Herrman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[european commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawsuits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[monopolies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=366480</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In case you were wondering if Intel&#8217;s business practices were as shady as the European Commission and the NY Attorney General think they are, look no further than this: Intel is paying $US1.25 billion &#8212; plus frills &#8212; to avoid fighting.
Here&#8217;s how Intel describes the settlement:
 Intel Corporation and Advanced Micro Devices today announced a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_500x_amd-cake_01.jpg" alt="" class="right" />In case you were wondering if Intel&#8217;s business practices were as shady as the <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/05/intel_smacked_with_staggering_145_billion_fine_in_euro_antitrust_case-2/">European Commission</a> and the <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-hit-with-a-massive-antitrust-suit-in-the-us-this-time/">NY Attorney General</a> think they are, look no further than this: Intel is paying $US1.25 billion &mdash; plus frills &mdash; <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/11/12/intel-amd-to-bury-antitrust-hatchet-intel-to-pay-125b/">to avoid fighting</a>.<span id="more-366480"></span></p>
<p>Here&#8217;s how Intel describes the settlement:</p>
<blockquote><p> Intel Corporation and Advanced Micro Devices today announced a comprehensive agreement to end all outstanding legal disputes between the companies, including antitrust litigation and patent cross licence disputes.</p>
</blockquote>
<p> So, they&#8217;re not fighting directly anymore, and the mountains of patent and antitrust disputes are resolved: Intel will pay this ridiculously large sum of money to AMD, and agree to not engage in anything even <em>resembling</em> monopolistic behaviour, and both companies will live in harmony, cross-licensing technologies and competing, but softly! Great. Well, sort of: Intel&#8217;s biggest problems right now don&#8217;t come from other companies, but from governments: Complaints from AMD no doubt helped spur investigations by the European Commission and New York Attorney General into Intel&#8217;s business practices, and as part of the agreement AMD is withdrawing their complaints with both agencies, but the EC issued their $US1 billion+ fine quite a while ago and <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-hit-with-a-massive-antitrust-suit-in-the-us-this-time/">from the looks of it</a>, the AG&#8217;s office is eager to move forward with their investigation too. In other words, this probably isn&#8217;t the end of the pain for Intel.</p>
<p>That, kids, is why you don&#8217;t engage in anticompetitive practices in a two-company industry. [<a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/11/12/intel-amd-to-bury-antitrust-hatchet-intel-to-pay-125b/">WSJ Law Blog</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/intel-pays-amd-1-25-billion-to-end-antitrust-patent-wars/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Netbook Hackintosh Fix 10.6.2 Coming In &#8220;A Few Weeks&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/netbook-hackintosh-fix-10-6-2-coming-in-a-few-weeks/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/netbook-hackintosh-fix-10-6-2-coming-in-a-few-weeks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:06:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Herrman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hackintosh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel atom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mac os x]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mac os x 10.6.2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[netbookinstaller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[netbooks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[operating systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[snow leopard]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=366182</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When Apple killed Atom processor support in the Snow Leopard 10.6.2 update, it was one of the first times they&#8217;d actively tried to stop hobbyist hackintoshing. It was also sort of a dick move! Luckily, it&#8217;s not going to stick.
