Why do people not shut down PC's?


Recommended Posts

I shut my down. Why? Because I freaking want to and it's no one else's business or concern. Speaking about power usage, if you can't afford the differences in cost be it in favor of standby or cold boot then you really should not be owning one as it's a very pointless debate topic in that regard. To strain one's finances to that point is a life fail of poor decision making.

Furthermore not all PC's are always stable going into standby all the time or they sometimes will wake up randomly despite no software reason why it should.

I shut my down. Why? Because I freaking want to and it's no one else's business or concern. Speaking about power usage, if you can't afford the differences in cost be it in favor of standby or cold boot then you really should not be owning one as it's a very pointless debate topic in that regard. To strain one's finances to that point is a life fail of poor decision making.

Furthermore not all PC's are always stable going into standby all the time or they sometimes will wake up randomly despite no software reason why it should.

You should really live in the real world.

Fuel bills in Britain for example have increased 1.3 in the past 10 years.

Salary's amongst the lower paid have not increased in the past 4 years, whereas everything has gone up in price, food, travel, clothing etcetera.

Companies in Britain will charge you ?4+++ for a paper bill through the post, every month.

So therefore people try and make ends meet by making sure their fuel bills don't put them in debt.

They want to make sure they only pay for what they need.

In this day-n-age you need a net connected device.

So get off your high Horse and remember not everyone is as well off as you.

You should really live in the real world.

Fuel bills in Britain for example have increased 1.3 in the past 10 years.

Salary's amongst the lower paid have not increased in the past 4 years, whereas everything has gone up in price, food, travel, clothing etcetera.

Companies in Britain will charge you ?4+++ for a paper bill through the post, every month.

So therefore people try and make ends meet by making sure their fuel bills don't put them in debt.

They want to make sure they only pay for what they need.

In this day-n-age you need a net connected device.

So get off your high Horse and remember not everyone is as well off as you.

 

You shouldn't have a PC if you can't afford the extra 1-2 Dollars, Pounds, or whatever it might add to your bill to run your computers all the time, and that's not factoring the reduction if lifespan on your hardware with the constant reboots will cause over time 

Power companies store the energy and then sell it on to other companies as excess or off-set it against future use.

 

Like if you put solar panels on your porperty, if that is the roofs, garage roof, panels in garden, where ever, the 'what-you-don't-use' gets stored in blocks and energy companies will offer to buy it from you.

They don't store the power. But they predict how much is used and produce according to that if more or less is used it will slightly affect the hz. Over production is generally wasted or sent overseas. But all power production is adjusted to use.

You shouldn't have a PC if you can't afford the extra 1-2 Dollars, Pounds, or whatever it might add to your bill to run your computers all the time, and that's not factoring the reduction if lifespan on your hardware with the constant reboots will cause over time 

In 21st century Britain you must have a internet connected device, to pay bills.

 

With that you need an internet connection and a telephone line.

 

There are not enough spaces int eh local libraries, though local libraries are being closed down.

 

However you cannot dictate to people if they should or should not have a PC.

 

It is the 21st century and we all should have a PC in our homes.

They don't store the power. But they predict how much is used and produce according to that if more or less is used it will slightly affect the hz. Over production is generally wasted or sent overseas. But all power production is adjusted to use.

Yes they do store the power, I know this as I worked at the National grid London.

You should really live in the real world.

Fuel bills in Britain for example have increased 1.3 in the past 10 years.

Salary's amongst the lower paid have not increased in the past 4 years, whereas everything has gone up in price, food, travel, clothing etcetera.

Companies in Britain will charge you ?4+++ for a paper bill through the post, every month.

So therefore people try and make ends meet by making sure their fuel bills don't put them in debt.

They want to make sure they only pay for what they need.

In this day-n-age you need a net connected device.

So get off your high Horse and remember not everyone is as well off as you.

 

It's common sense. Sell your PC if it uses that kind of power and strains your budget. It's a poor decision to build a PC and then worry about wether you use standby or power off. A poor decision in life is a fail and there is no excuse. Reality isn't a high horse, if your bills have increased then you make concessions or perform some kind of money management preparations. There are TONS of alternatives to getting online if you require it but the issue at hand is apparently the differences of wether to turn such on or use standby which is ridiculous if you are cutting your finances that close.

