Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fujitsu To Show Off "Zero-Watt" PC At CeBIT

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the car's-mpg-is-infinite-while-engine's-stopped dept.

Power 222

mobile writes "In August of last year Fujitsu announced new 'zero-watt' displays. This means the screens use absolutely no power when put into standby mode, unlike most other screens that use less than 1 watt, but still require some power. Now Fujitsu has announced they will be showing a zero-watt PC later this year at the CeBIT show. The PC is called the Esprimo Green and marks a first, in that it's able to use no power while in standby mode — but this is a feature that will be required from 2010 for new PCs released across Europe."

cancel ×

222 comments

Define "Standby" (2, Insightful)

Facetious (710885) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553281)

I assume "standby" means hibernate, not suspend due to the power required to refresh RAM. Or is Fujitsu introducing something with MRAM?

Re:Define "Standby" (3, Insightful)

Killer Orca (1373645) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553327)

I assume "standby" means hibernate, not suspend due to the power required to refresh RAM. Or is Fujitsu introducing something with MRAM?

If it doesn't then there will most likely be a hit to resume standby/hibernate time. Of course some people will never see this 'cause they never turn off their computers.

Re:Define "Standby" (1, Redundant)

internerdj (1319281) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553453)

If I turn it off that means I have to do something else, like sleep or bathe...

Re:Define "Standby" (1, Funny)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554503)

something else, like sleep or bathe...

You must be new here.

Re:Define "Standby" (4, Funny)

duguk (589689) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553727)

they never turn off their computers

I have a Seagate drive and scared that if I reboot, I'll lose all my data, you insensitive clod!

Re:Define "Standby" (5, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553857)

Hmmmm...that's weird. I have a Seagate hard drive and I've never lost d

Re:Define "Standby" (2, Funny)

Malevolyn (776946) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554241)

Was that Seagate or did Candlejack get a little behind on h

Re:Define "Standby" (1)

Swizec (978239) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553877)

My computer doubles as the music streamer I listen to at work. It also doubles as the router my family uses to access the internet. It also doubles as a file server.

I do turn off the screens and speakers when I'm not around though. That counts as a good effort right?

Re:Define "Standby" (3, Funny)

Aphoxema (1088507) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554111)

So it quadruples?

Re:Define "Standby" (1)

Swizec (978239) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554299)

Yes, I'm fairly certain adding more and better screens, adding a dual core double fast CPU, quadrupling the RAM and so on has at least quadrupled its power consumption over the past eight years.

Re:Define "Standby" (1)

Aphoxema (1088507) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554363)

Just rest assured it has the potential to use zero power when you're not streaming music, sharing files or routing packets.

Re:Define "Standby" (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554367)

Naw... He just means he can use it as a computer and one of (music streamer, router, file server)

Re:Define "Standby" (4, Funny)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554525)

My computer doubles as the music streamer I listen to at work. It also doubles as the router my family uses to access the internet. It also doubles as a file server.

So it quadruples?

He doubled three times, there. 2*2*2 = 8. I'm afraid it actually octuples.

Re:Define "Standby" (1)

sortius_nod (1080919) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554427)

Wow, talk about all your eggs in one basket...

Re:Define "Standby" (1)

FST777 (913657) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553503)

It probably just means "off", without any form of sleeping or hibernating.

Re:Define "Standby" (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553541)

Summary says DISPLAYS.

Re:Define "Standby" (4, Informative)

RollingThunder (88952) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553617)

No the summary says they introduced zero watt displays LAST YEAR. The new thing that's going to be introduced is a zero-watt PC.

Re:Define "Standby" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553725)

I suggest you look again, chief.

Re:Define "Standby" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554301)

Oh fuck, I had read thru it but then I came back and saw displays and started to read the thread. Noticed the "error", looked at summary and told about it...

I'll blame my earlier elevated snatch-grip deadlifts.

Re:Define "Standby" (1)

adaminc (884075) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553555)

It probably charges a battery or capacitors during normal use, and uses that energy to power the RAM and the circuitry needed to wake the machine up.

