PCWorks: Re: screensaver or hibernation?

You're answering me yet not getting to the point; maybe I
wasn't clear. 
Going back to Win 95 I remember they said one should avoid
completely 
shutting down the computer (unless resources are low and
restarting the 
computer is the only way to renew resources) because putting
the circuits 
from hot to cold and then back to hot is wear and tear on
the circuitry's 
soldering points. Restarting then seemed to be the best
choice. Then came 
Win 98 and hibernation came into the picture (I don't recall
hibernation in 
Win 95).

I'm trying to do what is best for the system, what's best
for my computer. 
For examtple, it always strikes me that the fan, although
strong plastic and 
very light, since it is the only continuously moving part in
the computer, 
that when spinning without a rest, that it will eventually
wear out. I can't 
imagine anything going forever without a rest ... maybe I'm
wrong in 
thinking of a computer as having a life of its own, as
needing a rest etc 


Given that all the options suggested below are available
(including 
screensaver) ... turn off monitor, turn off hard disks,
system standby, 
system hibernates, plus the option of having the computer
always "ask me 
what to do" and assuming that all the options work well
and nothing is 
"problematic" ... my question is, what is the best
thing to do? For example, 
overnight ... should I use screensaver, shutdown, or
hibernate?

I always feel that when choices are given, one choice has to
be better than 
the other, and that's what life is; deciding among choices.
What I do now is 
if the computer will not be used for any extended time
(arbitrary), I shut 
it down. If overnight, I use hibernation (and shut the
electricity so the 
monitor is completly off), and if for an hour or two, I use
a blank 
screensaver. Are there better choices I can make? ---
Harold

> Hibernation is really a laptop device to save battery
power. It's often 
> problematic, and has no real use in a desktop.Look in
control panel and 
> you'll see power options where you can control the
Monitor and the hard 
> drive power, which are the biggest power users. ---
Hugh

> It depends on what you want.  The SS mode of course
does nothing but keep 
> a monitor from getting screen burn-in.  That of course
can be used with 
> having the also monitor power down (amber LED) or the
monitor power down 
> mode used by itself in lieu of a SS.  Neither of these
have any effect on 
> the PC's functioning.  Hibernation or STR (suspend to
RAM) or sleep mode 
> cuts the power use way down but it's pretty common for
some PC's "not to 
> like" that, they sometimes act strange
"waking up".  Not all PC's can do 
> this, the mobo has to have these power-saving options
in the BIOS and they 
> usually need to be setup there. --- Clint

> > When using a screensaver (how simple it might be;
let's say a blank 
> > screen), one still has the system on, the fan or
fans spinning, and some 
> > resources are being used. When putting the system
into "hibernation" the 
> > system is virtually shut down and I suppose again,
some system resources 
> > are being used. Question: Which is better for the
overall operation of a 
> > computer? --- Harold
============= PCWorks Mailing List =================
Don't see your post? Check our posting guidelines &
make sure you've followed proper posting procedures,
http://pcworkers.com/r
ules.htm
Contact list owner <owner-pcworksimagicomm.com>
Unsubscribing and other changes: http://pcworkers.com
=====================================================

This is an old and controversial subject, and
"experts" will come down 
on both sides.
Some modern fans will run at a slower speed when feasible,
by the way.
My personal choice is to leave the computer on 24/7.
Better fans may have a MTBF of 80,000 hours or so, so be
sure to replace 
it after 6-7 years of continuous use.
It's up to you to decide what to do-the computer doesn't
care very much, 
and the difference between turning it off and leaving it
running can be 
argued either way.
Now, CSS, there's a subject with some hard and fast
answers.



Harold B. wrote:
> You're answering me yet not getting to the point; maybe
I wasn't clear. 
> Going back to Win 95 I remember they said one should
avoid completely 
> shutting down the computer (unless resources are low
and restarting the 
> computer is the only way to renew resources) because
putting the 
> circuits from hot to cold and then back to hot is wear
and tear on the 
> circuitry's soldering points. Restarting then seemed to
be the best 
> choice. Then came Win 98 and hibernation came into the
picture (I don't 
> recall hibernation in Win 95).
> 
> I'm trying to do what is best for the system, what's
best for my 
> computer. For examtple, it always strikes me that the
fan, although 
> strong plastic and very light, since it is the only
continuously moving 
> part in the computer, that when spinning without a
rest, that it will 
> eventually wear out. I can't imagine anything going
forever without a 
> rest ... maybe I'm wrong in thinking of a computer as
having a life of 
> its own, as needing a rest etc 
> 
> Given that all the options suggested below are
available (including 
> screensaver) ... turn off monitor, turn off hard disks,
system standby, 
> system hibernates, plus the option of having the
computer always "ask me 
> what to do" and assuming that all the options work
well and nothing is 
> "problematic" ... my question is, what is the
best thing to do? For 
> example, overnight ... should I use screensaver,
shutdown, or hibernate?
> 
> I always feel that when choices are given, one choice
has to be better 
> than the other, and that's what life is; deciding among
choices. What I 
> do now is if the computer will not be used for any
extended time 
> (arbitrary), I shut it down. If overnight, I use
hibernation (and shut 
> the electricity so the monitor is completly off), and
if for an hour or 
> two, I use a blank screensaver. Are there better
choices I can make? --- 
> Harold
============= PCWorks Mailing List =================
Don't see your post? Check our posting guidelines &
make sure you've followed proper posting procedures,
http://pcworkers.com/r
ules.htm
Contact list owner <owner-pcworksimagicomm.com>
Unsubscribing and other changes: http://pcworkers.com
=====================================================

