<?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 on: 10 [Wrong] Things They Hate About Macs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/10-wrong-things-they-hate-about-macs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/10-wrong-things-they-hate-about-macs/</link>
	<description>Apple news and analysis from everyone's favorite mythical Mac user</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kordan Harvey</title>
		<link>http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/10-wrong-things-they-hate-about-macs/comment-page-1/#comment-229</link>
		<dc:creator>Kordan Harvey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:53:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.macalope.com/?p=39#comment-229</guid>
		<description>From what I've read are the currently line of Intel chips not showing AMD how it's really done? I haven't heard anything from AMD in a long, long time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From what I&#8217;ve read are the currently line of Intel chips not showing AMD how it&#8217;s really done? I haven&#8217;t heard anything from AMD in a long, long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Billy K</title>
		<link>http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/10-wrong-things-they-hate-about-macs/comment-page-1/#comment-223</link>
		<dc:creator>Billy K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Sep 2006 16:06:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.macalope.com/?p=39#comment-223</guid>
		<description>My list goes to eleven.

(Implying that shooting in the face with a firehose is no. 11. Get it?)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My list goes to eleven.</p>
<p>(Implying that shooting in the face with a firehose is no. 11. Get it?)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: V M Respectable</title>
		<link>http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/10-wrong-things-they-hate-about-macs/comment-page-1/#comment-215</link>
		<dc:creator>V M Respectable</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:51:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.macalope.com/?p=39#comment-215</guid>
		<description>Tom goes into the AMD thing, too, I see. I'd like to have someone who knows something more about this talk about how likely that is in the short term. To me it just sounds like a lot more work for little benefit: as it is, the OS has to know how to best stroke two different architectures with a number of different feature sets just right to make them purr; adding another with even more permutations, not to mention AMD's fabled hackability, seems like a hassle. I'm probably way off, but I'd still like someone to not just throw an AMD comment in there so facilely, as though it's settled one way or the other.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom goes into the AMD thing, too, I see. I&#8217;d like to have someone who knows something more about this talk about how likely that is in the short term. To me it just sounds like a lot more work for little benefit: as it is, the OS has to know how to best stroke two different architectures with a number of different feature sets just right to make them purr; adding another with even more permutations, not to mention AMD&#8217;s fabled hackability, seems like a hassle. I&#8217;m probably way off, but I&#8217;d still like someone to not just throw an AMD comment in there so facilely, as though it&#8217;s settled one way or the other.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