Re:Define "Standby" (5, Funny)

markov_chain (202465) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553669)

The zero-power use state is activated when the "zero-power" LED turns on.

Bloody greenwashing (5, Insightful)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553911)

This sort of saving it getting to be pretty typical of a lot of "green marketing". Make a big deal out of the very tiny savings and ignore the big stuff. Save the 1W or so, but ignore the fact that the computer as a whole uses a lot of power.

The problem with just fixing and selling the small stuff is that this can actually be counter-productive. "Green guilt" has a positive purpose: make people feel bad so they do less of that bad thing. The "eco products" counter that: buy our xxx and you don't have to feel bad. This would be OK except that people often then modify their behavior. Someone that feels bad for driving 5 miles with an SUV might feel they're doing the planet good when they drive 100 miles with a Prius.

Same deal here. I don't feel bad about leaving my computer on any more because the monitor is now using zero Watts.

Re:Bloody greenwashing (1)

reboot246 (623534) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554089)

I think I'll drive my SUV 50 miles to buy one of these new monitors! Think of the energy I'll save if I use the new monitor for a thousand years.

Or, just I could keep the one I have and turn it off when I'm not using it. :)

I like your new word "greenwashing".

seems counterproductive, too (2, Insightful)

Trepidity (597) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554539)

If, for example, mandates like this end up requiring use of suspend-to-disk over suspend-to-RAM, increasing the unsuspend time, the likely effect is that more people will simply leave their computers fully powered on for more time, making the overall power usage worse than before.

Not a laptop but a hover top (1)

gsgriffin (1195771) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554595)

I'd tend to agree with your perspective. My laptop cooling fans make a table or desk irrelevant. It simply hovers about 8" over anything while running. Hmmm. Maybe that takes a little power too.

Mods are drunk again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554437)

How the hell did you get an off-topic mod when your question absolutely is on topic?

Unconquerable (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553289)

A while ago, library bathroom [goatse.fr] , you know the rest.

Very nice. (4, Funny)

idontgno (624372) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553295)

I've been looking for a computer powered by zero-point energy [wikipedia.org] drawn from vacuum fluctuation. [wikipedia.org]

Maybe I can transplant the power supply into my car and get infinite miles per gallon?

a ZPM is to much power for a car put it in a space (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553445)

a ZPM is to much power for a car put it in a space ship.

Re:a ZPM is to much power for a car put it in a sp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554191)

Not if you need it to achieve 1.21 gigawatts!

Re:Very nice. (1)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553589)

Yes, in fact you can. And then use it to cure the common cold. I have a working prototype if you're willing to send me six hundred dollars. More will get you an even bigger share of the profits when they come rolling in!

Re:Very nice. (1)

Chosen Reject (842143) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554039)

Curse you. You've undersold me. I was selling mine for $699, but it comes with a Linux license.

Re:Very nice. (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553913)

Yeah, well, as they say TANSTAAFL.

Re:Very nice. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553999)

I've been looking for a computer powered by zero-point energy [wikipedia.org] drawn from vacuum fluctuation. [wikipedia.org]

Maybe I can transplant the power supply into my car and get infinite miles per gallon?

Per gallon of what?

Re:Very nice. (1)

QuasiEvil (74356) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554185)

Per gallon of what?

Bulls@#$, obviously. :) Or is that measured by the pound these days?

Thats ok... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553343)

Not bad, but what about the actual power consumption of the device... how about making the PC consume less power while at low/medium load...

Re:Thats ok... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554211)

THIS, this right here is what more people should be doing!
How many of you can say that you browse the net on some quad core, or edit a few files here and there and occasionally play games.
Essentially, a large chunk of power is being wasted by the CPU.

There needs to be more computers that have real-time underclocking. (as well as OSes supporting them so that you can choose programs to terminate / lose priority when you lower it)
Laptops can do it, so why not PCs too?
I used to always run my laptop on the lowest setting (sub 800Mhz speeds AFAIK) when i was only doing small things, or downloading through the night.

