English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

There are many arguments, both pro and con, that I've been reading lately. What do you think?

Thank you for the ideas!

2007-09-23 09:55:59 · 4 answers · asked by Pacific Ocean 3 in Computers & Internet Other - Computers

4 answers

Yeah, there are pro/cons of this issue. On one hand, some think leaving a computer on all the time will cause parts to wear out sooner, and on the other, those who say it matters little this wearing out situation because before it ever gets to that point the computer is obsolete and it is time to get a new one anyway.

There are those who say turning off a system is important because it helps refresh the system, but others say that the idle time is important due to how Windows uses idle time to do houseworking tasks needed to keep a system in tip top shape.

Regardless of which side you fall on it is a good idea to occassionly reboot the system. This allows it to reset system configurations which would otherwise not be done. However, this also seems a bit pointless too, because after certain updates or installation of programs or hardware, or system configuration changes, a reboot is required to finish the task. So, this creates a reboot without doing so at a given time each week, or month, etc.

Today's computers are such well built and configured in such a manner that completely shutting down the system every night is really not needed any longer. With a monitors ability to be turned off with a button, you don't even need to worry about utility resources being wasted and running up a bill. After an individual has finished for the night, and either, puts the system into hypernation, sleep, or just leaves it on, and turns off the monitor, the system is fine and the electricity used very small if at all significant.

Sleep uses a bit more electricity than hybernation, but all in all each is a good way to leave the system. The system recovers quicker from sleep than hybernation, but the trade off is in the small amount of power saved from hybernation over sleep.

I was surprised to learn that it is a monitor which consumes the largest amount of electicity. A 17 inch monitor, left on 24/7 costs about $70.00 a year. While this may not sound like much if you only have one computer, if you are a business owner, it can run up the expense account considerably! If a business has ten computers, well, that is $700.00 a year! Just to run the monitors, not including the electricity the rest of the system uses.

I think it is perfectly acceptable to leave a system on. If you have an Always On Internet connection just ensure your system is behind a NAT router and a good firewall is used. If you are concerned about saving a few bucks on your electricity bill, turn off the monitor(s).

This is a good question because there IS still a lot of debate over which is the better way to handle a system. For each con there is a pro. So, it would be an individual preference which winds up driving how one chooses to deal with this issue. There isn't anything one way or the other which proves preferable.

2007-09-23 10:27:13 · answer #1 · answered by Serenity 7 · 4 0

I usually just log off, and turn my screen off. My computer is still on, just not "functioning"

2007-09-23 10:18:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

always on, unless there is tunderstorm out

2007-09-23 11:10:15 · answer #3 · answered by dagatedy_2000 3 · 2 0

i don't i turn it off

2007-09-23 11:11:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

fedest.com, questions and answers