[HingVista]

A new report has recently been published demonstrating the hard savings available from Windows Vista's Power Saving functionality. If your company has hard C02 reduction targets, or you would like to tell your management that you can save them $11 per desktop in direct costs then go ahead and read this report.

The headlines are:

• Windows Vista can reduce electricity costs. Businesses can save up to $11 per system, per year by switching to Windows Vista, due to the default power management settings. For a company with 5000 users, this means up to $47,000 of bottom line dollars can be saved annually.
  
  
• The Vista Sleep state is more reliable than XP. Computers resume from Sleep in two seconds, which is about the same time it takes a screen to resume from Idle mode in Windows XP.
  
  
• Power consumption reduction translates into direct CO2 savings. Carbon dioxide emissions are reduced by up to 67 kg of carbon dioxide per desktop PC, per year. For a company with 5000 users, this is 288 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions reduced.
  
  
• Aero graphics have no effect on overall power consumption. Organizations should take advantage of Aero since it does not have a significant impact on electricity usage.

You may download the full report HERE, via Technet

[pakistanipower]

ya good for big business. they should have just kept that option in business edition, not in home premium n ulitimate. i mean $11..for one year in household isn't worth the delay

but for $47000 thats alot tfs

[SharmanNet]

Quote

The Vista Sleep state is more reliable than XP

This is my favorite feature. Now I always keep my notebook in sleep mode because it can be resumed back within two seconds.

[Abhi]

pakistanipower, on Apr 21 2008, 05:30 AM, said:

ya good for big business. they should have just kept that option in business edition, not in home premium n ulitimate. i mean $11..for one year in household isn't worth the delay

but for $47000 thats alot tfs

Why, whats wrong with saving, even if it is just $11 for households?
Its not taking anything away...is it?
If you can save even $11 with the default settings, it should be more than welcome.

[juliankreuz]

Hey there is a program in Windows XP that saves emissions

Download: CO2 Saver

Also works in Windows Vista

[j4f]

Ubuntu saves more battery....
The power savings in Ubuntu ain't that advanced, but it works.

[Abhi]

j4f, on Apr 21 2008, 05:32 PM, said:

Ubuntu saves more battery....
The power savings in Ubuntu ain't that advanced, but it works.

But how many companies do really use Ubuntu?

[M!W]

Well, Ubuntu is much younger than Windows but it's community is huge! And it's getting more and more into that business thing as it evolves.

[adrynalyne]

j4f, on Apr 21 2008, 12:02 PM, said:

Ubuntu saves more battery....
The power savings in Ubuntu ain't that advanced, but it works.

Check your info.

Its pretty common knowledge that Vista, even XP (XP is probably better by default, without tweaking) has better power management than Ubuntu.

Random bashing of Vista: Failed.

Here is a link of someone who actually does their homework instead of lame OS bashings on a message board:

http://www.phoronix....i...m=880&num=1

Fedora does better than Ubuntu, lmao. Now while some might say, well...PM in Ubuntu can be tweaked, well so can Windows. Vista gives considerable tweakage there.

This post has been edited by adrynalyne: 21 April 2008 - 01:15 PM

[adrynalyne]

Abhi, on Apr 21 2008, 12:12 PM, said:

j4f, on Apr 21 2008, 05:32 PM, said:

Ubuntu saves more battery....
The power savings in Ubuntu ain't that advanced, but it works.

But how many companies do really use Ubuntu?

How many companies are willing to tweak Ubuntu to get the same power management performance as Windows?


A big fat zero.

I had full intentions of going straight Ubuntu on my laptop, but the power management just isn't there, even with PowerTop.

Yet.

[pakistanipower]

Abhi, on Apr 21 2008, 06:02 AM, said:

pakistanipower, on Apr 21 2008, 05:30 AM, said:

ya good for big business. they should have just kept that option in business edition, not in home premium n ulitimate. i mean $11..for one year in household isn't worth the delay

but for $47000 thats alot tfs

Why, whats wrong with saving, even if it is just $11 for households?
Its not taking anything away...is it?
If you can save even $11 with the default settings, it should be more than welcome.

well doesn't it reduce the actual computer speed, because everytime i install vista, i always check the "performance" mode from the "power saving" mode, i heard in one of the guides that it increase speed.

so for $11 i rather get the performance, than saving $11..my 2 cent

[adrynalyne]

pakistanipower, on Apr 21 2008, 05:35 PM, said:

Abhi, on Apr 21 2008, 06:02 AM, said:

pakistanipower, on Apr 21 2008, 05:30 AM, said:

ya good for big business. they should have just kept that option in business edition, not in home premium n ulitimate. i mean $11..for one year in household isn't worth the delay

but for $47000 thats alot tfs

Why, whats wrong with saving, even if it is just $11 for households?
Its not taking anything away...is it?
If you can save even $11 with the default settings, it should be more than welcome.

well doesn't it reduce the actual computer speed, because everytime i install vista, i always check the "performance" mode from the "power saving" mode, i heard in one of the guides that it increase speed.

so for $11 i rather get the performance, than saving $11..my 2 cent

By default, it is dynamic. You will probably not notice the performance difference if the CPU is not running at 100%.

By default it ramps down to 50% speed when the CPU is idling, saving power and heat. XP can do the same, of course. So some things can be slowed down, sure, but its all tweakable.

For example, I have my own power profile. On battery, everything goes into low power mode, and the CPU drops down to 36% speed, which I have it locked in at. On power, it ramps everything up to max again.

For desktops, power savings arent really important, IMO. Of course, I also disagree that Vista will save 11 dollars a year in electricity over XP. XP has pretty decent power management with the right hardware, and by default is better than Vista, IMO. Not near as tweakable as Vista though. People would save more than that anyway by simply turning off monitors when not in use.

This post has been edited by adrynalyne: 21 April 2008 - 06:02 PM

[The Silent Warrior]

Quote

Aero graphics have no effect on overall power consumption.

Really? Then why Vista turns off Aero on laptops when battery is low?

[adrynalyne]

The Silent Warrior, on Apr 22 2008, 12:31 AM, said:

Quote

Aero graphics have no effect on overall power consumption.

Really? Then why Vista turns off Aero on laptops when battery is low?

It doesn't. The third party power management provided by the OEM on the laptop does.

By default, the only thing turned off by Vista PM is transparency, which is the real battery sucker. Even then, its only under the power saver profile.

[Freka]

Holy , I'm actually surprised.