On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 10:43 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 09:10 -0400, Stephen Clark wrote:
> >
> >>Maybe new desktop systems - but what about the tens of millions of old
> >>systems that don't.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Does anyone really give a shit about saving power on the desktop anyway?
> > This is basically a laptop issue.
>
>
> Power consumption matters to server, desktop, and laptop.
>
> Assuming this is a laptop issue is wildly incorrect.
I would think you'd get the best power/performance ration from a desktop
by just having it suspend after 5 or 10 minutes of idle time.
Oh well, I'll shut up, I've already demonstrated a complete ignorance of
new hardware.
Lee
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
- Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
|
|