Andrew Lentvorski wrote:
DJA wrote:

Well, he's entertaining anyway. But to me he represents the average lazy, and technically ignorant user who thinks his way should be the only way. Especially if it means any mental work on his part. The rest of us should just pound sand.

Maybe, but the whole problem with the "Power" button on Windows is that it doesn't really work unless you power completely off.

But he's pointing out that Vista now offers more suitable options. His opinion though, is that _you_ shouldn't have or need those options if he doesn't understand them.


My Macbook almost *never* gets powered off. I shut the lid and I reopen the lid. I go weeks without hard powering my system up or down. And then, the restart is generally some idiotic Apple system upgrade (bad Apple--no biscuit).

I have no experience with what Macs do. In any case the author was criticizing Vista.


On Windows, even one shut lid-open lid cycle starts introducing strange bugs. My rule of thumb is, 3 cycles or screwball bug, whichever comes first, and hard reboot.

I sympathize, but then Windows doesn't need a lid cycle as an excuse to call initiate_brain_fart either. Again, this author is railing against options that he's (implicitly) given the benefit of the doubt in that they work as designed. He's not complaining that they don't work, he's complaining that they even exist.


And, he is correct about power management, the computer should be *far* better at managing that than it is. When the computer is idle, it should be ready to park everything immediately.

According to the ACPI spec it is. Getting implementors of the ACPI spec to follow it properly is the problem. That applies to both BIOS writers and OS designers. I've followed the ACPI4Linux mailing list for at least a year, and my observation is that most of the problems are caused by poor or misunderstood documentation regarding how the ACPI spec has been implemented in both the hardware and the BIOS.

Fortunately, on the BIOS/hardware side it's usually possible, though sometimes messy, to see what's supposed to happen by examining the DSDT and associated tables. Linux developers try very hard to work around DSDT and/or hardware bugs. However, M$ leaves no documentation behind as to what they are doing, and when they make a mistake which has a certain user-noticeable outcome, the user than assumes that is the proper behaviour and thinks when using another hardware platform or OS, "Why can't this work like Windows!). All the while never knowing that the Windows behavior is actually broken.


The problem is that whole boatloads of applications sitting in the background are too blasted chatty. "Hey, I cleaned the disk. Hey, we redid the application caches. Hey, here's another inconsequential log message." All of these applications demand persistency for no good reason.

True. But then ACPI accounts for this. The biggest offenders are not applications, but buggy drivers (hard drive controller, video, lan, sound, etc.) which don't properly account for power management behavior.


The worst offenders are the web browsers. "Let's cache everything on disk! Yay!" in spite of the fact that we now have computers with 1GB+ of RAM and network connections that can reload almost instantly. If you want to write my last links to disk as history, maybe, but I should be able to shut that off. Keep my last browsing in RAM cache, or *throw it out*. Writing cached images to disk is now useless.

-a

Keeping within the context of power management, RAM has to be refreshed. And that uses power. Thus Suspend to Disk. If things work as intended, a resume after this puts your system back to where it was before suspend. I agree there is a lot of drive space wasted on stoopid stuff like your examples above. Simply dumping the system to RAM is not very helpful, if when you return to your laptop, you find that power management's only solution was to notice there was only 5 minutes of battery left and so turned the computer off.


--
   Best Regards,
      ~DJA.


--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to