On Sunday 30 November 2008 14:16, Zero3 wrote: > Ian Clarke skrev: > > Just received this, anyone have any thoughts? :- > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Andrew <...> > > Date: Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 5:33 AM > > Subject: powertop/latencytop vs freenet > > To: ian at freenetproject.org > > > > > > Yo, > > > > I uninstalled Freenet from 40 laptops (we're a privacy company) > > because they rake havoc on battery life. Fix it please, then we'll > > re-install. > > > > Best, > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > Make Freenet automatically go into "sleep mode" when host is running on > battery power? (At least by default) > > Obviously this will have a cost of uptime, which i know you all hold > dearly, but that's the old discussion about how much uptime to sacrifice > in order to achieve better usability. (Less uptime = slower/poorer > network, but less usability = fewer users = same kinds of problems...)
:) That's a debate I've had with nextgens many times - he doesn't want me to implement download resuming for example. If the laptop is going to be regularly on battery power and connected via wifi, there is little point in having a node installed at all. However since so many laptops are used as desktop replacements, there may be some merit in detecting that we are on battery and shouting at the user when they try to access Freenet... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20081201/b20bb07a/attachment.pgp>