As if this will happen though, there will be half-assed attempts until solar power increases in efficiency in 5-10 years time, then this little "OH BUT THE COMPUTER ISN'T GREEN, IT NEEDS TO BE GREEN OR THE PLANTS WILL DIE" will be a thing of the past, a very small thing hopefully.

Now I'm imagining a car battery in it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553369)

Or a huge bank of capacitors.
"See! Once it's warmed up, it takes zero watts even when it's *running*"
"yeah, but the lights all dim when I turn it on..."

Call me picky, but what I'd like to see is kilowatt-hours used. This could be a great energy-saver, but it could also be an inrush-current shell game.

Re:Now I'm imagining a car battery in it... (1)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553511)

A shell game?? In this industry???

Standby? (3, Informative)

arth1 (260657) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553381)

How would you know whether the device is in standby or turned off? Normally an LED signifies this.
Perhaps a mechanical indicator? Or, e-ink?

Re:Standby? (1)

Korin43 (881732) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553923)

Does it matter? If it really doesn't use power in standby, then you don't really need to turn it off..

Re:Standby? (3, Interesting)

arth1 (260657) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554245)

It matters for security, if someone steals a PC in standby or hybrid standby.
(Yes, even with a password. Think about it.)

Re:Standby? (1)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553971)

More importantly, does it really matter?

Re:Standby? (1)

Billhead (842510) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554369)

Yes, if I was going to replace the hard drive or memory I would very much prefer it to be off rather than on standby.

They really prepared in advance for this! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553415)

Press release corresponds with this. [slashdot.org]

Just unplug the damned things, people! (4, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553475)

This means the screens use absolutely no power when put into standby mode, unlike most other screens that use less than 1 watt, but still require some power

I don't get this obsession with "standby" power draw... My computer and display and TV and DVD player already draw zero watts when off, thanks to the magic of the switch on the power strip.

And for the record, I don't even do this for the power savings - More than once, I've had my "expensive" electronic toys saved from nearby lightning strikes that took out things like alarm clocks and answering machines (No, a power strip won't stop a direct hit, but they do wonders to stop spikes up to a few hundred volts).

Well I understand reducing it (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553775)

But I don't get the obsession with eliminating it. I mean reducing makes sense. There are situations where people can't or won't disconnect the power to a device. So let's make things efficient. A good example would be to use switching PSUs in wall warts instead of linear PSUs. They use less energy (in operation as well as standby), generate less heat and are smaller. Good, done. Likewise, a device shouldn't keep more on components than it needs in standby. If all you need is a small IR receiver to look for a signal, then there's very little circuitry that needs to be on. Don't have the devices CPU (most HDTVs have one) on, for example.

However, when you do that, you get to a point of using less than a watt. At that point, I don't see why we are quibbling. That small of a power draw is just insignificant. To give you some idea a 100hp car engine generates almost 75,000 watts at full power. Worrying over a device drawing milliwatts is silly.

Goes double since to reduce something to zero draw, you've no choice but to interrupt the power flow entirely. You can't have something like a remote control since you need power to watch for a signal.

Re:Well I understand reducing it (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553815)

Actually, you could have a remote control - without even making it wired.

Magnets.

(Although this has some drawbacks of its own.)

Either that, or some switch that when it's exposed to a resonant frequency, powers a microcontroller for long enough to bring the TV up, and have the button on the remote emit that sound.

Re:Well I understand reducing it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553967)

Why not make remote work like RFID, then the power-on command could supply the power to get the rest of the device started :P

Re:Well I understand reducing it (1)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553993)

But that uses somewhat more energy than just powering a small microcontroller.

Your going backwards mate. :P

Re:Well I understand reducing it (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553983)

It's a matter of scale.

Let's say every American has their TV/PC on standby at the same time. Let's assume that the average power draw of those devices is ~650mw (probably on the low side, lot's of devices run very warm in standby mode). That's ~200Mw, or 10% of the peak output of the Hoover Dam.

