Battery Drain

[urjaman]

shut down

w00t you dont have your pandora on 24/7? </supposed-to-be-funny-comment>


I dunno, If I'd have your pandora I would measure its current draw when OFF, but that is quite complicated and possibly warranty-voiding stunt (if you use the DC input nodes in the edge of the PCB, easier to clamp to...). I measured 0.26mA (off-the-hat, might be wrong) when I did it, and if 8 hours drains 20% of battery, that would be drain of 105 mA. I'm pretty sure that I recall nearly being able to run the pandora on 100mA (well... I do remember 170mA as real)...


Either something isnt being turned off like it should be, or you havent really turned it off. I've heard that starting the shutdown with the charger attached (even if you remove it just before real shutdown) could do that (it would turn on again...), but not sure - I think 105mA isnt enough for that (yet).


Pseudo-edit: Hey my pandora takes 119mA in "power-save" mode (!). That would be well under 25% in 8 hours. I could run it in powersave for nearly 9 hours to lose 25% of battery. Are you sure youre not just flicking the power-switch? (That just goes to lower power mode, doesnt turn if off entirely). Xfce menu -> Log out -> Shut Down to really turn it off.

 

[WizardStan]

There's a real volume wheel.


Why no real on/off switch?


one that breaks the circuit.

Because, at the very least, the battery continues to power the real time clock. Breaking the circuit, you'd have to reset the time every time you turned it back on.


Not to mention that breaking the circuit like that completely eliminates any possibility of one day charging the Pandora while it is "off".


I'm sure there are other reasons a hard off is a bad idea, I just can't think of them.

 

[Yannick]

i am probably just thinking to "euro-green"


and yes, deep standby is really consumer friendly but,


"just really completely off" without removing the battery sounds like a good idea.


so your battery is good to go, 2 months later when you want to use it


if i don't use the switch on my extension cord, i've got 5 led's in my bedroom. 2 of them even blink

 

[WizardStan]

i am probably just thinking to "euro-green"


and yes, deep standby is really consumer friendly but,


"just really completely off" without removing the battery sounds like a good idea.


so your battery is good to go, 2 months later when you want to use it

In theory it is good to go. I believe it was Prometheus who made the sacrifice, leaving her Pandora in its "off" state for an extended period of time, and it was extrapolated that months would pass before the battery dropped dangerously low, and with the battery removed only about double that.


Leaving it alone for months and expecting it to just work without charging the battery is a fringe usage, in my opinion. Designing it with that in mind, making the switch a circuit cut off, would have been detrimental to the more regular usage; having to reset the clock every time you turn it on is not worth the few pennies you would save.


Other flaws to a full circuit cut off include, but are not limited to: software shut down cannot move a switch, you would have to tell the OS to power down and then flip the switch to kill the power once you are certain the system is "off"; physically killing the power can also cause damage to file systems if it is not prepared and all files are closed properly.


And that's if you're intentionally doing it, to say nothing of what happens when you accidentally kill the power.


I cannot at present think of any other device that does such a power disconnect: the NDS and PSP both have soft off switches; every phone I've encountered keeps time even when off, some even with alarms that will turn the device back on.


A "just really completely off" switch does not sound like a good idea to me. If you do anticipate not using your Pandora for months, it comes with a handy battery case for the express purpose of taking the battery out of the Pandora and storing it away.

 

[Yannick]

Did you ever own a desktop computer, with a physical power switch on the AT(X) power supply?


off == means really off


my current desktop doesn't have such a switch, the motherboard also isn't off (an smd led is still shining) but the motherboard does have a button battery, to keep the RTC and BIOS settings going. good thing, because i do have a power switch on my extension cord.


like you said, most consumer electronics don't support *really off*


that sounds like a design issue in all of them in my book.


anyhow, the thread was about excessive power usage in fake-off mode right?

 

[WizardStan]

Did you ever own a desktop computer, with a physical power switch on the AT(X) power supply?


off == means really off

Yes, I did. Did you ever corrupt your hard drive and have to reinstall DOS because you flipped the power switch (or even a power outage) at just the wrong time? Computers are far more complex now then they were then, so the odds of corrupting a file increases.