 

I do live in the real world. When prices go up, I make adjustments. I turned my heat down a little, invested in a higher efficiency furnace, purchased cheaper dog food, didn't buy certain things I don't need. I haven't purchased a PC game in months........but I can still turn it on from cold boot or use standby any time I please and not worry about it. I would never let my finances strain to that point, it's silly.

Concessions people...its part of growing up.

It costs you at least 50 times more in energy to shut down and reboot rather than sleep mode.

 

...

 

So hippy, you want to save the worlds resources, then what you need to do is sleep your PC unless a re-boot is required to update system files.

 

 

I don't think it works like you are saying it does. The small power spike on boot up may cost you 7 cents of power and thats being incredibly liberal about it and assuming you pay 15 cents a kilowatt. Everything has to come up and do a POST (Power On Self-Test) which is what wastes power. BIOS does one, CPU is 100% for the whole boot sequence, RAM gets checked and HDDs spin up, CD-ROM does a little howdy, etc. Unless you are only powering down for 5 seconds, sleep and shut down are essentially the same thing from the computers point of view. Copying from HDD to RAM what you need to boot is the slowest process, so to the user its a much faster startup.

 

Sleeping powers off nearly all components. Sleep works by holding voltage on the RAM chips so to the OS everything is already loaded on boot. They de-energize everything else and cool down until you power back up, saving power they would otherwise waste and turn to most likely its byproduct - heat. When you do power up, those components without power take the same power bump as a cold boot would, start heating up again and thus stressing 95% of your PC the same as a cold boot until a 'stable' temperature is reached.

You shouldn't have a PC if you can't afford the extra 1-2 Dollars, Pounds, or whatever it might add to your bill to run your computers all the time, and that's not factoring the reduction if lifespan on your hardware with the constant reboots will cause over time 

What? That doesn't even begin to make sense...

 

There is no need for the majority of people to leave their machines on 24/7. Keeping their utility bill lower isn't a negative thing either. Wasting money isn't really smart no matter the amount...

 

I have servers than run 24/7 in my basement and I don't let any PC in my home stay on 24/7. There is no need for this*.

 

* For the vast majority of users...

1) Power consumption from electronic are going down

2) Only hippies give a #### about the climate

3) Why wait for it to start back up.. I have a blown cap on my Mobo and it takes a solid 10 minutes for my PC to boot 

4) I leave my PC on 24/7 and it runs like a champ

5) Give me a good solid reason why I should shut down, taking into account points 1 - 3.

 

 

Because I can afford not to.  Simple honest answer.

 

What they said, except for firey's point 3. I do shut down my work laptop every day though since I have to take it home with me and there's usually too much hustle and bustle in the metro to risk leaving it on and something happening to the hard drive if it gets banged around too much while it's spinning. I turn it back on when I get home though and leave it on overnight so it can do the scheduled tasks like virus scan, updates, etc. I'm also somewhat addicted to email and like to read and respond to emails as soon as they come in, no matter the time of day, lol, so having my laptop/desktops on all the time make replying easier :)

  

It costs you at least 50 times more in energy to shut down and reboot rather than sleep mode.

...

 

 

I don't think it works like you are saying it does. The small power spike on boot up may cost you 7 cents of power and thats being incredibly liberal about it and assuming you pay 15 cents a kilowatt. Everything has to come up and do a POST (Power On Self-Test) which is what wastes power. BIOS does one, CPU is 100% for the whole boot sequence, RAM gets checked and HDDs spin up, CD-ROM does a little howdy, etc. Unless you are only powering down for 5 seconds, sleep and shut down are essentially the same thing from the computers point of view. Copying from HDD to RAM what you need to boot is the slowest process, so to the user its a much faster startup.

