Which one is fast?

public class Point2D {
    private int x, y;
    public Point2D() { x = 0; y = 0; }
    //public Point2D() { this(0,0); }
    public Point2D(int x, int y) {this.x = x; this.y = y;}
    public int getX() {return x;}
    public int getY() {return y;}
    public void setX(int x) {this.x = x;}
    public void setY(int y) {this.y = y;}
}the constructors below both work:
public Point2D() { x = 0; y = 0; }
//public Point2D() { this(0,0); }
which one should be more efficient?
thanks

A good compiler would generate the same code for both
forms of no argument constructor.
public class b {
int x,y;
public b(int x,int y) { this.x=x; this.y=y;}
public b(int x) { this(x,0); }
public b() { x=0; y=0;} //
public static void main(String args[] ) {
     b w0,w1;
}With SUN JDK 1.4.2_03:
javap -private -c b
Compiled from "b.java"
public class b extends java.lang.Object{
int x;
int y;
public b(int,int);
  Code:
   0:     aload_0
   1:     invokespecial     #1; //Method java/lang/Object."<init>":()V
   4:     aload_0
   5:     iload_1
   6:     putfield     #2; //Field x:I
   9:     aload_0
   10:     iload_2
   11:     putfield     #3; //Field y:I
   14:     return
public b(int);
  Code:
   0:     aload_0
   1:     iload_1
   2:     iconst_0
   3:     invokespecial     #4; //Method "<init>":(II)V
   6:     return
public b();
  Code:
   0:     aload_0
   1:     invokespecial     #1; //Method java/lang/Object."<init>":()V
   4:     aload_0
   5:     iconst_0
   6:     putfield     #2; //Field x:I
   9:     aload_0
   10:     iconst_0
   11:     putfield     #3; //Field y:I
   14:     return
public static void main(java.lang.String[]);
  Code:
   0:     return
}

Similar Messages

  • Which one is faster loading type between Insert/Update and Update/Insert?

    Hi Gurus,
    Could anyone tell me which loading type faster between Insert/Update and Update/Insert?Any resolution and document reference would be grateful.
    Regards,
    Joni

    910575 wrote:
    Thanks Purvesh for your quick response..
    Yes you are right, we have to prefer sql rather than plsql. But if i have 1 lakh records to be inserted then my insert into select will do insert one by one that mean context switching is more to server i.e 1 lakh.
    If i use BULK COLLECT+ FORALL then in a single switch the lakh records will be inserted right?
    I agree that when we have less number of records to insert we can prefer insert into select, if we have huge data then why not FORALL ?
    You have just tested for 107 records, but in huge data it is different right?
    Thanks,
    VinodYou've misunderstood how it works, I think. When you do the "insert into ... select", Oracle works out what rows need to be inserted and does them in one fell swoop. That's 2 context switches only, with the bulk of the work being done by the SQL engine.
    When you do the BULK COLLECT + FORALL, you're telling Oracle to first identify the rows (that's two context switches straight off; one from PL/SQL to SQL and then back to PL/SQL again), load them into a collection, then loop through the collection and insert the records X rows at a time (which could be all records or whatever you set as the LIMIT on the FORALL) (again, with the context switching between PL/SQL and SQL and back again through each loop).
    Which one sounds like it does the least amount of work? Not the BULK COLLECT, right?

  • Which one is faster to move an internal table to other?