Just try yanking a USB stick while it's writing a file a few times. The whole thing will be corrupt in a short while. Now imagine that USB stick is your root OS and instead of yanking the stick out of the USB you just flip a switch.


Seriously, bad idea.

my current desktop doesn't have such a switch, the motherboard also isn't off (an smd led is still shining) but the motherboard does have a button battery, to keep the RTC and BIOS settings going. good thing, because i do have a power switch on my extension cord.

The Pandora has no such button battery. Most portable electronics have no such button battery because they already have a battery built into it they can use. It makes no sense to have two batteries. What would it accomplish? Extra circuitry to gain the exact same functionality. A waste.


Pulling the plug as you do is a great solution in your case. You are sacrificing several features that can only be gained by having it plugged in, but they are features you do not use, so there is no problem: everyone wins. If it had been designed as you wanted it to, however, with a forced physical disconnect, the people that would use those features would have no recourse. There's no workaround to add power back in. They would be forced to always leave their systems on instead of triggered on when needed, which means more electricity usage and spinning fans 24 hours a day. More waste.


I don't understand why you think your idea is so great. Please explain to me what a physical cut off switch will accomplish that is worth all the problems it would cause.

 

[Yannick]

I don't understand why you think your idea is so great. Please explain to me what a physical cut off switch will accomplish that is worth all the problems it would cause.

not using power when i just told it to be off


i dare to bet if you walk thru my house with a power meter, you'd find i am wasting 50 watts 24h/day on devices i can't shut down without unplugging.


electricity is expensive

Yes, I did. Did you ever corrupt your hard drive and have to reinstall DOS because you flipped the power switch (or even a power outage) at just the wrong time? Computers are far more complex now then they were then, so the odds of corrupting a file increases.

yes i did once step on my extensioncord power switch once, during an apt-get upgrade


that was a fucked up install


that's also the reason why windows update shows you a screen with big letters "do not unplug the machine during updates"

Just try yanking a USB stick while it's writing a file a few times. The whole thing will be corrupt in a short while. Now imagine that USB stick is your root OS and instead of yanking the stick out of the USB you just flip a switch.

you are correct "while it's writing a file" that's mostly a software problem (clear write buffers as fast as possible) and users not following instructions. see the windows update remark above


now just for fun, i pulled out the battery of my linux laptop while editing this post.


i restarted it, i just checked the logs, the system didn't even do a proper fschk and firefox popped right back open with half my post still filed in on this edit page.


you think i'll fuck up my tv's OS by unplugging it? no, it only takes 20 seconds longer to start because it needs to cold boot instead of resume from standby. (and i am waisting 4.5 watts of power to save me 20seconds tomorow according to my manual)

There's no workaround to add power back in. They would be forced to always leave their systems on instead of triggered on when needed, which means more electricity usage and spinning fans 24 hours a day. More waste.

did it occur to you you could design electronics with both features?


but label it standby like *what it is really doing* and make the off button really go off.

 

[WizardStan]

not using power when i just told it to be off


i dare to bet if you walk thru my house with a power meter, you'd find i am wasting 50 watts 24h/day on devices i can't shut down without unplugging.

so unplug them. I already gave you a very good reason why the majority would not appreciate power going down complete. Even when you completely unplug your PC it is still using power, suckling off the battery to keep the clock and bios functioning.

did it occur to you you could design electronics with both features?


but label it standby like *what it is really doing* and make the off button really go off.

It isn't standby. When it is functioning correctly, it is off in the same way that your PC is off. That's why it needs to go through the complete boot process when you turn it back on. When shut down, the only thing that should be powered is the clock and some registers (bios settings equivalent). This is exactly the same situation as if you were to unplug your desktop. It uses tiny fractions of a watthour during this time.


And they did design it with both features: a soft switch which does its task, software power down which does as I've described, and latch clips so you can yank the battery if you are not going to use it for an extended period of time. I still don't think installing a kill switch just so you don't have to pull the battery would have been worthwhile. It's just an extra thing to break, accidentally flip, cause confusion, whatever.

