Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.co   
   !nntp.giganews.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!14   
   .99.99.194.MISMATCH!news-in-02.newsfeed.easynews.com!easynews.co   
   !easynews!sn-xt-sjc-02!sn-xt-sjc-06!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com   
   corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail   
   From: Chris Cox    
   Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.suse,alt.os.linux.ubuntu   
   Subject: Re: An Ultimate Vista Problem   
   Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 12:31:08 -0600   
   Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com   
   Message-ID: <12s70f5jeuibk75@corp.supernews.com>   
   User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20060911)   
   MIME-Version: 1.0   
   References: <1pi5s294usu93gvhvlt0ulo71omtp8mmn6@4ax.com> <12s6qv   
   e2ffj2c4@corp.supernews.com> <45c378c9$0$324$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>   
   In-Reply-To: <45c378c9$0$324$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>   
   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1   
   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   
   X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com   
   Lines: 49   
   Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.os.linux.suse:301464 alt   
   os.linux.ubuntu:9527   
      
   Dirk T. Verbeek wrote:   
   > Chris Cox schreef:   
   >> Arrowcatcher wrote:   
   >>> Computers now power hogs!  I think this computer power consumption   
   >>> thing is going to become an issue.   
   >>>   
   >>> Two techie friends and I upgraded our XP computers to run Vista and   
   >>> had been using beta and trial versions of Ultimate and Business   
   >>> successfully.  We installed temp HDs so our XP installs were   
   >>> untouched.   
   >>>   
   >>> However, our "Kill-a-Watt" electricity monitors show that the upgraded   
   >>> machines now draw 40% more ultility power.  My P4 machine jumped from   
   >>> a nominal 105 watts to 145 with its new Invidia FX5500 display   
   >>> adapter, which I didn't otherwise need to edit AVI and MPEG2 videos.   
   >>   
   >> While moderately interesting, you're still the culprit by running   
   >> a P4 and running an Nvidia GPU.   
   >    
   > But that's the core of the argument, this (or any) type of hardware will   
   > use MORE power when run on Vista.   
   > Plus it's, even admitted by Microsoft, some 10% slower which means   
   > another 10% more time and energy needed for the same tasks.   
      
   I disagree somewhat.  The core of the argument is that people   
   go out and buy very powerful (power hungry) machines.  Many of   
   those machines are Vista capable.  The machine was already   
   a power pig... now it's a bit more of a power pig.  Still a pig.   
      
   (and yes... I love pigs... and my pigs are probably much   
   larger than most here... and I won't be making any anti-Vista   
   argument since all of my pigs are more than capable of   
   handling Vista... but I choose not to run it because I don't   
   need Windows.... though I may play around with Vista just   
   for my own education.)   
      
   >    
   >>   
   >> Sorry, but technology today consumes vast amounts of power for   
   >> marginal performance gains.  It is just a fact.  Vista may help   
   >> expose the problem, but I wouldn't single them out as   
   >> a "cause"... more of an example of "to make matters worse".   
   >    
   > So who said any different?   
      
   OP seem to making a case against Vista because it utilizes   
   more of their already power hungry machinery.  And that's just a   
   wrong slant.   
   --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5   
    * Origin: Omicron Theta BBS (1:261/20)