fearofshorts
Member
Ouch! Is the program _THAT_ reliant on hardware-decryption?
...
Or is it that flv is just the worst possible container and sucks power?
...
Or is it that flv is just the worst possible container and sucks power?
I still hope, Hardware Acceleration will work at the end. Not that it turns out there is another wrong resistor somewhere that prevents the Pandora to use hardware Acceleration at all.EvilDragon said:We've got Totem, but without hardware acceleration it plays YouTube video with about 1 frame each three seconds.
MWeston said:P.S. Yes, transferring a file from my PC would be smarter but I have to figure out how to do that still. I normally turn anything like that off for security reasons. I don't think I've done file sharing since the headache-y days of Win98!
fusion_power said:I still hope, Hardware Acceleration will work at the end. Not that it turns out there is another wrong resistor somewhere that prevents the Pandora to use hardware Acceleration at all.
TAKE THAT!DaMummy said:
MWeston said:The resistor was the series resistance in the oscillator driver. I did change it once on a previous revision but since there were no complaints back in the day, I kept it larger for lower current consumption. The wifi clock requires a very strict clock profile so I had to decrease this resistance to drive the crystal harder (larger voltage swing), increase the bandwidth and put the crystal into a tighter range around resonance. It probably means an extra mA or two of constant current drain so not a big issue in that respect.
Vega said:MWeston said:The resistor was the series resistance in the oscillator driver. I did change it once on a previous revision but since there were no complaints back in the day, I kept it larger for lower current consumption. The wifi clock requires a very strict clock profile so I had to decrease this resistance to drive the crystal harder (larger voltage swing), increase the bandwidth and put the crystal into a tighter range around resonance. It probably means an extra mA or two of constant current drain so not a big issue in that respect.
Does it consume power even when the WiFi chip is off? Then 2mA would be quite a lot. Consider 2mA x 24h x 7days = 336 mAh a week. What is the capacity of the battery?
I was also wondering if anybody from the devs achieved faster WiFi (how fast?) on any of the earlier boards revisions, where the resistor was larger?
came to post what Tor said. ssh poses a non-negligible overhead. and wget can actually saturate a link to its fullest through multiple streams. just create a skeleton page with links to, say, 10 files of 10MB each, run a recursive, timed wget on the page, observe.Tor said:wget -O /dev/null <url> isn't bad for measurements. Better than scp anyway, as any SSH operation involves lots of CPU work which may impact measurements, particularly when the link (wi-fi) gets faster.
Did you try to replace the webkit engine? Maybe Angstrom uses unstable version.EvilDragon said:Epiphany had the same rendering and crashing issues as Midori for me - I guess the problem is with WebKit, as they both use it.
For the rendering issue, there's a fix, it might also fix the crashing, but it's not yet implemented in our image
x68000 said:TAKE THAT!DaMummy said:
Dunny said:
Dead1nside said:4400mah
Exophase said:Dead1nside said:4400mah
4200mAh.
I'll let MWeston give the real answer but I doubt that it draws that kind of power when the clock is gated off.
Dead1nside said:I thought they said something about getting 10% for free, although the battery's are still rated at 4000mAh?
MWeston said:The datasheet rates these batteries as 4250mAh, 4200mAh minimum but they stamp 4000mAh on the side of the batteries. I’ve been working on the configuration file for the battery fuel gauge and if I try to set it to 4000, the battery still runs for most of an hour even though it says 0%. I had no choice but to use 4200 as the calibration value. The last battery I calculated was about 4230 so the datasheet seems accurate.
Exophase said:Dead1nside said:I thought they said something about getting 10% for free, although the battery's are still rated at 4000mAh?
This is the relevant quote from MWeston:
MWeston said:The datasheet rates these batteries as 4250mAh, 4200mAh minimum but they stamp 4000mAh on the side of the batteries. I’ve been working on the configuration file for the battery fuel gauge and if I try to set it to 4000, the battery still runs for most of an hour even though it says 0%. I had no choice but to use 4200 as the calibration value. The last battery I calculated was about 4230 so the datasheet seems accurate.
They're 4200mAh batteries that are for some reason labeled 4000.
What about the voltage? Laptop batteries are usually higher than 3.7V.Dead1nside said:Thanks for the correction. I think I was associating it with my boasts of "Has the same battery power as my sister's laptop" which is 4400mAh.