On 16 March 2011 08:50, eckinator <[email protected]> wrote: > good point with regard to more complex systems. different for mere > on/off functionality replaced by standby. NVRAM and EEPROM are cheap > and fast. saving settings shouldn't be such a big whoop. and there are > more energy efficient ways to do that. a simple AA rechargeable. or > you could even go one step further and store settings in the remote > which has a battery anyway. plus if you take into the equation the > additional production footprint for the standby function even a > standby that makes sense otherwise may become totally pointless. > meaning if the energy saved by using standby instead of just letting > the system run is less over the lifetime of the device than the energy > spent to add the standby function...
I should add too that on my always on systems I allow my spare CPU cycles to mash away at BIONC projects such as http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/research/cep2/overview.do -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
