Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 23, 2013
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
GNOME 3.4 released
Posted Mar 28, 2012 18:35 UTC (Wed) by avtechmjc (subscriber, #50477)
Posted Mar 28, 2012 18:39 UTC (Wed) by spaetz (subscriber, #32870)
my box uses 25 watts when suspended, but boots in 40 secs when I turn it on from real off. Why should I necessarily want to suspend?
Posted Mar 28, 2012 19:07 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333)
It's instantaneous and it's like you never left.
Posted Mar 28, 2012 19:20 UTC (Wed) by spaetz (subscriber, #32870)
That "convenience" costs me around 25watt*14h*365*0.3€/kWh ~ 40€/year, nah I`ll pass :-) .
Actually, I prefer to start a new day with a clean desk and not have that old accumulated cruft around. But I installed an extension and am happy with that, no need to argue...
Posted Mar 28, 2012 21:14 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)
News flash! GNOME shell does not scale!
Posted Mar 29, 2012 16:14 UTC (Thu) by cortana (subscriber, #24596)
Assuming we are on the IPCC's A1F scenario (which seems easy day terrifyingly more like an idealistic of what could have been rather than a doomsday scenario), then the global mean temperature anomaly in 2300 is increased by much less than 1 * 10^-5 degrees C (the margin of error of my model). So we can fortunately let GNOME 3 off the hook for any noticeable damage to the planet. :)
Source: the climate model used in Fate of the World, adapted from work performed by Dr. Myles Allen [Allen, M. R. et al (2009) Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne, Nature, 458:1163-1166]
Posted Mar 29, 2012 20:26 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)
News flash! GNOME shell is not dangerous to the planet, after all! New data confirms that computer suspend is harmless to the planet (but might be relevant to your pocket), page 5.
Posted Mar 29, 2012 21:44 UTC (Thu) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784)
Posted Mar 28, 2012 19:46 UTC (Wed) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164)
Posted Mar 28, 2012 20:02 UTC (Wed) by rgmoore (✭ supporter ✭, #75)
Now if they can just get fix all the programs so they pay attention to system management, we'll be somewhere. Evolution is the one that bugs me; I don't want to have to restart it manually every time I log on because it isn't smart enough to restart itself.
Posted Mar 29, 2012 6:19 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333)
No it isn't and it never worked on any OS. Suspend is fair superior.
Posted Mar 29, 2012 9:22 UTC (Thu) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164)
It IS a very useful feature. I suspend my laptop most of the time, but when I have to reboot (say after an update) I don't have to start my apps and open my documents again. Nice. On my desktop it is even better - I don't use suspend (it boots up fast enough) so I like to not have to open my 20 apps again. Hell, I wouldn't use a web browser without session support, would you?
On my media center it's even worse as suspend there kills the HDMI output so I have to shut it down to save the trees. Session management means I continue where I left off...
The fact that you prefer to spend time with things others rather have their computer do for them doesn't mean it's an useless feature. I've got work to do, you know...
Posted Mar 29, 2012 10:35 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333)
It seems weird that you think that I said it wasn't useful when I never said anything of the sort. I am just saying it's fundamentally broken.
The fact that a few programs implement something like it in a fairly useful manner is besides the point entirely.
> Hell, I wouldn't use a web browser without session support, would you?
Despite all your assumptions and attempts to change the subject I wouldn't even notice or care, personally. Other people seem to find it useful, but that's besides the point, again.
> The fact that you prefer to spend time with things others rather have their computer do for them doesn't mean it's an useless feature. I've got work to do, you know...
Why would I spend time struggling with a feature that never worked and is never going to work for most of the applications I use when I have something that is much faster and actually works for all of them?
If I run into bugged out hardware or actually find myself caring about the minuscule amount of power it takes to maintain my ram state in my laptop then I can always just change the default to 'suspend to swap'.
Posted Mar 31, 2012 14:33 UTC (Sat) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164)
So the few app maintainers which have been incapable of implementing this just need a gentle push - or a patch. At that point, we can save trees and make the reboot experience nicer - you don't have to loose all your state anymore.
Much more important, the session capabilities are put to use in a far more innovative way: Activities. Being able to save the state of a group of your applications and stopping/starting them based on what you're working on, and even more cool, moving it all to another device, is something really new and useful.
Imagine - you're at work, and are working on a task but don't want to miss the train. Transfer your work (not just the files but the whole session) to another device (say laptop, or tablet, if your desktop is smart enough to adapt to such a device) and keep working in the train!
You might think it's not possible. Maybe start using less obsolete software? Because it is - and millions of users on Linux are using it already as it was introduced on the Linux desktop years ago... This is from September 2010:
And may 2011:
(granted, the moving of activities from one system to the next isn't possible yet, but managing and using them on one system works just fine)
I think it's time to look at a calendar: yes, it is 2012 and your computer can do more than you think. Trowing around workarounds like suspend are imho just a bad excuse for unwillingness to adopt new, good, useful technologies. The idea that shutting down the computer means loosing everything you were working on is DOS era stuff. Does the fact that MS and Apple can't get their act together mean we have to be similarly restricted?
Posted Mar 29, 2012 15:57 UTC (Thu) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196)
Posted Mar 29, 2012 21:51 UTC (Thu) by blujay (guest, #39961)
Posted Mar 28, 2012 20:57 UTC (Wed) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630)
The GNOME Overlords have DECREED that thou shalt NOT power your computer off.
The GNOME Overlords further DECREE that all BLASPHEMERS who express such SICK and TWISTED desires shall choose between banishment to Extension-Land and carpal-tunnel syndrome from sixty-two mouse-clicks while holding down Ctrl-Alt-Shift-Meta-Windows to satisfy their BLASPHEMY.
(It's a joke... don't get upset! :))
Posted Mar 28, 2012 22:51 UTC (Wed) by hadess (subscriber, #24252)
When you need to say that it's a joke, then it's usually not that good a joke.
Posted Mar 29, 2012 12:57 UTC (Thu) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630)
It wasn't a very good joke, but had I not made the disclaimer, there'd have been a thread sixty messages deep from touchy GNOME developers.
Posted Mar 29, 2012 13:01 UTC (Thu) by hadess (subscriber, #24252)
Those touchy GNOME developers that think this joke isn't funny.
Posted Mar 29, 2012 13:10 UTC (Thu) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630)
If you say so.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds