![Apple serial number mystery by analysis](https://knopkazmeya.com/21.png)
![apple serial number mystery by analysis apple serial number mystery by analysis](https://fossbytes.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/MacBook-serial-number-lookup-using-Apple-ID.jpg)
- #Apple serial number mystery by analysis serial numbers#
- #Apple serial number mystery by analysis pro#
My recollection tells me that serial numbers won't change even if a board is replaced as part of a repair or some other repair extension program. If a board is swapped, the same serial number is burned in by whoever services them (AASP or ARS). I feel less bad about moving the board to a better chassis if it's not original. I'm not really motivated enough to ring AppleCare about a 20 year old machine, I'm pretty sure they'll just shrug and say they don't know (you can totally do that ovver the phone). Of course, the other possibility is the MLB was replaced with one sourced from a USA-built PowerMac (via eBay or OWC or similar most likely) used after it was out of warranty. if the machine had been assembled in Cork (as the chassis serial number indicates) but had had the MLB replaced at some stage say because of damage or a failure, would the board have been serial numbered to the USA (where it was likely manufactured) or would it have had the serial overlaid by the technician with the original chassis serial number? The 'Exchange Board' idea was just a theory I thought might fit, so it has no basis really BUT.
#Apple serial number mystery by analysis pro#
Also, I bought a Mac Pro CTO in 2006 and it still came with a CK serial. This makes some sense now at least.ĬTO options on the G4 PowerMacs were usually SCSI, RAM, CPU speed, and drive configs, so didn't need a main logic board swap, thus I doubt that's the case. Okay, thanks, Alex, that's some useful info there. The board as been in the chassis for a considerable time as the chassis and board are both similarly corroded (the board was moved to a Sawtooth case ultimately because it was in way better condition).ĭoes anyone know what the build location XB is and where this board might have originated? Is it possibly a service 'E Xchange Board' that's been supplied as a spare part? I'm really curious. the XB serial also decodes to a GigE model. The Logic Board has a XB prefix on th serial number and the rest of the number is a mismatch except the last 3 digits (both are JNX, I assume that's something to indicate the model). The case has a CK serial sticker on the back (notably without any specs on, is that usual?), and the serial number decodes down the a GigE model as it should. The vast majority of PPC Macs in the UK are prefixed CK for Cork, Ireland where Apple formally assembled and pre-checked Macs before European market delivery. One of these, on earlier machines, is the build location. I am often interested in the Seriel number of Macs because they can be decoded into specs and other details. The difference is very small, really just changing a function to a subroutine.Īs correctly comments, there is a larger risk of ABI incompatibility in calling a function vs calling a subroutine (similar to a void function).I have a wonderful mystery on my hands realting to the GigE PowerMac G4 I grabbed off eBay and am preserving.
![apple serial number mystery by analysis apple serial number mystery by analysis](https://support.apple.com/library/content/dam/edam/applecare/images/en_US/airpods/ios12-iphone-xs-settings-general-about-airpods.jpg)
I do not have an answer why that is necessary right now. The author of CBLAS chose to implement a Fortran intermediate subroutine sdsdotsub.
![apple serial number mystery by analysis apple serial number mystery by analysis](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/0DdD_WA6v-A/maxresdefault.jpg)
However, you probably could call the sdsdot function (in whichever language it is actually implemented) directly from C cblas_sdsdot. The very common reference implementation is written in Fortran, but it is not the fastest one. The functionality is in whatever BLAS implementation you install. Therefore the CBLAS does not actually contain the whole functionality. BLAS can be implemented in C or assembly, but the API is set to be Fortran. BLAS is defined using a reference Fortran implementation and a Fortran API. "What I wanna ask is actually why there is a need for a intermediate wrapper, why not write it in C?" (More detailed in this question)Īn example could be as below, with the usage of "object-closing" context manager from PEP 343 examples, and a wrapper class with close method which calls native object's destructor: with statement (from PEP 343) on the other hand guarantees that if _enter_ method of the object succeeded, then _exit_ method will be called at the end of the statement, both in case of normal execution and in case of exception. So even if in most cases _del_ method of an object is being called by GC, it is not guaranteed. The try…finally statement and the with statement provide convenient ways to do this. Programs are strongly recommended to explicitly close such objects. It is understood that these resources are freed when the object is garbage-collected, but since garbage collection is not guaranteed to happen, such objects also provide an explicit way to release the external resource, usually a close() method.
![apple serial number mystery by analysis apple serial number mystery by analysis](https://support.apple.com/library/content/dam/edam/applecare/images/en_US/appletv/apple-tv-settings-general-about.jpg)
Some objects contain references to “external” resources such as open files or windows. An implementation is allowed to postpone garbage collection or omit it altogether. Objects are never explicitly destroyed however, when they become unreachable they may be garbage-collected.
![Apple serial number mystery by analysis](https://knopkazmeya.com/21.png)