All that is just a matter of opinion and each person will
give 
you a different answer about it.    I
always shut mine down 
because I don't want there to be failure of something when
I'm 
away.  That seems logical to me.  I have alarms for
everything, 
but what's the use if you're asleep and it wakes you up then

you have to go to the PC and investigate it, when you could

have just shut it down.  Also wasting power and $ seems 
dumb...to me at least.  But there's the option of
hibernation 
or STR like I mentioned which would cut power and fans, but
you 
then have the potential problem of a PC waking up and
"not 
knowing where who or what it is".

Assuming everything is cooled well with fans, and it SHOULD
be, 
there's not going to be any issue of cold solder joints. 
Mine 
has been running for several years, I check it regularly,
and 
all the solder looks fine.  But my huge case has about 22
fans 
in it.  LOL.

I look at it sort of like this way: you ever run a desk fan,

you know the typical oscillating fan or box fan for a real
long 
time?  When you shut it down, many times they won't start 
again.  Now PC type fans are of higher quality, don't give
off 
any heat to speak of and that might not be an issue with
them, 
but I still don't gamble with it.  It could be more of an
issue 
with HD's because they DO give off much more heat than a PC

fan.  Running all the time Vs. shutting it down is usually 
talking about things like running all the time Vs 
start-stop-start-stop quickly in succession, that's not good

for anything.

A PC always works best right after a restart, so one should
at 
the very least restart daily if running 24/7.

I just don't like leaving anything electrical running 
unattended, that just doesn't seem like a smart thing to do.
 I 
know, many will say they do it for years with no problems,
but 
just because many do it without any problems doesn't mean
there 
will NEVER be any problems.
-Clint

God Bless
Clint Hamilton, Owner
http://www.OrpheusCom
puting.com
http://www.Comput
ersCustomBuilt.com
http://Computer-Hardware-Sales-Consumer-Electronics
-Sales.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harold B."

You're answering me yet not getting to the point; maybe I 
wasn't clear.
Going back to Win 95 I remember they said one should avoid 
completely
shutting down the computer (unless resources are low and 
restarting the
computer is the only way to renew resources) because putting

the circuits
from hot to cold and then back to hot is wear and tear on
the 
circuitry's
soldering points. Restarting then seemed to be the best
choice. 
Then came
Win 98 and hibernation came into the picture (I don't recall

hibernation in
Win 95).

I'm trying to do what is best for the system, what's best
for 
my computer.
For examtple, it always strikes me that the fan, although 
strong plastic and
very light, since it is the only continuously moving part in

the computer,
that when spinning without a rest, that it will eventually
wear 
out. I can't
imagine anything going forever without a rest ... maybe I'm

wrong in
thinking of a computer as having a life of its own, as
needing 
a rest etc


Given that all the options suggested below are available 
(including
screensaver) ... turn off monitor, turn off hard disks,
system 
standby,
system hibernates, plus the option of having the computer 
always "ask me
what to do" and assuming that all the options work well
and 
nothing is
"problematic" ... my question is, what is the best
thing to do? 
For example,
overnight ... should I use screensaver, shutdown, or
hibernate?

I always feel that when choices are given, one choice has to
be 
better than
the other, and that's what life is; deciding among choices.

What I do now is
if the computer will not be used for any extended time 
(arbitrary), I shut
it down. If overnight, I use hibernation (and shut the 
electricity so the
monitor is completly off), and if for an hour or two, I use
a 
blank
screensaver. Are there better choices I can make? ---
Harold

> Hibernation is really a laptop device to save battery
power. 
> It's often
> problematic, and has no real use in a desktop.Look in
control 
> panel and
> you'll see power options where you can control the
Monitor 
> and the hard
> drive power, which are the biggest power users. ---
Hugh

> It depends on what you want.  The SS mode of course
does 
> nothing but keep
> a monitor from getting screen burn-in.  That of course
can be 
> used with
> having the also monitor power down (amber LED) or the
monitor 
> power down
> mode used by itself in lieu of a SS.  Neither of these
have 
> any effect on
> the PC's functioning.  Hibernation or STR (suspend to
RAM) or 
> sleep mode
> cuts the power use way down but it's pretty common for
some 
> PC's "not to
> like" that, they sometimes act strange
"waking up".  Not all 
> PC's can do
> this, the mobo has to have these power-saving options
in the 
> BIOS and they
> usually need to be setup there. --- Clint

> > When using a screensaver (how simple it might be;
let's say 
> > a blank
> > screen), one still has the system on, the fan or
fans 
> > spinning, and some
> > resources are being used. When putting the system
into 
> > "hibernation" the
> > system is virtually shut down and I suppose again,
some 
> > system resources
> > are being used. Question: Which is better for the
overall 
> > operation of a
> > computer? --- Harold
============= PCWorks Mailing List =================
Don't see your post? Check our posting guidelines &
make sure you've followed proper posting procedures,
http://pcworkers.com/r
ules.htm
Contact list owner <owner-pcworksimagicomm.com>
Unsubscribing and other changes: http://pcworkers.com
=====================================================