    Hi Gurus,
    Suppose I've two internal tables with same structures. Which one of the following statement works faster to move one table to another?
    1 . APPEND LINES OF ITAB TO JTAB.
    2 . JTAB[] = ITAB[].
    kindly help me out.

    hello,
       These two stmts are NOT the same !
    Appending does appending, adding to the existing ones
    where as the other one simply copies the content  .
    Assuming there are no prior entries involved, copying
    itab1[] = itab2[] is faster .
    ~ laxmi
    pls reward helpful answers

  • Which one is better to manage sprites??

    hello,
    i have a class that manage all my sprites, from updating to rendering
    and because there will be many sprites iterated every game loop
    i want to know which one is faster between these :
    1. i put ALL sprites (active and not active) in the sprite manager and update the sprite based on whenever it's active or not
    OR
    2. i put only active sprite and the sprite that not active is removed from the list, in this case in every loop i must add new active sprite to the list and remove nonactive sprite from the list
    the code will be like this :
    for number 1
    ArrayList spritelist; // list of the sprites
    public void update(Graphics g) {
         for (int i=0;i < spritelist.size();i++) {
              Sprite s = (Sprite) spritelist.get(i);
              if (s.active()) {
                   s.update();
                   s.render(g);
    ......and for number 2
    ArrayList spritelist; // list of the sprites
    public void update(Graphics g) {
         for (int i=0;i < spritelist.size();i++) {
              Sprite s = (Sprite) spritelist.get(i);
              if (s.active()) {
                   s.update();
                   s.render(g);
              } else { spritelist.remove(i); i--; }
    ......in code 1, there will be many sprites to iterate, and in code 2, there will be many adding and removing sprite from the list
    so my question is:
    is iterating on many sprites and get it's active status is faster or
    iterate on few sprites and use ArrayList.add() and ArrayList.remove()
    Thanks in advance........

    Rules about optimizing:
    1)     Dont do it.
    2)     (experts only) Dont do it yet.
    Do you have less than 10000 sprites? Do you add or remove more than 1000 sprites for each iteration in the game loop?
    The answer is likely to be no.
    Is the time it takes to do the painting of one single sprite plus the time it takes to do calculation regarding the movement of one single sprite grater than the time it takes to iterate over an array of 1000 sprites?
    The answer is likely to be yes.
    So, in what part of your code should you twist your head to do some optimizing?
    Not here!
    And where should you concentrate about maintainability?

  • I have a budget of $2,200 and I don't know what to buy; The MacBook Pro 15 inch for $2,199 or the MacBook Pro w/ Retina Display for $2,199. I LOVE playing games but I don't know which one would play games faster.Take note that I wont upgrade anything.

    The MBP w/ Retina Display is 2.3GHz but the other without Retina Display is 2.6GHz. So I don't know which one would play games absolutely flawlessly. I wont have the screen resolution so high on the games though. So can someone reply and tell me which one I should get and why?

    Mac's are generally not 3D gaming computers and laptops especially are not because 3D games require a upgraded video card to take advantage of newer games and more feature rich updates.
    Only the Mac Pro can one change the video card, if one can find a upgrade for it.
    If you really love 3D gaming, a Windows 7 3D gaming tower is your machine.
    http://www.cbscores.com/index.php?sort=ogl&order=desc
    3D gaming on a Mac is sort of a second hobby, it's rather short lived as one can't replace the video card once a year, only with a new machine purchase.
    Most 3D games are for Windows anyway and Apple almost demands OS X be upgraded to newer verisons annually now, so that sort of throws a monkey wrench into a Mac gaming rig with software upgrades and all. On the other hand Windows 7 is supported for a decade.
    Mac's just don't work well with 3D gaming, perhaps a Win 7 tower and a iPad or something.

  • Which one of these Macbooks (configurations) will be faster?

    I'm debating between a 13'' macbook air and a macbook pro.
    The MacBook pro is a 2.9GHz Dual-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz and 8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM BUT with a 750GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
    The MacBook Air is 1.8GHz Intel Dual-Core Core i5 with 4GB 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM BUT has a solid state drive
    I heard a solid state drive makes a huge difference in speed but I don't know how much. if they will match in performance I will go for air's portability but if the pro far outweighs in speed I might go with it.
    for cost issues I am maxing out at those 2 options. is there a clear winner for which is the faster (stronger) computer?

    The SSD may be faster than the HDD, but the MBP should be about 4 times faster than the MBA.
    Please don't make multiple posts of the same question.