Re:Well I understand reducing it (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554079)

You can't have something like a remote control since you need power to watch for a signal.

Not really. See: AM radios, RFID tags...

Question is whether it costs any power to have a transistor there, so that the power from the signal alone could start a chain reaction that wakes up the system.

Re:Well I understand reducing it (4, Interesting)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554737)

---Worrying over a device drawing milliwatts is silly.

Is it now?

Have you ever heard of QRP? It's a code for power reduction in terms of ham radio. When we're talking QRP, we're talking about 1w or LESS power to communicate anywhere in the world. In the early spring, we can communicate with Midway (the island), and we're in Indiana. We've done satellite communications on .5w, however that was using a parabolic antenna.

So yes, 1w is a lot of power.

Re:Just unplug the damned things, people! (2, Insightful)

MechaBlue (1068636) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553865)

Turning a computer on can take several minutes of repetitive, non-productive work. You need to boot the system, log in, open applications, open documents, and find you place in the documents. This can take several minutes.

Standby mode takes care of this hassle at the cost of a few Watts of power. Now they have a way to get the benefits without using those few Watts of power.

"...uphill both ways..."

Re:Just unplug the damned things, people! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554433)

I guess you use windows.
  On Linux it's quite standard to have a *working* save session feature, so it's not really an issue. And of course, desktops can hibernate, so you could hibernate and cut the power.

Re:Just unplug the damned things, people! (1)

bnenning (58349) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553903)

My computer and display and TV and DVD player already draw zero watts when off, thanks to the magic of the switch on the power strip.

TV and DVD sure, but computers are annoying to turn on and off because you (or at least I) often have substantial state to restore: open apps and files, terminal windows, etc. It's perfectly reasonable to normally use sleep or hibernate and only shut down for special circumstances.

Re:Just unplug the damned things, people! (1)

Jherek Carnelian (831679) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554505)

I don't get this obsession with "standby" power draw... My computer and display and TV and DVD player already draw zero watts when off, thanks to the magic of the switch on the power strip.

Its not so easy for all of us. My Dell 24" monitor frequently "crashes" if I use the powerstrip to turn it off. It still mostly works (usually it displays the video signal) but all of the user interface things (brightness control, switching inputs, power button, etc) are dead.

A "First"? (0)

Spectre (1685) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553513)

PC's from the early 80's used no power when you flipped the big red switch.

Not really "stand-by", since they couldn't auto-flip the switch, but still ...

Re:A "First"? (1)

freedumb2000 (966222) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553991)

I love those switches, gives me a warm fuzzy feeling thinking about them.

Re:A "First"? (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554071)

My 80+ PSU has one of those on the back, I use it whenever I'm messing around in the case since it's easier than constantly plugging and unplugging the power cord.

Re:A "First"? (2, Informative)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554223)

They are also good to use since in some designs they leave the chassis ground connected. So you can cut power, but keep the case grounded (that's what it's grounded through) and then ground yourself to that by touching it. No static zap.

Zero-watt computers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553547)

I've already had some zero-watt computers:

- Commodore 64
- Hard-power Macs
- The AT/XT form factor, where the power switch ran directly to the power supply. For more impact, the kind with a giant red switch on the right side of the case near the rear, which a friend of mine called the "ENIAC switch". The IBM PS/2 series was like this too.

Zero Watt?? No electricity?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553657)

That must mean that it eats hot pockets for energy.

Re:Zero Watt?? No electricity?? (1)

QuasiEvil (74356) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554215)

Just don't forget to feed it, or in Soviet Russia... oh wait, nevermind.

Transistor basics (0)

Aphoxema (1088507) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553663)

I'm pretty sure anything that uses a semiconductor to switch power to itself draws power constantly, unless they found some way to get around that.

Re:Transistor basics (1)

duguk (589689) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553745)

I'm pretty sure anything that uses a semiconductor to switch power to itself draws power constantly, unless they found some way to get around that.

