On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Dimi Paun wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 20:20 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >> No. Matthew already outlined exactly how he took his measurements. >> >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-January/msg02387.html > > The problem with this measurement is that it measures max wattage s/wattage/power/ there's no such thing as wattage. > when the cursor blinks. But for a typical user browsing, reading > documents, reading email, etc. the cursor blinks a tiny portion > of the time, only when they _write_ an email. I'd venture to say <10%. > > If that is so we're looking at a saving of about 0.2W for a typical > user. Is this enough to flip the default? > > Here's another proposal: during first boot prompt the user to > change the default to no-blink, explain the benefits, tell > them how to switch back if they don't care for it. This way > nobody will get frustrated or will be surprised their system > no longer works the way they expect it to. > > I know it is more work, but this affects an important UI behavior. > If 0.2W is not all that important to justify the work, lets drop it. > that, according to my calculation, means saving 1 tree every 23 days. If you promise you are going to plant a tree every 23 days, I think we should restart the discussions to consider this issue. Orcan -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
