DaWei

Again, software burns no power. Executing software has been converted to hardware-contained representations of binary values that will direct the sequence of hardware operations that get the problem solved. It takes fewer types of operations, and consequently less hardware, to play music than it does to do some other things. In fact, music played by software-driven devices is more costly than music played by dedicated hardware mechanisms. This inefficiency is compounded by using a hardware/software combination that is designed to be general-purpose, rather than to perform one specific task. I could design you a general-purpose machine that would be considerably more efficient when playing music than when it was performing other tasks that require more computational power. The incremental cost of the machine, because of the circuitry involved in controlling the 'live' parts, would be greater than the cost of an iPod. This shouldn't really surprise anyone. It's why iPods are marketable. They play your music just fine, but they suck at enterprise-wide inventory and distribution control (and other things). Another example is picture-taking cell phones. The quality sucks because the technology isn't quite where it needs to be for results comparable to a dedicated camera.

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

Booooze

If you check computer tempatures when in the CMOS, they will be lower than if you are running Windows. If your in Windows on a laptop, and you check how much battery time you have left, and then run a whole bunch or programs, the time will change (it would be less). That's how much time you would have left if you continued to run all those programs. You close them all, the time changes back. In the end, the processor needs more power to run all those programs, and store them in RAM. You can't nessacarily say that software burns no power. The more software running, the more work the processor has to do, and the more power the processor needs. The more processing it does, the hotter it gets. It's like a light bulb. The brighter it is, the hotter it gets.

DaWei

You just aren't picking up on the reality. When you load a program to execute it, you put it in hardware containers that burn power. As you execute, the hardware signals moving around and about and into and out of the HARDWARE devices burn power. CMOS, as a hardware container, uses less power than dynamic RAM. You use dynamic RAM because it's denser and cheaper. Period. If you drop a 10,000 page listing of source code on the floor, yes, you use some energy. If you're designing and writing software, yes, you're expending a lot of energy. That isn't germane to the point here that "software doesn't consume power." Executing more data transfers per time period (which uses more power) because you have "more software running" is a hardware phenomenon. Hardware requirements and implementations are system design and marketing phenomena. That's what's applicable to the question of making a laptop as cheap and efficient as an iPod or a pocket dictating machine.

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

Eric the Red

I really wish that there was some light shed on this topic. I really don't want to give up on this idea because i think that it's such a wonderful idea. To me it now looks impossible. However, what can i use to conserve power rather than use WM player on windows? Maybe something more efficient. "sticking with my laptop" please no ipod of usb stick.

Booooze

I'm sorry Dawei, I still can't quite grasp your concept. Can you make it simpler? :p I'm interested to see your point.

nnxion

Hasn't he said enough already? Your hardware is running, or not running, if it is then it costs power, you may be able to preserve some more power with an OS like Linux than Windows XP, but your hardware will still run, this means accessing your hard disk, putting it in memory, playing the music (sound card or USB). Plus your motherboard is on, your monitor will have to be on for selecting the music. Well you get the point.

__________________
"Employ your time in improving yourself by other men's writings, so that you shall gain easily what others have labored hard for."
-- Socrates

Jimbo

Just thinking about it for all of, oh, three seconds, here's the problem I see: even if you slim down everything running, you need to power your motherboard, cpu, ram, hard drive, and most likely any graphics related things (graphics card if you have one, and the screen, which sucks power)... and using a cd would add one more thing to the list. Overall savings against running a full load: your cpu usage might average lower than executing several programs all at once... you might get a bit of a longer battery life (say an extra 1/2hr to maybe an hour)...

DaWei

I see you can't grasp it. Software is a list of signal patterns for operating logical devices. It essentially defines "how the switches are set" in a sequence controlling hardware signals. It's only used for a couple of reasons: flexibility and ease of distribution. That's why it's called "soft" ware. I'm not belaboring it here; catch me on another day if you want to know how things work. The question here is: why don't I build a car that's as small as a bicycle, still performs exactly as a car does, and burns no fuel. I think most other people grasped the concept (even if they didn't care for the answer). So, 2 + 2 = 4. I'm damned if I like it, I want it to be 5.

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

Booooze

@Jimbo and nnxion - I already knew all that, I aknowledged it earlier.

DaWei - Starting to see the point. I won't bother asking again since you seem a little fed up.

MBirchmeier

The point is trying to save energy consumption by running less software is like trying to save energy on a treadmill by removing the runner. The hardware (the belt) is still moving, and that's where most of the energy is spent

-MBirchmeier