7621716
submission
olddoc writes:
Why is suspend to ram so broken? My wife thinks her quad core SSD equipped PC is slow because it takes 25 seconds to resume from suspend. I've had trouble with PCs running XP, Vista and now 7. Sometimes there is lockup on resume. Sometimes it takes 25 seconds. Sometimes the network adapter doesn't work. I've found similar problems with Linux since 2.4 kernel days. I would assume Macs get this to work since they control the hardware.
Does anyone know how to troubleshoot Windows STR issues? How do I get reliable wakeup in 5 seconds with a working network connection? Are Macs reliable at suspend/resume?
3947201
submission
olddoc writes:
I remember reading about cosmic rays causing memory errors and how errors become more frequent with more RAM.
That was in the days of 512MB systems. Now home PCs are stuffed with 6GB or 8GB and no one uses ECC memory in home PCs.
Recently I had consistant BSODs with Vista64 on a PC with 4GB and I tried memtest86 and it always failed within hours.
Yet when I ran 64bit Ubuntu at 100% load and using all memory it ran fine for days.
I have 2 questions:
1) Do people trust a Memtest86 error to mean a bad memory module or motherboard or CPU?
2) When I check my email on my desktop 16GB PC next year, should I be running ECC memory?
310281
submission
olddoc writes:
Microsoft?
Apple?
RIAA?
MPAA?
Cowoy Neal?
97100
submission
olddoc writes:
I am having a growing problem with junk faxes. Unlike email, it costs me money when I get a fax so junk faxes really tick me off.
A while ago, I gave my number to a removal number and now I am getting more junk faxes than ever!
Does anyone know how to make them pay? What devious methods can I use to get even?
Can I sign up for a phone number that will drive up their costs when I call the toll free removal number?
What have other readers done?
72034
submission
olddoc writes:
How many LEDs do you have on in your computer room?
1-10
11-50
50-100
Can't see! Too much glare.
7141
submission
olddoc writes:
I used to run Seti@home and Folding at Home. It was advertised as donating "unused" computer cycles.
My computers now idle at 175w and run at 225w under load (without GPU load)
I much prefer to put them in standby, but if I run these distributed computation programs
instead of idling, I use an extra 50w. After 20 hours I can generate 1 work unit and use up 1 Kilowatt hour.
For every 100 units I "donate" I've spent at least $10 in electricity; much more if I assume the computer would be
in a 5 watt standby state 1/2 the time.
I wonder if anyone has estimated the number of Megawatt hours Seti@home has used.
It would be interesting to look at the amount of coal burned and CO2 released for US based contributers.
French units are mostly nuclear powered and Icelandic would be hydroelectric and geothermal.
My point is that this research consumes an awful lot of electricity.