 

[Yannick]

It's just an extra thing to break, accidentally flip, cause confusion, whatever.

we'll agree to disagree on this point then, i'd like all my electronics to have a real kill switch. can't cost more then a couple of cents for an extra feature.

 

[WizardStan]

we'll agree to disagree on this point then, i'd like all my electronics to have a real kill switch. can't cost more then a couple of cents for an extra feature.

I don't think we should agree to disagree. You think you have a really good idea and it might even BE a really good idea if we can just get to the root of why you think it is a really good idea that will be beneficial to enough people. Unfortunately the way I've been understanding it it sounds like a feature for such a small fringe group (the ones that intend to leave their Pandora alone for months at a time) that I can't see it being worth adding, and may even be detrimental to the design. Remember, the switch itself may only be a couple of cents, but MWeston would have had to take that into account, it would have increased the complexity of an already extremely complex design, not to mention how tightly packed it is as well as ensuring every component can safely handle the stress of being powered on and off. It's still an extra step that you would have to go through, having to select shut down and then also remember to flip the switch, so I don't see how the added feature is really so much better than removing the battery.


If I remember correctly, it has an estimated 3 months of off time with the battery still in the Pandora, and 6 months if you pull the battery before the battery goes flat. If you're going to leave it for such an extended period of time, such a power switch will save you at most 3 months of battery power. Alternatively, if you're going to leave it for such a long period of time, pulling the battery and sealing it in its case (and maybe an airtight plastic bag as well) and sticking it in the fridge will keep it pretty close to 100% for a year. If you're going to keep it there for more than a year you'll want to discharge it to about 40% before putting it into cold storage, but then I'll question why you bought it if you only use it once a year.

 

[Yannick]

i'd like all my electronics to have a real kill switch

the pandora is already *revolutionary* with a real analog volume wheel, if i remember correctly this was seen as a huge feature


you can regulate your volume, in the app, in the os and on the hardware. i don't hear you saying thats confusing for users (hey where did i turn the volume down today?)


but a real circuitbreaking offswitch that must be too hard to implement or use right?


where did i say that the pandora needs to be redesigned?


i just said i would like a real kill switch


**Start of reason***


on all electronics in my house


to save power


because it adds up


***End of reason***


and here you are


bitching it would be to hard to flip a fucking switch, that you said yourself most people you know wouldn't use anyway


i already mentioned i have european green party view on this stuff, and i know alot of people that would use and are smart enough to use a real offswitch on a computer

 

[WizardStan]

Ok, I try again: what benefit do you gain from a switch that is not already available by simply pulling the battery?


You are suggesting a feature. Good! Justify that feature! Every feature adds cost. You may see it as pennies, but if you're the only one who uses it, that's OPT spending pennies*8000 (and more) to save you $3 per year (assuming you only used it once every 3 months). And as I said, it may even cause problems in the form of improper (both accidental and intentional) shut downs eventually causing corruption.


Obviously it's too late to add any such feature to the existing Pandora, but maybe a good feature which has been worked through will be considered for a future revision, and we can't do that if your reason for wanting something is just so that you personally can save a couple dollars regardless of whether it is actually good for everyone or not.

 

[Yannick]

This is the sort of mentality switch the green party would like to see in electronics manufacturers


(i can't believe i am making political statements now)


if i can save some money by using it, then everybody can


it costs only cents to add a switch with an extra state, but companies think they'll go bankrupt because they'll have 5 cents less profit.


