Re: Design choice for suspend option only
- From: Rovanion Luckey <rovanion luckey gmail com>
- To: Sriram Ramkrishna <sri ramkrishna me>
- Cc: gnome-shell-list gnome org, Mark Blakeney <mark blakeney bullet-systems net>
- Subject: Re: Design choice for suspend option only
- Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 00:55:28 +0100
> The reason is that GNOME 3 is geared towards power saving and wear and
> tear. Shutting down your laptop is not as good as suspend.
Do you have any sources to back up the claim that it's less power
consuming to suspend a computer then to shut it down or hibernate it?
> So when people as you, it's because suspend is a better mode than shutting
> down and booting up. Since that increases wear and tear on your laptop
> especially drives.
This I can imagine being real, but again is there anything more behind
this than speculation?
> Suspend lets you instantly start working again. If suspend is not working
> then we need to push for the Linux eco-system to make it work. Not making
> compromises forces people to actually fix the various issues and that makes
> Linux better.
>
> On a Mac, I never ever think of shutting down, I just close the lid and then
> open up again. Why? Because suspend is nearly instantaneous.
>
> One could argue that it doesn't make sense for a desktop, but honestly for
> myself I never shutdown my machine, it's better to go into a power saving
> mode.
Except those times we need to load a new kernel with new security patches on.
--
www.twitter.com/Rovanion
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]