The (main) man behind the NetbookInstaller software, which takes care of enough of the under-the-hood tweaks [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_500x_opthack.jpg" alt="" class="right" />When Apple <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/mac-os-x-10-6-2-update-missing-atom-support-breaks-hackintosh/">killed</a> Atom processor support in the Snow Leopard 10.6.2 update, it was one of the first times they&#8217;d actively tried to stop hobbyist hackintoshing. It was also sort of a dick move! Luckily, it&#8217;s not going to stick.<span id="more-366182"></span></p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.meklort.com/?p=111">(main) man</a> behind the NetbookInstaller software, which takes care of enough of the under-the-hood tweaks to make netbook hackintoshing <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/10/how-to-hackintosh-a-dell-mini-10v-into-the-ultimate-os-x-netbook/">approachable</a>, heard the plaintive cries of his flock and handed down a decree from on high:</p>
<blockquote><p> The kernel will be fixed. It&#8217;ll just take a few weeks.</p>
</blockquote>
<p> This certainty, combined with the <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/os-x-10-6-2-does-not-ditch-atom-support-hackintosh-safe/">flip</a>-<a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/latest-snow-leopard-developer-build-breaks-hackintosh-support-again/">flopping</a> Atom compatibility in earlier 10.6.2 builds, points to the breakage as an intentional choice, not just some incidental bug.</p>
<p><strong>Update:</strong> Actually, there&#8217;s <a href="http://stellarola.tumblr.com/post/235446599/atom-cpu-sir-your-pants-are-on-fire">an interesting case</a> to be made: The 10.6.2 killed Atom in all builds of the update. Interesting. —<em>Thanks, Eduardo!</em></p>
<p>Even better, for anyone who dove straight into the 10.6.2 update only to find themselves very suddenly <em>without a working netbook</em>, there&#8217;s a quick fix: <a href="http://www.mydellmini.com/forum/general-mac-os-x-discussion/15050-osx-10-6-2-a-2.html#post117830">Downgrade your kernel</a>! Using the same instruction set you can do a partial (excluding the kernel) upgrade to 10.6.2, but you&#8217;re probably just best off waiting until everything is patched-up right and proper. [<a href="http://www.meklort.com/?p=111">Meklort</a>, <a href="http://www.mydellmini.com/forum/general-mac-os-x-discussion/15050-osx-10-6-2-a-9.html">MyDellMini</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/netbook-hackintosh-fix-10-6-2-coming-in-a-few-weeks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Intel Reader Photographs Text And Reads It Back To You</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/the-intel-reader-photographs-text-and-reads-it-back-to-you/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/the-intel-reader-photographs-text-and-reads-it-back-to-you/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 12:29:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Danny Allen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gadgets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ereaders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[readers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[text to speech]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=365867</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Intel&#8217;s Reader for the visually impaired isn&#8217;t a concept; it goes on sale today. Using an Atom processor, 5-megapixel camera and Intel&#8217;s Linux-based Moblin OS, it turns book pages into digital text and MP3s…then reads aloud in a synthesised voice.

Ben Foss, Director of Access Technology at Intel&#8217;s Digital Health group said the device is also [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_intelreader.jpg" alt="" class="center" />Intel&#8217;s Reader for the visually impaired isn&#8217;t a concept; it goes on sale today. Using an Atom processor, 5-megapixel camera and Intel&#8217;s Linux-based Moblin OS, it turns book pages into digital text and MP3s…then reads aloud in a synthesised voice.<span id="more-365867"></span></p>
<p><object width="570" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zq8moeOGAXw&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1&amp;fmt=22"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zq8moeOGAXw&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1&amp;fmt=22" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="570" height="350"></object></p>
<p>Ben Foss, Director of Access Technology at Intel&#8217;s Digital Health group said the device is also intended to assist those with severe Dyslexia, an impairment he himself grew up with. &#8220;We want people to experience the independence of being able to read on their own in a public place or anywhere they want to.&#8221;</p>
<p>Prototypes of the paper-back sized device were tested with more than 400 visually impaired users, including some who were completely blind. The reader can adjust the speed of reading, and its 2GB of storage can hold about 500,000 pages of text; roughly 600 pages of scanned books.</p>
<p>At $US1500, it&#8217;s not cheap. But compared to even more expensive Braille readers, it has a shot as a specialty device. [<a href="http://www.reader.intel.com/">Intel</a> via <a href="http://venturebeat.com/2009/11/09/intel-introduces-a-digital-book-reader-for-the-blind/">VentureBeat</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/the-intel-reader-photographs-text-and-reads-it-back-to-you/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mac OS X 10.6.2 Update Missing Atom Support, Breaks Hackintosh</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/mac-os-x-10-6-2-update-missing-atom-support-breaks-hackintosh/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/mac-os-x-10-6-2-update-missing-atom-support-breaks-hackintosh/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rosa Golijan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hackintosh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mac os x]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[operating systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[snow leopard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[updates]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=365715</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you&#8217;re using a Hackintosh then you might want to wait before upgrading to Mac OS X 10.6.2 because for all the bug fixes it brings, it lacks the Intel Atom support necessary for our beloved Hackintoshes.
[OS X Daily]
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_macosx.jpg" alt="" class="center" />If you&#8217;re using a Hackintosh then you might want to wait before upgrading to <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/snow-leopard-10-6-2-fixes-account-nuking-bug-and-about-40-more/">Mac OS X 10.6.2</a> because for all the bug fixes it brings, it lacks the Intel Atom support necessary for our beloved Hackintoshes.<span id="more-365715"></span></p>
<p>[<a href="http://osxdaily.com/2009/11/09/mac-os-x-10-6-2-update-released-intel-atom-support-officially-missing-breaks-hackintosh-netbooks/">OS X Daily</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/mac-os-x-10-6-2-update-missing-atom-support-breaks-hackintosh/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
