Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

No OFF button

Last response: in Home Theatre Legacy
Share
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 7:13:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Probably a stupid question. There is not an "ON/OFF" switch on Tivo
machine. The machine stays on and keeps writing/recycling the last 30-min
into harddrive. If I know for sure I am not going to need that, is there a
way to really let the machine deep sleep. The "SLEEP" function in the
Setting menu only seems to stop the output, but not the harddrive
activities.

Thanks

More about : button

Anonymous
April 14, 2005 7:57:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <WMv7e.2296$t85.786@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
"Way Lee" <wlee@qualcomm.com> wrote:

> Probably a stupid question. There is not an "ON/OFF" switch on Tivo
> machine. The machine stays on and keeps writing/recycling the last 30-min
> into harddrive. If I know for sure I am not going to need that, is there a
> way to really let the machine deep sleep. The "SLEEP" function in the
> Setting menu only seems to stop the output, but not the harddrive
> activities.


The machine may find something from a wishlist, or need to "phone home"
while you sleep, and thus is intended to always be left on.


>
> Thanks
April 14, 2005 8:27:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

"Way Lee" <wlee@qualcomm.com> wrote in
news:WMv7e.2296$t85.786@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:

> Probably a stupid question. There is not an "ON/OFF" switch on Tivo
> machine. The machine stays on and keeps writing/recycling the last
> 30-min into harddrive. If I know for sure I am not going to need that,
> is there a way to really let the machine deep sleep. The "SLEEP"
> function in the Setting menu only seems to stop the output, but not the
> harddrive activities.

There's no on/off switch for your toaster, fridge, or microwave either.
Like those devices, if you want the TiVo 100% completely off (and, like
those other devices, render it unable to be used for what it was designed
for) you need to unplug it.

--
Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past Knowledge
stile99@email.com. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is irrelevant.
I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be assimilated.
no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf is futile.
Related resources
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 9:22:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

I understand the need to keep machine on, for downloading stuff and such.
Just the part of keep writing the last 30-min bothers me. I know I am not
going to watch thoes cached 30min video, but the machine keeps the HD
spinning and spinning. Wouldn't it prolong the lifespan of HD if that
30-min can be suspended. That's the part I was wondering.

"Howard" <stile99@email.com.> wrote in message
news:Xns963874A2C52C0stile@129.250.170.81...
> "Way Lee" <wlee@qualcomm.com> wrote in
> news:WMv7e.2296$t85.786@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:
>
>> Probably a stupid question. There is not an "ON/OFF" switch on Tivo
>> machine. The machine stays on and keeps writing/recycling the last
>> 30-min into harddrive. If I know for sure I am not going to need that,
>> is there a way to really let the machine deep sleep. The "SLEEP"
>> function in the Setting menu only seems to stop the output, but not the
>> harddrive activities.
>
> There's no on/off switch for your toaster, fridge, or microwave either.
> Like those devices, if you want the TiVo 100% completely off (and, like
> those other devices, render it unable to be used for what it was designed
> for) you need to unplug it.
>
> --
> Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past Knowledge
> stile99@email.com. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is irrelevant.
> I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be assimilated.
> no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf is futile.
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 9:22:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Way Lee wrote:
> I understand the need to keep machine on, for downloading stuff and such.
> Just the part of keep writing the last 30-min bothers me. I know I am not
> going to watch thoes cached 30min video, but the machine keeps the HD
> spinning and spinning. Wouldn't it prolong the lifespan of HD if that
> 30-min can be suspended. That's the part I was wondering.

Maybe, but not significantly, and not with any consistancy. As others
have pointed out, it's even possible that starting and stopping the
platters is harder on the drive than just keeping it spinning.

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 9:22:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Way Lee wrote:
> Wouldn't it prolong the lifespan of HD if that
> 30-min can be suspended.

No.
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 9:26:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

>I understand the need to keep machine on, for downloading stuff and such.
>Just the part of keep writing the last 30-min bothers me. I know I am not
>going to watch thoes cached 30min video, but the machine keeps the HD
>spinning and spinning. Wouldn't it prolong the lifespan of HD if that
>30-min can be suspended. That's the part I was wondering.

Starting and stopping a hard disk is not particularly good for
some of the mechanical parts of a hard disk, like bearings.

Gordon L. Burditt
April 14, 2005 9:46:15 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

I *believe* (not 100% positive here) that if you put it into standby, it
stops recording the 30 minute buffer.

Way Lee wrote:
> I understand the need to keep machine on, for downloading stuff and
> such. Just the part of keep writing the last 30-min bothers me. I
> know I am not going to watch thoes cached 30min video, but the
> machine keeps the HD spinning and spinning. Wouldn't it prolong the
> lifespan of HD if that 30-min can be suspended. That's the part I
> was wondering.
> "Howard" <stile99@email.com.> wrote in message
> news:Xns963874A2C52C0stile@129.250.170.81...
>> "Way Lee" <wlee@qualcomm.com> wrote in
>> news:WMv7e.2296$t85.786@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:
>>
>>> Probably a stupid question. There is not an "ON/OFF" switch on Tivo
>>> machine. The machine stays on and keeps writing/recycling the last
>>> 30-min into harddrive. If I know for sure I am not going to need
>>> that, is there a way to really let the machine deep sleep. The
>>> "SLEEP" function in the Setting menu only seems to stop the output,
>>> but not the harddrive activities.
>>
>> There's no on/off switch for your toaster, fridge, or microwave
>> either. Like those devices, if you want the TiVo 100% completely off
>> (and, like those other devices, render it unable to be used for what
>> it was designed for) you need to unplug it.
>>
>> --
>> Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past
>> Knowledge stile99@email.com. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is
>> irrelevant. I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be
>> assimilated. no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf
>> is futile.
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 9:46:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Rob wrote:
> I *believe* (not 100% positive here) that if you put it into standby, it
> stops recording the 30 minute buffer.

Actually I believe that that is correct for a Directivo, but not for an
SA Tivo DVR.

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 10:25:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

The standalone TiVo will record the buffer in Standby mode.
A DirecTV DVR with TiVo doesn't record either buffer in Standby.

"Rob" <rob@nospam.com> wrote in message news:H%x7e.26020$9i7.3007@trnddc04...
> I *believe* (not 100% positive here) that if you put it into standby, it
> stops recording the 30 minute buffer.
>
> Way Lee wrote:
> > I understand the need to keep machine on, for downloading stuff and
> > such. Just the part of keep writing the last 30-min bothers me. I
> > know I am not going to watch thoes cached 30min video, but the
> > machine keeps the HD spinning and spinning. Wouldn't it prolong the
> > lifespan of HD if that 30-min can be suspended. That's the part I
> > was wondering.
> > "Howard" <stile99@email.com.> wrote in message
> > news:Xns963874A2C52C0stile@129.250.170.81...
> >> "Way Lee" <wlee@qualcomm.com> wrote in
> >> news:WMv7e.2296$t85.786@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:
> >>
> >>> Probably a stupid question. There is not an "ON/OFF" switch on Tivo
> >>> machine. The machine stays on and keeps writing/recycling the last
> >>> 30-min into harddrive. If I know for sure I am not going to need
> >>> that, is there a way to really let the machine deep sleep. The
> >>> "SLEEP" function in the Setting menu only seems to stop the output,
> >>> but not the harddrive activities.
> >>
> >> There's no on/off switch for your toaster, fridge, or microwave
> >> either. Like those devices, if you want the TiVo 100% completely off
> >> (and, like those other devices, render it unable to be used for what
> >> it was designed for) you need to unplug it.
> >>
> >> --
April 15, 2005 2:59:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

"Way Lee" <wlee@qualcomm.com> wrote in
news:kFx7e.3406$dT4.1923@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com:

> I understand the need to keep machine on, for downloading stuff and
> such. Just the part of keep writing the last 30-min bothers me. I know
> I am not going to watch thoes cached 30min video, but the machine keeps
> the HD spinning and spinning. Wouldn't it prolong the lifespan of HD if
> that 30-min can be suspended. That's the part I was wondering.

No. Although you will get people (who don't understand the technology
behind hard drives) to argue, the fact is that running the hard drive
constantly is doing NO HARM, and it is constant starting and stopping that
would cause damage.

--
Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past Knowledge
stile99@email.com. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is irrelevant.
I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be assimilated.
no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf is futile.
Anonymous
April 15, 2005 5:55:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:22:24 GMT, Way Lee wrote:

> I understand the need to keep machine on, for downloading stuff and such.
> Just the part of keep writing the last 30-min bothers me. I know I am not
> going to watch thoes cached 30min video, but the machine keeps the HD
> spinning and spinning. Wouldn't it prolong the lifespan of HD if that
> 30-min can be suspended. That's the part I was wondering.

No. Network servers keep their hard drives running 24/7. The power surge
experienced when a hard drive is started up frequently is more destructive
to it than running it constantly, assuming the drive doesn't overheat due to
poor air circulation.
Anonymous
April 15, 2005 8:50:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

The sleep function on a DirecTivo will stop the 30 minute buffer.
The drive will still be spinning, although any disk activity is just new
downloaded guide data and db maintenance.
I am not sure of the SA units.

--
Steven BerkHolz
Send to Domain TESCOGroup dot com, username SB

Note: you may also want to know that you should never send mail to:
blacklist-my-ip@admins.ws
info@dautrap.uceprotect.net
listme@sorbs.net
spamtrap@sandes.dk
spamtrap@stop.mail-abuse.org
spamtrap@frankenbiker.de
spamtrap@blars.org
"Way Lee" <wlee@qualcomm.com> wrote in message
news:WMv7e.2296$t85.786@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> Probably a stupid question. There is not an "ON/OFF" switch on Tivo
> machine. The machine stays on and keeps writing/recycling the last 30-min
> into harddrive. If I know for sure I am not going to need that, is there
> a way to really let the machine deep sleep. The "SLEEP" function in the
> Setting menu only seems to stop the output, but not the harddrive
> activities.
>
> Thanks
>
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 8:58:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Yes, "constant starting and stopping" can cause damage. And
then we apply numbers as anyone who understands technology
must always do. A lowest number of "starting and stopping"
was 40,000 power cycles on an IBM drive. That means "starting
and stopping" seven times, every day (without interruption)
for .... over 15 years. Who cared?

Some people just get out of bed every day, find this
starting difficult, and then assume starting is also
destructive to hard drives. Yes, "starting and stopping" is
destructive. And then we apply numbers - that say the damage
from "starting and stopping" is completely irrelevant.

One who "understands the technology behind hard drives)
first learns the numbers. Others who claim they know are
simply hyping personal emotions as if it were science fact.
Don't worry about damage from "starting and stopping" as made
obvious by they numbers and manufacturer's own experience.

Howard wrote:
> No. Although you will get people (who don't understand the technology
> behind hard drives) to argue, the fact is that running the hard drive
> constantly is doing NO HARM, and it is constant starting and stopping
> that would cause damage.
>
> --
> Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past Knowledge
> stile99@email.com. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is irrelevant.
> I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be assimilated.
> no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf is futile.
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 9:01:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

So maybe explain in technical terms where the 'so
destructive' power surge comes from? And maybe explain what
that inrush current limiter is doing. And maybe provide
manufacturer's spec numbers to prove that " power surge
experienced when a hard drive is started up frequently is more
destructive". I smell human emotion rather than science fact
being promoted. But the most damning fact - no numbers. Its
called speculation as proof of junk science reasoning.

Strongbox wrote:
> No. Network servers keep their hard drives running 24/7. The
> power surge experienced when a hard drive is started up frequently
> is more destructive to it than running it constantly, assuming the
> drive doesn't overheat due to poor air circulation.
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 9:53:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

OMG! What kind of drugs are you on? Rational arguments can be made for
leaving drives running versus shutting them off, but your assertions are
an illogical mess!

> Yes, "constant starting and stopping" can cause damage. And
> then we apply numbers as anyone who understands technology
> must always do. A lowest number of "starting and stopping"
> was 40,000 power cycles on an IBM drive. That means "starting
> and stopping" seven times, every day (without interruption)
> for .... over 15 years. Who cared?

Can you provide verifiable sources for these so-called "numbers"? It
would also be helpful if they were independent, not part of promotional
material from a vendor pusing its products. Beyond that, laboratory
studies are ideal conditions which generally overstate real-world results.

>
> Some people just get out of bed every day, find this
> starting difficult, and then assume starting is also
> destructive to hard drives. Yes, "starting and stopping" is
> destructive. And then we apply numbers - that say the damage
> from "starting and stopping" is completely irrelevant.

There are real world reasons that rotating machinery can be more harshly
impacted from cold starts than from continuous operation. I worked on
bearings in jet engines for several years, so I have 1st hand
experience. The harshest wear cycle of an oil cooled and lubricated
bearing is start-up, when the bearing has yet to build up a steady-state
film of lubricant maintained by the pressure of centripetal force. This
applies to journal bearings especially (which rely solely on oil
pressure) but applies to ball and roller bearings as well. Also, many
times oil pressure is supplied by the rotation of the engine
(often-times the oil reservoir or source is maintained at the center of
rotation and centripetal force is used to deliver it at pressure to the
bearings), so that there is only residual oil present at start-up.

Hard drives use bearings at the hub, so there is definitely precedent
for start/stop cycles to adversely affect their operation beyond some
absurd "getting out of bed" analogy. The read/write heads also use what
could be interpreted as a type of journal bearing, only using air as a
lubricant, rather than oil. It would not be improbable that head
crashes are more likely to occur at startup/shutdown when the air
pressure supporting the head is at its lowest.

Does this mean that it's better to leave a drive running rather than
shutting it down? Not necessarily, that would require comparing the
risk of a head crash/bearing failure during a start/stop cycle to the
wear rate of the rotational hardware in a drive, which is beyond any of
us to do without considerable time and hardware, and likely varies quite
a bit from drive to drive. It would also be difficult considering the
probabilistic nature of hard drive failures.

> One who "understands the technology behind hard drives)
> first learns the numbers. Others who claim they know are
> simply hyping personal emotions as if it were science fact.
> Don't worry about damage from "starting and stopping" as made
> obvious by they numbers and manufacturer's own experience.
>

You have said nothing to make "obvious" such a conclusion, only made
obvious your incomplete comprehension of the factors involved.

Randy S.
April 18, 2005 12:11:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

"Howard" <stile99@email.com.> wrote in message
news:Xns963874A2C52C0stile@129.250.170.81...
>
> There's no on/off switch for your toaster, fridge, or microwave either.
> Like those devices, if you want the TiVo 100% completely off (and, like
> those other devices, render it unable to be used for what it was designed
> for) you need to unplug it.
>

My toaster isn't turned on untill I push the lever down and when it's done
it automatically turns itself off. When turned off it uses zero
electricity.
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 12:35:47 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Demonstrated was how myths are created. Others claim power
cycling is destructive - using speculation. Not one could be
bothered to provide a single number.

All hard drive manufactures provide numbers for life
expectancy and power cycling. No numbers were posted here: as
junk scientists routinely do. Randy S posted:
> Hard drives use bearings at the hub, so there is definitely
> precedent for start/stop cycles to adversely affect their
> operation ...
This only proves that a hard drive might fail after power
cycling every day for 10,000 years. I noted how junk
scientists speculate without numbers. Then Randy S goes right
ahead again; using personal speculations as if they were facts
- without any numbers. His only proof? Personal insults.

Randy S - previously demonstrated was how those without
basic knowledge create facts from speculation: provide no
numbers. Then you went right ahead and did it again. Clearly
you are only a mechanic. You provided no numbers for jet
engine bearings either. Somehow you just know - which is why
we are happy the engineers are making the decisions for you.
What do they first learn - and you do not? The numbers.

Using Randy S reasoning, then jet engine bearings will
immediately fail after only a few cold starts. Since he
posted no numbers, then this conclusion is accurate based upon
what Randy S posted. We must never power off jet engines - if
Randy S logic is valid. Or we cite Randy S as a purveyor of
junk science reasoning.

Most drives spec around 100,000 power cycles. This one IBM
drive had a particularly low number of 40,000 cycles.
Believe power cycling to be so destructive? Then post numbers
without wildly speculating. And unlike Randy S, learn to post
numbers of science without silly insults.

Claims about power cycling are classic junk science
reasoning when the author provides no numbers; never even
bothered to cite specifications from disk drive
manufacturers. No numbers means he is posting junk science -
old wive's tales - myths.

"OMG" is how drug addicts reply - rather than post numbers.

"Randy S." wrote:
> OMG! What kind of drugs are you on? Rational arguments can be made for
> leaving drives running versus shutting them off, but your assertions are
> an illogical mess!
> ...
>
> Can you provide verifiable sources for these so-called "numbers"? It
> would also be helpful if they were independent, not part of promotional
> material from a vendor pusing its products. Beyond that, laboratory
> studies are ideal conditions which generally overstate real-world
> results.
> ...
>
> There are real world reasons that rotating machinery can be more harshly
> impacted from cold starts than from continuous operation. I worked on
> bearings in jet engines for several years, so I have 1st hand
> experience. The harshest wear cycle of an oil cooled and lubricated
> bearing is start-up, when the bearing has yet to build up a steady-state
> film of lubricant maintained by the pressure of centripetal force. This
> applies to journal bearings especially (which rely solely on oil
> pressure) but applies to ball and roller bearings as well. Also, many
> times oil pressure is supplied by the rotation of the engine
> (often-times the oil reservoir or source is maintained at the center of
> rotation and centripetal force is used to deliver it at pressure to the
> bearings), so that there is only residual oil present at start-up.
>
> Hard drives use bearings at the hub, so there is definitely precedent
> for start/stop cycles to adversely affect their operation beyond some
> absurd "getting out of bed" analogy. The read/write heads also use what
> could be interpreted as a type of journal bearing, only using air as a
> lubricant, rather than oil. It would not be improbable that head
> crashes are more likely to occur at startup/shutdown when the air
> pressure supporting the head is at its lowest.
>
> Does this mean that it's better to leave a drive running rather than
> shutting it down? Not necessarily, that would require comparing the
> risk of a head crash/bearing failure during a start/stop cycle to the
> wear rate of the rotational hardware in a drive, which is beyond any of
> us to do without considerable time and hardware, and likely varies quite
> a bit from drive to drive. It would also be difficult considering the
> probabilistic nature of hard drive failures.
>
>
> You have said nothing to make "obvious" such a conclusion, only made
> obvious your incomplete comprehension of the factors involved.
>
> Randy S.
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 2:36:13 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

w_tom wrote:
> Demonstrated was how myths are created. Others claim power
> cycling is destructive - using speculation. Not one could be
> bothered to provide a single number.

As opposed to your one set of completely unsubstantiated numbers from an
unverified source? Care to try again, Yoda?

I provided no specific numbers because I didn't design these bearing and
have no knowledge of the design requirements, load limits, and lifecycle
costs associated with them. Given those numbers I could likely work up
some numbers, but they would be strictly probabilistic due to the
failure profile of this type of design. An extensive stochastic
analysis would be required to arrive at some sort of probability
function of failure, and I don't see you offering to pay my salary for that.

> All hard drive manufactures provide numbers for life
> expectancy and power cycling. No numbers were posted here: as
> junk scientists routinely do. Randy S posted:
>
>>Hard drives use bearings at the hub, so there is definitely
>>precedent for start/stop cycles to adversely affect their
>>operation ...
>
> This only proves that a hard drive might fail after power
> cycling every day for 10,000 years. I noted how junk
> scientists speculate without numbers. Then Randy S goes right
> ahead again; using personal speculations as if they were facts
> - without any numbers. His only proof? Personal insults.

You make conclusions from nothing. What I said *proved* nothing, and I
did not say it did. All I set out to demonstrate was that you *also*
proved nothing. Simply stating something as fact does not make it so.
How does saying a hard drive might be more prone to failure with
frequent power cycling somehow bring up some assinine 10,000 years
number? That's your junk number not mine!

> Randy S - previously demonstrated was how those without
> basic knowledge create facts from speculation: provide no
> numbers. Then you went right ahead and did it again. Clearly
> you are only a mechanic. You provided no numbers for jet
> engine bearings either. Somehow you just know - which is why
> we are happy the engineers are making the decisions for you.
> What do they first learn - and you do not? The numbers.

4 years of undergrad work in aerospace and mechanical engineering and 4
more in graduate engineering work makes me more than a mechanic, thank
you. I didn't *maintain* bearings in jet engines, I designed them for 4
years after my undergrad degree. Besides, that's an assinine statement
as well. I worked besides line mechanics with 30 years of experience
who knew a *hell* of a lot about how bearings worked and how they failed
without having a college degree in engineering. I'd take advice from
any one of them well before I'd take yours.

> Using Randy S reasoning, then jet engine bearings will
> immediately fail after only a few cold starts. Since he
> posted no numbers, then this conclusion is accurate based upon
> what Randy S posted. We must never power off jet engines - if
> Randy S logic is valid. Or we cite Randy S as a purveyor of
> junk science reasoning.

? I said no such thing. We designed engine bearings taking start/stop
cycles into consideration, they were one of the largest causes of wear
in the lifecycle. The useful lifetime calculation for an engine bearing
included *both* the engine run time *and* the number of start/stop
cycles it had experienced. The relative weighting of those factors
would vary between applications, but they are both certainly significant.

> Most drives spec around 100,000 power cycles. This one IBM
> drive had a particularly low number of 40,000 cycles.
> Believe power cycling to be so destructive? Then post numbers
> without wildly speculating. And unlike Randy S, learn to post
> numbers of science without silly insults.

And I you before to provide some verifiable numbers, preferably
independent and unbiased. By refusing to do so you have basically
proven that you are making these numbers up. I see no reason to believe
otherwise.

How about I take literally 20 seconds and google bearing wear start-up?
Hmm, look what the first link leads to:
http://www.bearings.machinedesign.com/guiEdits/Content/...


Let's take a quote, shall we?

"Hydrodynamic bearings wear very slowly. Wear occurs during start-up and
slowdown when speed is too low to produce sufficient fluid pressure to
support the bearing surfaces on a lubricant film."

Wow! Where have I heard a statement like that before? Maybe in my last
post?

> Claims about power cycling are classic junk science
> reasoning when the author provides no numbers; never even
> bothered to cite specifications from disk drive
> manufacturers. No numbers means he is posting junk science -
> old wive's tales - myths.
>
> "OMG" is how drug addicts reply - rather than post numbers.

If this is true, why don't you at least *attempt* to refute the logic I
presented? The scary thing is that it's not even just logic, this comes
from several years of work in the field. Why don't you ask an
automobile mechanic or engineer at what point does most wear and tear on
an automobile engine occur? They'll confirm that it is at start-up,
before the oil pump can provide enough oil pressure to circulate
lubricant in the engine. Take a look at this page:

http://engineparts.com/motorhead/techstuff/bearingfailu...

Notice how, at startup, the shaft and the race are physically in
contact? This is when 80-90% of wear occurs. Once started, the oil
wedge generation by rotation seperates the parts and has an extremely
low rate of wear.

Engines that are designed to cycle often (like your typical car engine)
have to be designed with bearings that can take a lot more wear, or can
be easily and more often replaced. Engines that operate continuously
(like turbine generators) have far fewer start/stop cycles and can be
designed with much tighter clearances and lower wear profiles. This can
increase efficiency greatly.

Can you even *name* the parts of a bearing? Can you tell me the
difference between a ball, roller, and journal bearing? Can you tell me
where you would use a roller bearing in place of a ball bearing, and
why? How about a caged vs. a cageless design? Can you actually
demonstrate any knowledge in this field at all other than your so-called
*junk* science? I'm afraid you're just another Internet wacko who
subscribes to innumerable conspiracy theories, I suppose you'll be
telling us when the aliens will be landing next.

Startup/shutdown cycles*are* uncontrovertably a factor in bearing life.
Are they significant enough to avoid turning a pc off at night? I
can't say, and, guess what, neither can you. In fact the answer may
differ even from drive to drive. But stop feeding us this drivel about
how somehow *YOU* have the answer.

Randy S.
April 18, 2005 5:50:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

w_tom <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in news:426300E3.F3180654@hotmail.com:

> Demonstrated was how myths are created. Others claim power
> cycling is destructive - using speculation. Not one could be
> bothered to provide a single number.

You don't even register on the troll scale. I would plonk you, but why waste
the effort? You'll have gotten bored and wandered off by the end of the
week.

--
Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past Knowledge
stile99@email.com. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is irrelevant.
I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be assimilated.
no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf is futile.
April 18, 2005 7:17:20 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

* Howard wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
> w_tom <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in news:426300E3.F3180654@hotmail.com:

>> Demonstrated was how myths are created. Others claim power
>> cycling is destructive - using speculation. Not one could be
>> bothered to provide a single number.

> You don't even register on the troll scale. I would plonk you, but why waste
> the effort? You'll have gotten bored and wandered off by the end of the
> week.

No matter the news group, if you mention something having to do with
power w_tom will be there. Try it some time. Pick a news group and start
a thread about electricity in the home. Give it 2 to 4 days tops.

