In my energy use calculation above, I forgot to count in "sleep draw"... which is usually around 10 watts or so... so add in $7.50 to make it about $58 per year.
A 19" LCD draws about 45 watts, with 10 watts for sleep mode... so that comes out to $17 per year for usage + $7 for sleep... $24 annualized cost...
$34 per year in electricity is hardly worth the $300 extra the monitor would cost... even given the other benefits, due to the drawbacks.
Its also heavier (important for the younger crowd thats likely to move two more times in the next 10 years), has an unweildy depth (about 3 feet versus 6" thus occupying more square footage, big for us in expensive urban areas), and consumes far more power, which generates far more heat (higher bills).
#1) I have had the same 19" monitor since 1997. It's about 40lbs, and I have moved no less than 5 times in those 7 years. Never once have I thought, "I need to get a lighter monitor".
#2) My monitor (19" dinosaur) is about 14" deep... not 3 feet deep...
#3) Those 5 moves in 7 years were all in the SF Bay Area, and never once did I think "Man, I need to get a smaller footprint monitor, so I can save on rent!"... Why? because that extra 1 square foot is not optional in a house/apartment.
#4) I live in California. We have high electricity costs. at 13 cents per kilowatt hour, go ahead and figure out how much a monitor will cost you, when it is in sleep mode for 16 hours a day (8 hours of actual use) and see how big of a dent that makes in your wallet. A general and modern monitor (viewsonic) at 19" draws about 135 watts. 8 hours * 135 watts * 365 days = 394 kilowatt hours. At $0.13 per KwH (which is quite high), that comes out to $51 per year... that's one day at the movies with your SO.
LCD is significantly below the quality of plasma as far as TVs go. LCD TVs are for the "Want Champagne, but can only afford Coors" crowd...
The drawbacks of LCD are too significant to replace CRT, especially when the price point of LCDs is so high. Viewing angle, response time, artifacts, contrast, etc... all crappy on most consumer level LCD monitors.
I mean really, somebody could come up with some clever box-art and website art, that can just ensure that folks keep calling it "Lindows" until they get the law suit figured out...
You're right, it is ridiculous. Debian is at 2.2 (IIRC), a more reasonable number, although a little on the low side.
Slackware jumped becasue Volkerding decided that his distro couldn't compete against the others when they started artificially bumping up the numbers, so he jumped his from 4 to 7.
Since then, distro's seem to inflate their numbers to stay ahead of the competition, I guess since people don't understand that Libranet 2.1 is not older than Mandrake 10. (Notice the number of references to "Linux 9.0" on the Internet?)
How about NetBSD? Talk about low version numbers, they're at 1.6.1. They've gone from 0.8 in '93 to 1.6.1 in 2003.
Slashdot Mirror
Honestly, I have not looked at a TV under 36" in four years.
I'm in the market for a ~50 inch TV.
I hate projection TVs... crappy quality, and many other drawbacks make them undesirable in my book.
I will admit that the Aquos line is nice...
In my energy use calculation above, I forgot to count in "sleep draw"... which is usually around 10 watts or so...
so add in $7.50 to make it about $58 per year.
A 19" LCD draws about 45 watts, with 10 watts for sleep mode... so that comes out to $17 per year for usage + $7 for sleep... $24 annualized cost...
$34 per year in electricity is hardly worth the $300 extra the monitor would cost... even given the other benefits, due to the drawbacks.
Its also heavier (important for the younger crowd thats likely to move two more times in the next 10 years), has an unweildy depth (about 3 feet versus 6" thus occupying more square footage, big for us in expensive urban areas), and consumes far more power, which generates far more heat (higher bills).
#1) I have had the same 19" monitor since 1997. It's about 40lbs, and I have moved no less than 5 times in those 7 years. Never once have I thought, "I need to get a lighter monitor".
#2) My monitor (19" dinosaur) is about 14" deep... not 3 feet deep...
#3) Those 5 moves in 7 years were all in the SF Bay Area, and never once did I think "Man, I need to get a smaller footprint monitor, so I can save on rent!"... Why? because that extra 1 square foot is not optional in a house/apartment.
#4) I live in California. We have high electricity costs. at 13 cents per kilowatt hour, go ahead and figure out how much a monitor will cost you, when it is in sleep mode for 16 hours a day (8 hours of actual use) and see how big of a dent that makes in your wallet. A general and modern monitor (viewsonic) at 19" draws about 135 watts.
8 hours * 135 watts * 365 days = 394 kilowatt hours. At $0.13 per KwH (which is quite high), that comes out to $51 per year... that's one day at the movies with your SO.
LCD is significantly below the quality of plasma as far as TVs go. LCD TVs are for the "Want Champagne, but can only afford Coors" crowd...
The drawbacks of LCD are too significant to replace CRT, especially when the price point of LCDs is so high. Viewing angle, response time, artifacts, contrast, etc... all crappy on most consumer level LCD monitors.
A 'server' requires both 'server' hardware an a 'server' OS.
Windows and WIntel hardware (most x86) do not a 'server' make.
On servers, it's called a console port.
Usually a 9 or 25 pin serial port that allows you to hook up a VT100 or similar terminal.
They are usually called a "Hot Prowler" or something similar... it's probably more frequent than you imaging.
If you are home, so are your car keys and your wallet...
I thought it was due to calling someone who approves a submission an "editor".
What the fuck. I should really sue AOL for scarring me for life.
I have always thought that all non-AOL users should get to sue AOL for bringing all of these 'users' onto the Internet in the first place.
enrique(at)exocet(dot)org
Give me an invite, and I'll mod you up! :p
I for one welcome our new Razorback Overlords...
err... wait...
In spite of our half-trillion-dollar deficit, the Bush Administration is going to send humans to Mars someday.
I say, lets start today... With George W. Bush...
As another poster noted, Ghostbusters was doing this 20 years ago...
but MY question is...
Where is JonKatz when you need him...
I mean, really. "Mad about You" was a fine TV show... but this good?
How long until we see McKellenFS?
It seems that the author has confused the word "robust" for "functional".
The whole Wifi experience is just not robust, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't
This should read:
The whole Wifi experience is just not functional, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't
I hope it's 3x as thick, not 3x as long or wide...
and no, I did not RTFA
How many folks will pull out this card, hold it up to their faces, and say:
"ChangeMe"
?
Supposedly a 'a dramatically different direction' for Netscape is in the works, too.
Woo Hoo!
Any new direction is better than their current direction: down.
Why not just become
Swodnil
or
swodniL
I mean really, somebody could come up with some clever box-art and website art, that can just ensure that folks keep calling it "Lindows" until they get the law suit figured out...
However, the british model will be even larger
True, and it will also leak more oil.
I for one welcome our new Earthling Overlords
I wonder if that means that now would be a good time to start buying YHOO shares again?
Only if YHOO starts selling services related to Cats or Scrapbooking.
You're right, it is ridiculous.
Debian is at 2.2 (IIRC), a more reasonable number, although a little on the low side.
Slackware jumped becasue Volkerding decided that his distro couldn't compete against the others when they started artificially bumping up the numbers, so he jumped his from 4 to 7.
Since then, distro's seem to inflate their numbers to stay ahead of the competition, I guess since people don't understand that Libranet 2.1 is not older than Mandrake 10. (Notice the number of references to "Linux 9.0" on the Internet?)
How about NetBSD?
Talk about low version numbers, they're at 1.6.1.
They've gone from 0.8 in '93 to 1.6.1 in 2003.
you should get +1 underrated just for the Equilibrium reference...
But, then again, you'd get the +1 overrated for the broken iPronto link.