You know what, add half a euro/dollar to the retail price. <= extra profit


but marketing will say €299,99 is a much better price then €300,07


everytime i see a multi-9 price i know i've been ripped off, that's just marketing deciding what i would be prepared to pay instead of a good honest price based on labour + parts.


the above doesn't seem to apply to openpandora, it seems price is based purely on parts + fixed profit margin.


so adding 5 cents in parts should only raise price with 5 cents + VAT


electronics cost multiple hundreds of dollars/euro's anyway, how much difference can a couple of cents really make


apparently you need to threaten companies with big extra taxes to implement powersaving features that costs only cents in manufacturing.


today tv's and such in europe are *green*


because europe passed a law a couple of years ago, *forcing* powersaving features or face extra pollution taxes


and my *green* tv (bought with government sponsored "ECO cheques" don't ask) still can't be shut off completely because some japanese manufacturer decided i don't like to wait 20 seconds for my tv to boot and giving me a 5 cent powersaving feature on my €899 TV is apparently an attack on their profit margin.


my big brown '80's analog monster did have a large power button, and then some dude/engineer discovered they could fake an off state with the electronics they were using anyway and save 5 cents. then sold it to us as a feature => (now you can put your tv ON with your remote too)


a killswitch is the ultimate powersaving


you stated yourself the battery would last 6 months disconnected, compared to 3 months connected.


that's double performance just by flipping a switch


i am pretty sure consumers will find a switch much more friendly then removing the battery


for the nand corruption, another 5cent chip could bypass the killswitch during software updates and refuse to update if the battery is low


that's even better unbrickable design


every other accidental shutdown is a software problem (write buffers) that as far as i know has been fixed by ext4 in linux


as for the RTC, how hard is it, really, to enter the date and time during bootup and having the device sync with network time server when it connects. Do we really need Unix server levels of precision? on a gaming device or a cell phone for that matter. I've got 3 minutes of drift on all my clocks in the house i can see from chair


so there you have it


i want my kill switch because it works +


a politically inspired view on why manufacturers are ripping us off <= EDIT bad expression!


you just made me think really long about off switches and now i'am convinced even more that they should be essential equipment on all electronics.

 

[Prometheus]

^ Pardon my interjection here, but I'm curious. You keep mentioning "five cents" here and "five cents" there, but are you accounting for the fact that this would require a likely-costly redesign of the entire board, and the fact that the cost of the time alone to do this is not nothing?


Again, pardon me for asking, please. I am simply genuinely curious. Myths like "Big bad manufacturers are just out to rip us all off!", and "Things just take pennies to make." without taking into account other costs, are of particular interest to me because they play a huge part in people falling prey to counterfeits and the like, so it's something I keep tabs on.

 

[Yannick]

^ Pardon my interjection here, but I'm curious. You keep mentioning "five cents" here and "five cents" there, but are you accounting for the fact that this would require a likely-costly redesign of the entire board, and the fact that the cost of the time alone to do this is not nothing?

yes, redesigning for this would be stupid


but if you would add this to the list of design specs on new machines


it really only is the price of the switch you pay


take the volume wheel, it costs 5 cents too (give or take a cent) and MWeston would have had to spend some extra time to add it. It's not even necessary, software can handle it but hardware is better.


take my powersaving switch. It's not even necessary, software can handle it but hardware is better.


can't express it clearer then this.

"Big bad manufacturers are just out to rip us all off!"

I find it quiet interesting how my 899 euro TV costs exactly 899 dollars overseas


take the PS3 for another example.


how did they calculate the price on that? with currency's and taxes different everywhere. sounds to me somebody just decided 899 is a goodlooking number.


that's hardly ripping us off, but it does imply the price isn't related to parts + labour


i am all for honest hard working people, but just slapping an arbitrary price on something. If my car mechanic did this i would call him a fraud.


EDIT:


*sigh* such a wall of text because sparkymark's postit note hack reminded me i can't shutoff most my electronics without putting a switch on an extentioncord

 

[Prometheus]

yes, redesigning for this would be stupid


but if you would add this to the list of design specs on new machines


it really only is the price of the switch you pay

Ah, such as a future iteration, you mean? That makes sense to me.

i am all for honest hard working people, but just slapping an arbitrary price on something. If my car mechanic did this i would call him a fraud.

Yeah, I see what you mean, there. :lol: That doesn't seem to happen in the UK as much as it used to (or at least, the last time I check, it doesn't happen with anything that affects me :lol: ), which I'm glad about, I have to admit.

