[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: silent PC vs. emacs
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: silent PC vs. emacs |
Date: |
Tue, 05 Sep 2006 05:43:03 -0400 |
> Could someone try this experiment? Does the laptop burn power faster
> when Emacs is running and blinking the cursor?
I am not sure how easy it is to do such an experiment.
You could let your laptop run without AC power, with Emacs running
and without it, and ask acpi what the power drain rate is.
Given that so many applications wake up so often, what emacs does
might not be measurable at this point, but it might make a difference
in the future.
You could try also killing other X apps, and try killing X too.
I just tried some experiments. Having Emacs running under X does not
increase my power drain rate. However, having X running (with GNOME)
makes a big increase -- about 50%.
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Dan Nicolaescu, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/09/02
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Richard Stallman, 2006/09/04
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/09/04
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, Dan Jacobson, 2006/09/04
- Re: silent PC vs. emacs, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/09/04