  • Difference between Temp table and Variable table and which one is better performance wise?

    Hello,
    Anyone could you explain What is difference between Temp Table (#, ##) and Variable table (DECLARE @V TABLE (EMP_ID INT)) ?
    Which one is recommended to use for better performance?
    also Is it possible to create CLUSTER and NONCLUSTER Index on Variable table?
    In my case: 1-2 days transactional data are more than 3-4 Millions. I tried using both # and table variable and found table variable is faster.
    Is that Table variable using Memory or Disk space?
    Thanks Shiven:) If Answer is Helpful, Please Vote

    Check following link to see differences b/w TempTable & TableVariable: http://sqlwithmanoj.com/2010/05/15/temporary-tables-vs-table-variables/
    TempTables & TableVariables both use memory & tempDB in similar manner, check this blog post: http://sqlwithmanoj.com/2010/07/20/table-variables-are-not-stored-in-memory-but-in-tempdb/
    Performance wise if you are dealing with millions of records then TempTable is ideal, as you can create explicit indexes on top of them. But if there are less records then TableVariables are good suited.
    On Tables Variable explicit index are not allowed, if you define a PK column, then a Clustered Index will be created automatically.
    But it also depends upon specific scenarios you are dealing with , can you share it?
    ~manoj | email: http://scr.im/m22g
    http://sqlwithmanoj.wordpress.com
    MCCA 2011 | My FB Page

  • In need of a new Graphics/Video card,..which one?

    My computer stopped booting all the way a couple of days ago. Took it to Apple store where they told me I need a new Graphics card. As of now I have:
    Chipset Model: NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT
    Bus: PCIe
    PCIe Lane Width: x16
    VRAM (Total): 256 MB
    Vendor: NVIDIA (0x10de)
    ROM Revision: 3011
    Does anybody have a suggestion on which one to get?
    When it comes to that stuff, I have no clue which one is good/better etc.
    Any help would be appreciated. I would be willing to spend $250-$350 unless I get an amazing one for a bit higher.
    I don't do a lot of graphics work on the computer, but, I do like my computer games.
    I was looking at this on OWC:
    http://eshop.macsales.com/item/ATI%20Technologies/100435928/
    (ATI RADEON 3870 256-bit 512MB GDDR4 16x PCIe Video Card for the Mac Pro with two Dual-Link DVI Ports, supports two 30" displays! Supports HDMI output up to 1920x1080!)
    Thanks

    Then, if I look on comments on the Apple website, some people say it does work on older models, some say it does not because this card requires PCI Express 2.0??
    The card is PCI Express 2. Your Mac Pro has just standard PCI Express. However, that doesn't matter , since PCI Express 2 was designed to be compatible with standard PCI Express. Any PCI Express card (2.0 or not) can be used in any PCI Express slot (2.0 or not). Of course you only get 2.0 speed if the card and slot are both 2.0.
    PCI slot 1 (the lower slot) in your Mac Pro is a 16x slot, and will provide plenty of speed for the card. It is unlikely that an older Mac Pro could send data any faster than that slot could handle. The new Mac Pros have faster memory, and might be able to use the extra speed of PCI Express 2.0.

  • Which one to choose the G5 2.5 DP or the G5 dual core 2.3?

    I'm going to change my computer yet I'd like to stay Classic compatible for a while. Which of the 2 theme machines would you recommend? One has a slower CPU but more L2 cache, one has faster RAM but slower bus, one has better graphics card, more RAM can be added... As you can see in my profile I mainly work with Pro Tools LE 7.4 (mainly audio to video post production) and Logic 8 (and am aware it's graphic speed hungry) + Kontakt3, Absynth4, Stylus RMX, PlugSound Pro and others for music composing. I know you would recommend the Quad but I can't afford it. I just want to sell the iMac while it's worth something and upgrade to a reasonable machine for not too much money. Thanks for your thoughts in advance.
    Wojtek

    Gee! How will they call new processors in the decade? 10k core CPUs? Bring me my ZX81 back It was ok with my TV set, great fun with no fan, it could draw 3 lines (the fourth line was beyond its 1kB of RAM), it could call me my name when I programmed it in basic...