I know its pretty new technology, but how about a mains power switch?

Re:Transistor basics (1)

Aphoxema (1088507) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553825)

I guess a self-sustaining relay might keep a computer on after it's started and draw nothing when it's off, but the computer then can not turn itself on.

Re:Transistor basics (1)

MechaBlue (1068636) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553891)

A system controllable relay in the power supply would do the trick.

Re:Transistor basics (1)

Aphoxema (1088507) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554097)

But then how would it turn itself on when coming out of standby?

Re:Transistor basics (1)

kiddygrinder (605598) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554713)

The monitors they had previously just charged a capacitor whilst running to power the switch back on thing. how they're gonna keep the memory charged is a question you'll prolly have to read the article for.

Let's get real (2, Insightful)

Ancient_Hacker (751168) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553733)

Let's get real. It can't be ZERO watts and still be listening to the net, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. Maybe less than one watt with custom CMOS net interfaces. But not ZERO.

Re:Let's get real (1)

jaguth (1067484) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553781)

zero-watt displays. RTFA

Re:Let's get real (1)

fractalspace (1241106) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553843)

"Fujitsu To Show Off "Zero-Watt" PC At CeBIT " RTFA title at least.

Re:Let's get real (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554041)

zero-watt displays. RTFA

You mean like this one [wikimedia.org] , which used zero watts when the PC was off because it came with one of these [cflsystems.com] ?

Not exactly new.

,

Re:Let's get real (1)

lokiomega (596833) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554149)

It can be. The "wake-up" signal that the net, Wi-Fi, or Bluetooth gives it could give it enough power to switch it back on.

Re:Let's get real (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554349)

As I understand US "Energy Star" guidelines, a device can still draw a very small amount of power, close to but more than true zero watts, and still claim to be a "zero watt" device.

Yep, a shell game (4, Insightful)

russotto (537200) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553771)

Even though the Esprimo Green uses no power in standby mode Fujitsu say it can still be managed with LAN, Bluetooth, and UMTS. A demonstration of which will surely be given during CeBIT.

To do that

1) They've managed to break the laws of physics or
2) They're lying or
3) They're storing power

And of course, if it's 3, that stored power has to be replenished when the computer is on, causing slightly higher draw then. It's certainly possible that the efficiency of doing that is greater than the efficiency of drawing a very small current from the line. But calling it "zero power" is just marketing. Truly "using zero power" would mean that any internal state of charge wouldn't be depleted either.

Re:Yep, a shell game (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553813)

4) They are drawing power out of band. E.g a net card running on the power of the packets, or the standby circuit activating from the power supplied by the VGA connector...

Re:Yep, a shell game (4, Interesting)

afidel (530433) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554129)

Interesting idea, combine PoE and WoL. You send the magic packet, the switchport intercepts it and provides power to that port then the NIC uses the PoE power to switch a relay in the PSU. Would be very efficient and still allow the computers to be managed for patching. It wouldn't add much in the consumer space but I see it as a future direction for large enterprise deployments. Oh and if anyone tries to patent it, prior art =)

Re:Yep, a shell game (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554103)

Or the power button has a dynamo attached underneath so repeated stabbings generate the power.

Re:Yep, a shell game (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554153)

Even though the Esprimo Green uses no power in standby mode Fujitsu say it can still be managed with LAN, Bluetooth, and UMTS. A demonstration of which will surely be given during CeBIT.

To do that

1) They've managed to break the laws of physics or
2) They're lying or
3) They're storing power

And of course, if it's 3, that stored power has to be replenished when the computer is on, causing slightly higher draw then. It's certainly possible that the efficiency of doing that is greater than the efficiency of drawing a very small current from the line. But calling it "zero power" is just marketing. Truly "using zero power" would mean that any internal state of charge wouldn't be depleted either.

Just because it is 0 Watt dosen't mean it can be dissconnected from the power.