 

[WizardStan]

a killswitch is the ultimate powersaving


you stated yourself the battery would last 6 months disconnected, compared to 3 months connected.


that's double performance just by flipping a switch


that's double performance just by flipping a switch

Which is nothing compared to pulling the battery and storing it in its case in the fridge.


If the power usage is your concern, why not buy or build a dynamo? A cheap wind up flashlight can easily be used to recharge the Pandora; never touch the grid at all. Or get a cheap solar panel. A $60 panel easily keeps a 12 volt car battery topped up which you can then use a DC-DC to convert it to 5 volts to keep all your rechargeable electronics running well. The best way to save power is to make decisions in the home, not force others to make decisions.


My argument is that the average user will use their Pandora basically every day, and yes, entering in the date every day does get annoying. I don't believe such a full-kill switch would be used as much as you think it would, making it a wasted feature for the average person. A cost of a few cents adds up, as you said, and across 8000 and more units that's no small chunk of change. It's just not economical to try and conserve in this case.


Where effort might be well spent is in getting actual suspend working properly. Current low power mode will still drain out the battery in a day or two. A proper suspend should increase that to a couple of weeks. Such a feature would not be so that people could leave it alone for weeks and then come back to a reasonable charge: it is a feature for being able to do some work, suspend it, and come back to it a few hours later and being able to resume what you were doing. If you are going to be doing nothing with it for a few days, best to simply shut it off; if you'll do nothing with it for weeks or months, pull the battery and store it in the fridge. Those are the ways to conserve the batteries power.


Your TV is completely irrelevant to this debate. I'm sorry you bought a bad TV. My TV has no such "feature". It comes up right away whether I've just plugged it in or been using it for weeks. It does use a little power when it's off keeping the sensor for the remote going but that's almost as low as what the Pandora uses to keep the clock running. The LCD clock on my desk uses more power than that, and even that's just a drop in the bucket compared to what my lights use. If you don't like that feature, get a power bar: they have exactly that kind of kill switch you want: you get what you want and it doesn't inconvenience anyone else.


Point I'm trying to make is that I still believe your usage is a fringe case, that the average person will be turning on their Pandora on a reasonably regular basis and will have no interest in resetting the time every time they do so. I further still believe that if you are going to be leaving it for such a period where a full kill will save you a noticeable amount of power that you are much better off pulling the battery anyway so it can be stored in a cold place which will save you even more.


Sorry, I'm really trying. I understand your desire to save power, but I still don't see why a kill-switch is necessarily better than removing the battery. You can talk about how software can be fixed to prevent corruption, but that doesn't allow things to be shut down cleanly, and doesn't bring back my term paper if I hadn't managed to save it. It also takes further effort and therefore energy to find those cases where sudden power loss would be bad and adjust for them. Heck, between the two of us, we've probably used up more electricity on this debate than you would have saved in that three months on the Pandora.

i am pretty sure consumers will find a switch much more friendly then removing the battery

Actually, the soft off and the easy remove battery were both feature requests the community made to OPT, so it's the opposite of what you said: the consumers requested an always on device and the ability to easily remove the battery (previously it was held in with screws)

 

[WizardStan]

I find it quiet interesting how my 899 euro TV costs exactly 899 dollars overseas


take the PS3 for another example.

That's actually not surprising to me at all. The average wage in the UK in GBP is about the same as here in Canada in CAD. Haven't looked up what it is in the EU, but I don't doubt it is very different. It makes sense for products to be priced relatively the same here as there. In fact, if it were otherwise, if that $899 TV cost less than 899 EUR (or 899 GBP, I'll reserved final judgment on the EU until I've done more research, if I feel up to it), I would be the one to be complaining about how rich the British are, and how much more the pound buys vs the dollar

 

[Prometheus]

^ The import taxes (and other things relating to distribution) for the manufacturers to bring their goods to the EU are also a factor.

 

[moz]

^ The import taxes (and other things relating to distribution) for the manufacturers to bring their goods to the EU are also a factor.

How comes it seems that all your posts recently have been inconvenient page breaks?