  • I am considering buying a new MAC laptop to run LOGIC for composition and band live/recording, but which one is best as I do not want to spend too much money? Does it have a line in and how do you monitor sound? Will I need adaptors and a interface?

    Can anybody help?
    I am considering buying a new MAC laptop to run LOGIC for composition and band live/recording, but which one is best as I do not want to spend too much money?
    Does it have a line in and how do you monitor sound?
    Will I need adaptors and an interface?
    Also, I am guessing as Logic only runs on MAC surely then they would not the best spec to recommend to run it?
    I see all the upgrades as additional memory or a faster process?
    Is a retina screen necessary, and why flash based storage against a 1TB hard drive, and a i5 instead of an i7
    The main reason for this purchase is to play live and use backing tracks and record found sounds and make creative songs.
    I hope you can provide some valuable feedback, as I am a longtime MAC user and see upgrades and changes happen regularly but the most important thing is the songs not the equipment.
    I have £500 already and willing to add another 500 to 700 pounds, then software extra.

    Can anybody help?
    I am considering buying a new MAC laptop to run LOGIC for composition and band live/recording, but which one is best as I do not want to spend too much money?
    Does it have a line in and how do you monitor sound?
    Will I need adaptors and an interface?
    Also, I am guessing as Logic only runs on MAC surely then they would not the best spec to recommend to run it?
    I see all the upgrades as additional memory or a faster process?
    Is a retina screen necessary, and why flash based storage against a 1TB hard drive, and a i5 instead of an i7
    The main reason for this purchase is to play live and use backing tracks and record found sounds and make creative songs.
    I hope you can provide some valuable feedback, as I am a longtime MAC user and see upgrades and changes happen regularly but the most important thing is the songs not the equipment.
    I have £500 already and willing to add another 500 to 700 pounds, then software extra.

  • Hard drive duke out...which one would you put your life on the line for?

    As far as SATA drives go only...
    Seagate 320 gig Barracuda (ST3320820AS) vs. Samsung 320 gig HD320KJ vs. factory WD/Apple 250 gig drive. All about the same age (3/07) except for the Apple 250 which is about 8/06.
    Which one would you choose for your main drive?
    Thanks a bunch!

    Everybodys milage seems to vary with Hard drives as does the current quality of certain manufactures. Personally I've been burned numerous times on Seagate drives but that could simply be my luck of the draw. What is really more important is how you use specific drives vs their reliability.
    I have a RAID 5 Linux server in my rack for my major archiving. That server has been built with Raptor OS drives (Small ones, 36Gb) as all it has is FC5. The RAID array is built from much cheaper (per Gb) 500Gb WD Caviar drives. In my configuration this comes to about 1.25Tb of RAID 5 storage. I can sustain a full drive failure without losing my data. I can also lose my OS drive, buy an new one, Install Fedora 5 again, and my RAID will still be there. (I've backed up the critical files necessary to support this and I've tested it. It works.)
    My MacPro is just about to be rebuilt. I got a Hitachi Ultrastar from Newegg.com
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822145164
    I have 4x500Gb WD drives in my Pro configured to be a RAID 1 from 2 1Tb logical volumes. I plan on using this for quick local archive of projects as yanking a 50Gb project from there is still much faster than off my RAID 5 plus my RAID 5 is quickly getting filled from my photography work so I'm using the RAID 1 for my video work. In addition to that, I have a Firewire 800 1TB external drive to run on TimeMachine and back up all my working files on my new OS drive. If I sound paranoid. I am. Just remember no matter WHO's drive you buy, it is, in the end, not a question of IF it might fail, but WHEN. You should plan your work environment expecting your drives will fail and then make sure you have enough backup that you can recover from that. One could argue there may be holes even in my backup plan. There are, but in the end, I can recover everything, baring my home burning down. (and actually I'm covered for that, all be it the latency in the backup is probably on a 2 week cycle).

  • I'm debating between a Macbook Air or a Macbook Pro which one would you suggest?

    I'm debating between a Macbook Air (MC965LL/A) or a Macbook Pro (MD313LL/A) which one would you suggest?
    I will be using this for college and taking it to class with me.  My biggest fear is that I may be too hard on the Air and damage it, but I like that it is lighter and looks cooler.  But which one do you believe is more logical and provides the best computer quality overall?

    This is an objective comparison,
    Meanwhile, we start from the price of their basic models, considering of course that could get discounts as a student in the Education Store. Required about 100 € more to buy an Air with the same screen size of this Pro and already, in some cases, may be enough to make your own choice.
    Assuming a score to score, we could say: Pro 1 - 0 Air
    Until recently, the beloved laptop for school purposes was the white MacBook.Orphaned "bianchino", now out of the list for some time now Apple, the Mac that is most on the economic front is approaching the Air 11 "(900 € on the edu store). Air 13 "display offers a native that could be called HiRes, identical resolution to that of Pro 15" base:
    Air 11 "(16:9) 1366 x 768 = 1,049,088 pixels
    Pro 13 "(16:10 format) 1280 x 800 = 1,024,000 pixels
    Air 13 "(16:10 format) 1440 x 900 = 1,296,000 pixels
    The comparison on the screens is not to be taken seriously. After all, is what we will see during every second of computer work.
    And so the challenge back in a tie: Pro 1 - Air 1
    For size and weight comparison is merciless. The Pro is a portable slim, well built and, after all, not too heavy. However, this aspect of the Air is unsurpassed. He created a new category of laptops is so small wonder. The weight is also almost halved with 1.3 kg against 2Kg. For those who are always on the go is a godsend for the university and also the difference in the shoulder is remarkable.
    We update our score: Pro 1 - Air 2
    The battery is offered in both cases with a duration of 7 hours. 2-Air Pro 3. Another aspect that is rather in favor of a tie on the graphics: Both models use the Intel HD Graphics 3000 with 384MB of DDR3 SDRAM condivisa.Pro 3 - Air 4.
    In academia, it may not feel quite the need for a Firewire port, but the fact remains that the Air does not have it.
    I guess that's the case to score another point: Pro 4 - 5 Air
    I scored a little more than necessary to have a complete line of Air, but for the purposes of this comparison we are interested in the value obtained from the Pro 13 'Air base and 13 "base. Both processors are dual core and, as you can see, the little guy gets along very well though with a slower clock. There is also a crucial aspect to consider: these data refer to the computing power but do not take into account the incredible speed-bump-up by SSD. Translated into monetary terms means that if the Pro 13 "is marginally faster when the CPU is under stress (such as video encoding) Air 13" is significantly more responsive in every area. By now you will present the advantages of SSD, as we talk about it constantly, and be assured that we are talking about really obvious differences in the everyday. The advantages obtained clearly outweigh the disadvantage resulting from a delay of a few seconds more in exporting an iMovie or a few seconds to compress a full-bodied zip file (which then increased the write speed scale in part). To assign a score in this area I find then a little 'in difficulty. From the viewpoint of the CPU Pro 13 "is slightly faster but we are sure you can assign an advantage when then every single operation, to start since, requires up to 8 times (the value is clearly approximate) of the time ' Air 11 "? I have no doubt to say that overall performance on the front of the Pro 13 "basis, as configured, is beaten hands down Air 13" base.
    I say then: Pro 4 - Air 6 (but wait ... is not over)
    Do you know where the above discussion decade? The MacBook Pro is much more expandable: add just € 77 and takes a 60GB OCZ Agility SATA3 that mounts in an instant. At that point, the bill draws on the opposite reactivity with SSD and the difference of the processor, though not so obvious, back to bite. It is also possible to realize different combinations. We have spoken of a disk of only 60GB in effect, but in the Pro can also be used as an adapter to enter the optibay the HDD of 320GB in place of the original SuperDrive. In this way we obtain the speed of the solid disc for the operating system and applications and the increased capacity of a traditional hard drive for archiving. Also, the RAM, which base is 4GB on both, on the Pro can be easily increased to 8GB. To want to do things right we should say that the added cost rises well and lose the initial assumption for which we have assigned a point to Pro for the greater economy.Furthermore, the comparison is based, only the basic models, however, the counter remains a valuable expandability, both now and in the future: if after some time you should decide to improve the performance of your Mac, is with the Aircan only change SSD (mSATA but those are expensive), while the Pro will have more flexibility.
    u point for the Pro: Pro 5 - 6 Air
    With the 2011 version of the MacBook Air has resumed the backlit keyboard, but still (and will) not have an Ethernet port, Superdrive and the infrared receiver. The absence of the reader / writer is a point against him, this is indisputable
    equal footing Pro 6 - Air 6. As Apple moves fast towards a future where this will no longer be necessary (see installation and operating system software via the web) can still be useful today. It must be said that with less than 30 € you take an external drive efficiently (review) but this still requires to carry around another "element". On a personal level each of us will be evaluated differently this absence, there are those who do not tolerate it and who has already got used to (in extreme cases supported by the Remote Disk feature) but it is still a lack of perspective in a single complete computer , at least at present.
    For this reason we say: Pro 7 - 6 Air
    pull the money (or better scores ) won the pro of a single point.
    i hope it can help you ti choose
    Francesco