Asynchronous models are like this in where when not being used they draw 0 power (except for leakage current) as no switching occurs. As soon as a signal comes it starts switching and power is drawn.

Maybe they just figured a way to pause the clock and have the wakeup managment part working like an asynchronous unit. Then it could do all they say without storing power or 'breaking the laws of physics'.

Re:Yep, a shell game (1)

QuasiEvil (74356) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554239)

or...

4) Gerbils. Awesome backup power source when combined with a small generator, just don't forget to feed them as the extended warranty won't cover their expiration.

No, seriously, they've probably got a supercap or something in there and have optimized the wake-up circuit to draw absolutely next to squat. Much better than running a power supply continuously at a low power draw, where they're typically very inefficient. Much better to draw a minute amount of load on top of the operating load and store it for the off times, if you can tweak your wake up circuit to be that incredibly power efficient.

Zero watts, why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26553885)

The demands to lower standby power consumption are getting downright silly; it started as a good idea, ended up with some pretty decent results and looking forward to continual gradual improvements... but thats not enough for some bloody bureaucrat who has to justify his/her job and existence by demanding more to the point of absurdity.

Zero watts mandated in Europe? Why? Isn't it enough that you can shop around and get machines that draw just a few watts by going on standby instead of idling at 100+? That your screens also cut their usage by 95% or more when they go on standby? Diminishing returns, folks. Saving dollars (or Euros) on the power bill is one (big) thing but jumping through hoops to squeeze out a few more pennies... just to keep some bureaucrat happily self-relevant. That's just sad.

Uhhhhh.... (1)

jdb2 (800046) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553887)

Anybody heard of "suspend to disk"? If you're running Linux on your laptop/notebook/mobile-pc then just do this : "sudo echo -n 'disk' > /sys/power/state " or, use your GUI of choice.

Other than the not-so-novel "bistable" ( "zero power" ala e-ink ) display, what's the big deal? And why the fuss about zero standby current when in S3 sleep ( standby ) mode it's measured in microamps?

jdb2

Re:Uhhhhh.... (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554123)

just do this : "sudo echo -n 'disk' > /sys/power/state "

Actually, that won't work. The > is interpreted by the shell, which means the "echo" command will run as root, but the shell redirection will run as the user -- the exact opposite of what you want.

I've taken to doing things like this:

echo -n disk | sudo tee /sys/power/state

The extra output can be suppressed, if you really care, with a >/dev/null at the end.

Re:Uhhhhh.... (1)

jdb2 (800046) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554523)

just do this : "sudo echo -n 'disk' > /sys/power/state "

Actually, that won't work. The > is interpreted by the shell, which means the "echo" command will run as root, but the shell redirection will run as the user -- the exact opposite of what you want.

I've taken to doing things like this:

echo -n disk | sudo tee /sys/power/state

The extra output can be suppressed, if you really care, with a >/dev/null at the end.

Heh. Oops. Having done this many times, I should have remembered ( one of ) the correct command sequences -- seems my brain is running slow again. ;)

For the record, I usually use sudo sh -c 'echo -n disk > /sys/power/state' -- for some reason I forgot to put in the 'sh -c'. Anyway

jdb2

Is this a rounding-error thing? (1)

dpbsmith (263124) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553927)

Is this some legalism, as in nutrition labeling, in which rounding is allowed? Can they round the power consumption to the nearest watt, and call anything drawing less than 0.5 watts "zero watts?"

I realize that geek.com does say "absolutely no power," but the farthest I can trace that statement is to pcworld [pcworld.com] , not to Siemens.

World domination plan (2, Insightful)

diablovision (83618) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553935)

1. Invent zero-watt sleep mode for PC.
2. Patent relevant technology.
3. Lobby the Euros for legislation requiring feature.
4. Profit!

(forget about valid strategy of turning off PC--stupid consumers can't be bothered)

Think about it... (1)

EmagGeek (574360) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553937)

The thing can draw no power if it uses the power that enters the box in an Ethernet frame to throw the switch that turns it on.. same for Bluetooth. All you have to do is rectify the incoming energy from the antenna and I'll bet it's enough to charge the gate capacitance of an "ON" pin on a power controller somewhere.

