|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: jimpjimp Date: Dec 21, 2006 20:05
In sci.physics Morse rpa.com> wrote:
> specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
> news:r4nr54-utf.ln1@mail.specsol.com...>>
>> Haven't looked at TV's in 20 or 30 years?
>>
> Well I have- I used to service them and still do occasionally. Turning them
> off at the mains does not cause loss of user settings or channels.
>> If the TV has a CRT, when it is "off", it will have low voltage applied
>> to the CRT filament to reduce the warm up time.
>>
> I can't say I've ever seen a modern TV that keeps the CRT heaters running
> while on standby, apart from a really ancient Pye B/W portable I once came
> across. It would cause a considerable reduction in CRT life for no valid
> reason.
They don't run at full voltage when in standby.
|
| Show full article (2.84Kb) |
|
| | 5 Comments |
|
|
Author: IanAlIanAl Date: Dec 24, 2006 06:21
On Sun, 24 Dec 2006 12:16:28 +0000, Cynic yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
>On Sat, 23 Dec 2006 17:51:14 +0000, IanAl privacy.net> wrote:
>>>What do you call non-volatile memory?
>>
>>Capacitor-backed RAM? Only lasts a few days.
>>
>>Non-rechargeable battery backed RAM?...
|
| Show full article (1.56Kb) |
|
| | 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: CynicCynic Date: Dec 25, 2006 05:19
On Sun, 24 Dec 2006 13:26:58 +0000, IanAl privacy.net> wrote:
>>The modern version (for more than ten years) will support
>>more writes that you will reasonaly use in the lifetime of
>>the product.
>
>I think it's still only in the tens of thousands.
>
>Flash still needs 'wear levelling' routines, and often isn't used for
>things that change a lot like volume level or TV channel.
Assume 10000 writes (it's far greater these days).
How often will the average person change the TV channel frequency
setup on their TV set? Note that does *not* mean how often they
change the TV channel, but how often they perform a setup operation to
seach and store the available TV channels.
Multiply that by 10000 and see how long the EEPROM will last ...
--
Cynic
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: CynicCynic Date: Dec 25, 2006 05:21
On Sun, 24 Dec 2006 20:09:42 +0000, IanAl privacy.net> wrote:
>I think people who use computers realise they may have to be 'mucked
>about with' occasionally, and, in any case the instruction manual will
>undoubtedly explain how to replace the battery and the importance of
>saving the settings &c.
How many people are likely to still have the instruction manual for
their PC by the time the lithium battery gives out?
OTOH, how many people are likely to still have their *PC* by the time
the battery gives out?
--
Cynic
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: CynicCynic Date: Dec 25, 2006 05:25
On Sun, 24 Dec 2006 19:55:22 +0000, IanAl privacy.net> wrote:
>I mean it's rare to find an appliance that loses all its settings when
>you remove the power from it nowadays.
>
>>I absolutely abhor things with backup batteries buried in them.
>
>So do I - but what is the solution until they make non-volatile memory
>that doesn't wear out relatively quickly?
Unless there are settings that need to be saved for every power cycle,
EEPROMS have plenty sufficient write cycles to cope. How often do you
change the CMOS settings on your PC? Even if once a day, an EEPROM
will last for over 20 years!
From a design POV, the battery is necessary in order to maintain the
PC's real time clock, nothing else. It may be used for other things
seeing that it has to be in the design anyway.
--
Cynic
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: CynicCynic Date: Dec 25, 2006 05:29
On Sun, 24 Dec 2006 14:21:17 +0000, IanAl privacy.net> wrote:
>1) I've got a 1998 TV that a couple of years ago decided to forget the
>last volume setting and TV channel when switched to standby or powered
>off, so presumably there's a battery gone flat somewhere inside.
>
>2) I've got a 2006 audio amplifier that fails to remember the last
>volume change if switched off less than a few seconds later. So it
>must transfer the volume setting to flash when it thinks you're not
>going to fiddle with it any more. (This means that sometimes the
>volume unexpectedly blares out in the morning.)
>
>So there are still some issues associated with non-volatile memory.
But more due to bad design than availability of inexpensive solutions.
--
Cynic
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