  • Two WRT610N Routers Which One to Keep, Which One to Return?

    For Christmas I received two WRT610N routers as gifts.  While the model number is the same they appear to be different versions, or at least in different packaging.
    The first one is in an all blue box and is called N Ultra Range Plus Simultaneous Dual-N Band Wireless Router.  UPC# 45883 58520.
    The second one is in a blue box with a red banner on the front and a red side panel.  On that box the router is called a Simultanteous Dual Band Wireles-N Gigabit Router. The UPC# is also 4583 58520.
    Since I want to return one of them, I have not yet opened either box, so here are my questions:
    Are these the exact same products?
    Is one V1 and the other V2? How can you tell V1 from V2?
    Is V2 better than V1 or is it just a firmware update to the same hardware?
    If they are not the same product, which one should I keep and which one should I return?
    Thanks for your help!

    I agree with richard - I didn't mention this in my last post
      Unless you are in dire need of some other piece of equipment and can exchange the 2nd router for it - I would keep them both -- especially since Santa brought them and you have no actual cost ($$) in them 
       I maintain two different home networks and help 2 different business keep their small networks running -- I have a spare/extra router for 'each' of my home networks - and the two business' always has a spare router on hand - in case of an emergency 
       I'm not sure about your chipset question -- but I beieve you may be able to tell the version # by the S/N - google around to check on the S/N--Version question --- or ask Liknsys Chat -- it's faster than a phone call - http://www.linksysbycisco.com/US/en/chat

  • Is Fluid Mask 3 the best Knockout Plug-ins if not which one is?

    Is Fluid Mask 3 the best Knockout Plug-ins for Photoshop, if not which one is? I will appreciate it if someone can recommend a good and sophisticated Photoshop Knockout Plug-ins. Thank you