 

Sleeping powers off nearly all components. Sleep works by holding voltage on the RAM chips so to the OS everything is already loaded on boot. They de-energize everything else and cool down until you power back up, saving power they would otherwise waste and turn to most likely its byproduct - heat. When you do power up, those components without power take the same power bump as a cold boot would, start heating up again and thus stressing 95% of your PC the same as a cold boot until a 'stable' temperature is reached.

 

 

For those who are talking about how much energy is wasted from shutting off/turning on equipment versus leaving it on or in sleep mode: mythbuster's did a segment on this with lights at one point: http://www.curiousread.com/2007/11/myth-busters-leave-lights-on-or-turn.html

 

Logically, it doesn't really make sense anyway. It'd be very difficult to get an instantaneous spike in power draw to be larger than the power draw of 1 Watt in sleep mode over a prolonged period of time. Think about it like this: in sleep mode you typically are drawing energy at a rate of 1 Joule per second (W = J/s). After 1 minute, you've drawn 60 Joules of energy or to say it another way, you've drawn the same amount of energy that a 60 Watt bulb does in 1 second. Now consider that your computer has been sleeping for an hour: this means that it has drawn 3600 Joules of energy or to say it another way, you've drawn the same amount of energy that a 60 Watt bulb does in 1 minute.

 

Now if we drew that much energy in a single second how much would it be in terms of watts? 3600 Watts. Obviously, instantaneous power draws in this range are not possible because they would fry your equipment and there's really no way equipment is going to consume the same amount of energy in such a short period to make up for what was used by sleeping.

 

Now, If we assumed that it consumed additional power over a prolonged period of minutes what would it have to be to peak past what would be used during sleep? A typical desktop processor has a TDP of ~60 Watts. To put this in ranges where the system wouldn't vaporize, it would have to consume 60 additional Watts constantly for 60 seconds on top of the normal power draw (when on) to make up the difference for 1 hour of sleep. Now extrapolate that to 7 hours in sleep mode versus off... 60 additional Watts for 7 minutes. These are fairly ridiculous notions and I'm even being generous in my numbers: you are probably drawing more power than 1 watt when sleeping and portable machines operate at TDPs that <<60W so to make these "reasonable" times for many systems, you'd have to operate at TDP for much longer than what I listed here in a number of real world cases.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
    • For me, the fundamental problems with these "smartglasses" is that they really don't work well for people with significant prescriptions and massively up the price if you use attached lenses if they have displays, and if they don't, then they're not actually "smart" anything, rather just connecting to your phone and relaying voice to an AI. In a few cases like this, they throw in small cameras to feed video to the AI. All around, these feel like both a solution looking for a problem, and the problems it tries to solve seem more easily solved by different approaches and designs. Oddly, if the rumours are true, Apple may actually have invented something for once and it kind of does this right: put cameras in ear buds and manage the interface to AI exactly as most of us do: tapping on an ear bud and saying "Hey Google" or "Hey Siri." That makes them compatible with almost everyone, can double up as a hearing assist device, an impaired vision assist device, a "smart" device... and answer your phone and play music. That just seems like a better solution all around.
    • Usually the bigger ones with many fixes/changes take a few, theyre an exception to the rule most likely
    • If you don’t get lucky with Valve’s Steam Machine reservation system, you can make your own Steam Machine instead. Valve says that “starting with the SteamOS 3.8 release, you can put together your own Steam Machine using whatever PC parts you want.” SteamOS 3.8.10 launched last week with a slew of updates, including “improved compatibility with recent Intel and AMD platforms.” Alongside that improved compatibility, Valve is giving gamers the green light to install SteamOS on their own desktops. In an interview with The Verge, Valve’s Pierre-Loup Griffais said Valve has been “rolling out improvements to [SteamOS] so it’s more compatible with desktop hardware,” including eventual support for Nvidia graphics. Griffais says Valve has “a growing team” working on Nvidia driver support for SteamOS, adding, “We’re collaborating with Nvidia very closely.” While he mentioned that Nvidia support might not come this year, Griffais emphasized that “it’s certainly something that we’re working on in the background.”     Subscription not needed: https://archive.fo/Tssfc Subscription needed: https://www.theverge.com/games/953411/valve-steamos-desktop-nvidia
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      162
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      84
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!