Simple, really... where there is any current at all, there is probably enough energy to turn on the switch.

Wow. So we've come full circle? (0, Troll)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | more than 5 years ago | (#26553977)

Back in the 80s and 90s, all of my computers had "Zero-Watt" modes. After shutting down (in the latter days, parking the heads in the earlier days), I flipped a switch-like thingy that physically interrupted the flow of power to the computer. I had no idea this was so cutting edge that it would take so long to go mainstream.

BTW, you can cut the power to your computer if you use hibernate instead of standby. No need for new technology to do this. I can't help but wonder if re-labeling of hibernation mode will be the Big New Thing. "Look how amazing and Green(r)(c)(tm) we are by promoting this form of power savings that's been around for years. Aren't we awesome?"

Re:Wow. So we've come full circle? (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554169)

Hibernate in an ATX system will NOT bring power draw to 0 watts, just low power state. The motherboard header is still powered to allow things like WoL, keyboard power up, peripheral and clock based power on, etc.

Re:Wow. So we've come full circle? (3, Interesting)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554507)

Okay, they'll make a modified one that doesn't keep those features active and opens a relay at the end of the hibernation process which is then closed by pressing a button on the case, triggering restoration from hibernation mode. And You can make hibernate zero-watt by unplugging the device. And you can still do all this by just turning the darn thing off and cutting the power. This isn't a situation that needs technological innovation. It needs people to be educated, then exercise some common sense. Then they can save money without having to spend it on new equipment.

If they want to save some freakin' power in the future, stop loading up operating systems with all this eye candy BS that require multicore processors and 128 megs of dedicated video ram just to work. Put out a "gets the job done" operating system that is rock solid and has a small resource footprint. Then start pushing the new low-power processors like Intel's Atom. Flood corporate America with those things and stop giving core 2 duos to secretaries who spend all day reading email, typing up documents, making powerpoint presentations, and all that other stuff that doesn't need a 100 watt CPU and aero effects.

THAT is where we need to cut power consumption. Saving 100 watts over 8-9 hours, not 1-4 watts over 15-16 hours.

Re:Wow. So we've come full circle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554627)

This is true, kindof. You can take a system that was hibernated and unplug it from the wall, when it receives power again it will resume where it left off.

Zero-watt (for the screen) in standby (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554219)

It looks to me (from http://sp.fujitsu-siemens.com/dmsp/docs/ds_esprimo_e.pdf)

Power cycle by pulling power cable on crash? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26554225)

Hmm... so it requires no power to standby, eh?

What is for some reason, the Windows OS (yeah... imagine that) people run on there ended up crashing into such standby state, and even the power switch won't reboot the machine as some more severe crashes lead to...

In this case, would pulling the power cable, which is pretty much the usual last resort, do anything?

Zero-watt computer (screen) standby (3, Interesting)

TheRing (744219) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554313)

it looks from here http://sp.fujitsu-siemens.com/dmsp/docs/ds_esprimo_e.pdf [fujitsu-siemens.com] like its only the screen that draws 0 watts when ts in standby - looks like the power for the screen is routed through the pc box and so they just make the pc turn off the power to the screen when the pc is in standby. It is a bit hard to tell, as the first part of it seems to be written in engrish

Muscle powered? (1)

Rashdot (845549) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554411)

Maybe it's hand cranked.

EU allows up to 1 W in standby mode (1)

toxis (323509) | more than 5 years ago | (#26554689)

it's able to use no power while in standby mode -- but this is a feature that will be required from 2010 for new PCs released across Europe.

This is not true. The EU will allow 1 W from 2010 in standby mode and off mode and 0.5 W from 2014. There is an exception for devices that have an "information or status display" which allows for a power consumption of 2 W (2014: 1 W) in standby mode.
See commission regulation 1275/2008 [europa.eu] Annex II.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...