    Kim,
    In answer to your original question, Fluid Mask 3
    is probably the most fully featured of the current masking tools, and apparently the most expensive. Thanks to your message, I took a closer look at Fluid Mask 3 and, as a result, I have added it to my "wish list" for when I get enough free budget for the purchase. But thanks for keeping me from "blowing my money" on a lesser tool.
    I had originally decided against Fluid Mask based on the fact that much of its masking is based on the concept of "inside colors" and "outside colors" and, indeed, Fluid Mask has some very powerful tools for implementing that concept. But in
    many cases that concept breaks down because many colors appear both inside and outside a "foreground" object.
    Some insects and other creatures in nature rely on protective coloration (camouflage) and, for example, such a bug sitting on tree bark will have most of the tree bark repeated in its color pattern.
    But even human subject subjects can have surrounding colors repeated on them, either by happenstance or by the phenomenon of radiosity, in which each illuminated object becomes a secondary light source.
    In the real world, the circumstance in which the foreground object has a unique set of colors different from the background is very rare. That is why I used Corel KnockOut 1.5 so much. In it, you draw an inside line and an outside line and they define very local sets of inside and outside colors which can be interpolated for a transition mask. Those color sets can change continuously along the boundary, allowing for repeated color reversals. The motto of the original Ultimatte KnockOut (before Corel purchased it) was, "There are no edges, there are only transitions." KnockOut produced some very good knockouts for me for that reason. However, the tedium of drawing inside lines and outside lines, and refining them, slowed the process of getting a good mask.
    Fluid Mask's automatically produced adjustable vector sub-boundaries are a very interesting, unique, and useful feature that can help deal with objects that have areas of color that match the color of background areas, by letting you choose which areas are inside and which areas are outside. Those automatically drawn vector patches are what changed my mind about Fluid Mask. I think I could get a good mask faster with Fluid Mask 3 than I could with KnockOut 1.5, and that is the reason why I think Fluid Mask 3 might be worth its rather high price.
    But, like I said before, it will be awhile before I have the budget to make that purchase. There are several software tools that have higher priority, like an upgrade to Photoshop CS3 Extended, for example.
    -- Burton --

  • Which one of these two drives would you recommend and why

    Hello,
    I am planning on adding an external HD to be used with Time Machine.
    I was looking at a WD My Book Studio LX 2 TB FireWire 800, then I saw another WD - 2 TB My Book Studio II.
    While the first look very nice and sleek with its aluminum case, and judging by WD website, offers more features, the second one seem to be faster (7200 rpm vs 5400 rpm) and it also offers 5 years of warranty compared with only 3.
    I am not a computer geek, therefore I am throwing the question here: which one should I buy and why? Do I really need that RAID technology?
    Thanks in advance for your answers.
    Regards,
    Loerincz

    IMHO, you want neither. I've heard enough bad things about WD drives on these forums that I wouldn't touch them with a ten-foot pole. Try [Other World Computing|http://www.macsales.com>. They've got quality stuff.
    As for RAID, you probably don't need that. RAID is a way to make multiple separate drives act like one larger drive, but that's major overkill for most home backup needs.

Maybe you are looking for

  • How to clear a container in OOPS...?

    Hi,        How to Clear a Container in Object Orientation Programming...?                   There is a method available......can you tell me that one....... Moderator message: Please search the forums and Google before posting basic questions. Thread

  • .INI files vs .TXT files for changing default values in a .EXE?

    Hi, I have a two-part question related to updating the default values of controls in an executable: I am creating a LabVIEW executable for installation on two different production-floor computers.   I need to be able to change the default values of t

  • How to place TOC into a different frame in an HTML document?

    I'm now using MS Word 2010 to update a document that I originally created in MS Word 2003. I want to create a TOC in a separate frame positioned to the left of the frame that contains the text of the document.  Using help from Technet I've been able

  • Patching JDEV 11 errors out

    I need to apply the patch 9110539 on the JDEV 11.1.1.2.0 When I run the opatch, as follows, with the setting the ORACLE_HOME=D:\Product\JDev11_1120\ D:\Product\JDev11_1120\9110539>perl D:\Product\JDev11_1120\OPatch\opatch.pl apply -jdk D:\Product\JDe

  • Unable to launch remote iview in federated portal scenario.

    Hi all I have a bi portal and an enterprise portal.I am trying to configure federation to view bi reports in enterprise portal through RDL.i have done the necessary configuration.Now RDL for BEx Broadcaster works fine but in BEx Analyzer case it gene