Prev: Quick easy repair for scratched LCD screens
Next: Ink for Canon printer - Where to buy?
From: kony on 16 Apr 2010 11:20
On 16 Apr 2010 02:19:41 GMT, Nicholas Dreyer <gurfle(a)oz.net>
wrote:

>On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:13:35 -0400, kony wrote:
>
>>
>> ... but there is supporting evidence. It depends on the particular
>> weakness of the entire *system* and by system I also mean the power
>> grid.
>>
>> Basically the evidence comes from tracing fault modes, looking at dead
>> equipment rather than formal testing long term which serves little use -
>> by the time meaningful data was a accumulated nobody wants to build a
>> new system with old parts and it would have to be based on the
>> contemporary tech of the time as merely deciding a "disk drive" is a
>> "disk drive" is not enough, the designs change too much over the years
>> to combat failure modes as much as the design budget will allow.
>>
>> Will it be subject to significant power spikes? IF so then certainly
>> turning it off at a power strip will reduce # of events seen on average.
>>
>> Leaving it running tends to be most problematic if it uses poor
>> capacitors or fans so their lifespan elapses before the viable lifespan
>> of the system is up. Turning it off tends to wear out the battery
>> faster. Thermal shock is not much of a consideration though, if we
>> concede it will not damage equipment signficantl within its viable
>> lifespan which seems to be the case with all but the rare instances of
>> manufacturing solder pad defects or in-chip solder bump defects as seen
>> with certain chipsets in recent history.
>
>Thanks for the great insights. Now I'm leaning towards turning off power
>supply completely again!


Up to you, but personally I never turn equipment off at the
wall and don't have any problem with doing so. It uses a
single-digit # of watts per system but the last power surge
fault I saw was with a printer I leave on because it's a
networked printer that is inconvenient to go turn off when
it would be accessed by any random system on-site.

Before that it was a network switch which also never gets
turned off for similar reasons, a surge when through it and
fried a port on it and a network adapter in a client system.

Also in past years I'd found that some systems require a
power reset if they come back on from power off, rather than
leaving mains on all the time, so to me the chance of
failure is lower than I deem the risk of leaving power
connected.
From: Nicholas Dreyer on 17 Apr 2010 14:14
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:20:31 -0400, kony wrote:
>
>
> Up to you, but personally I never turn equipment off at the wall and
> don't have any problem with doing so. It uses a single-digit # of watts
> per system but the last power surge fault I saw was with a printer I
> leave on because it's a networked printer that is inconvenient to go
> turn off when it would be accessed by any random system on-site.
>
> Before that it was a network switch which also never gets turned off for
> similar reasons, a surge when through it and fried a port on it and a
> network adapter in a client system.
>
> Also in past years I'd found that some systems require a power reset if
> they come back on from power off, rather than leaving mains on all the
> time, so to me the chance of failure is lower than I deem the risk of
> leaving power connected.

Well, this makes sense too. It sure is more convenient not to have to
reach around and fiddle with switches every time you boot up and down.
And I too have: (1) A flat screen monitor whose instructions
specifically say not to use the toggle switch too frequently, (2) An HP
laserjet that doesn't even have a switch, (3) a DSL modem and (4) a
router, all of which are on all the time.

I guess the switch will stay on for now!
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Quick easy repair for scratched LCD screens
Next: Ink for Canon printer - Where to buy?