--
David
If it's not in the computer, it doesn't exist.
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 5:49:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 17:01:44 -0400, w_tom wrote:

> So maybe explain in technical terms where the 'so
> destructive' power surge comes from? And maybe explain what
> that inrush current limiter is doing. And maybe provide
> manufacturer's spec numbers to prove that " power surge
> experienced when a hard drive is started up frequently is more
> destructive". I smell human emotion rather than science fact
> being promoted. But the most damning fact - no numbers. Its
> called speculation as proof of junk science reasoning.
>

Motors will experience inrush current when started, since the back-EMF
generated by the motor windings is not there yet to limit the current. It
works simular to the cold vs. warm resistance function of a light bulb (most
light bulb failures occur when turning them on). Current limiters can and
do help this problem, but there is still inrush current none the less.

The manufacturers don't spec this effect since they know most people fall
into one of two catagories; 1) Those who use their PCs very little, so the
HD doesn't collect a lot of on-air time during the life of the PC, and 2)
Those who are heavy, must have the greatest and latest, users who cycle out
the PCs and/or HDs long before they reach the end of their useful life.

Although the hard drives are designed to meet their life specs while taking
into account a reasonable amount of cold starts, Way Lee asked if the
lifespan of the HD would be prolonged if it was turned off and on to avoid
the 30 minute cache instead of letting it run continuosly. The answer is
still no.
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 5:49:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> Although the hard drives are designed to meet their life specs while taking
> into account a reasonable amount of cold starts, Way Lee asked if the
> lifespan of the HD would be prolonged if it was turned off and on to avoid
> the 30 minute cache instead of letting it run continuosly. The answer is
> still no.

Well, I would quibble that the answer is "possibly yes, but not to any
significant or repeatable amount", but the end result is the same, it's
not worth shutting it off to save anything (other than a bit of power
maybe).

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 9:23:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Nice to know motor technology is same today as it was so
many decades ago. Still, where are the numbers? For that
matter, concepts of back EMF do not explain damage on power
up. It explains damage due to too low line voltage. Again,
all that power up transition is nice. But with experience
under your belt, failure during startup is more often a result
of damage done earlier during 'hours of operation'. Damage
created by too many hours of operation or operation under
excessively low voltage can appear later as a startup failure.

Classic junk science reasoning is why light bulbs fail. The
naive assume failure is from temperature transition during
power cycling. If true, then orange stop light signals would
fail as often as red and green. But instead we first learn
both theory and numbers from light bulb manufacturers. At
minimum, you should have first consulted the industry bible -
IES Lighting Handbook, an industry benchmark. This is my
polite way of putting into your face a fact. I have extensive
knowledge on these topics, in part, because I never believed
anyone or any source that does not provide the numbers. It is
probable that I was doing this stuff before you even existed.

The IES does provide numbers. Light bulbs are damaged by
hours of operation, voltage (which determines filament
temperature), and vibration (when filament is hot). IES even
provide the exponential equations to calculate this life
expectancy using numbers such as voltage and hours of
operation. Power cycling only appears on a list created by
junk science reasoning. Notice when a light bulb fails.
Often the vaporized filament is observed hours before that
bulb failure. Dark spots on the inside glass created by
damage from too many hours of operation or excessive voltage.
Damage so extensive that the bulb may even fail due to a very
gentle shock called power on.

Manufacturers for disk drives and other computer equipment
do provide numbers for power cycling. They just don't bother
to make those numbers available where human eyes glaze over
when the numbers appear. Power cycling is destructive only in
myths. Myths because so many 'experts' just know without
first obtaining numbers. All disk drives have a power cycle
spec. They also have an hours of operation number. I cited
the IBM drive because it was a lowest power cycling number.
So low that it significantly caught my attention. Drive was
speced for only 40000 power cycles.

Disk drive bearing wear is mostly from hours of operation.
The constant heat and vibration of use is destructive - not
power cycling. Vibration and the resulting heat being a
problem to life expectancy. Ball park numbers - the drive
that makes more noise will tend to be the drive with earliest
mechanical failure. Vibration being a most destructive
force. But again the paragraph must be tempered by numbers.
If one power cycles every five minutes for 1 year, then power
cycling could be destructive. How many hours of operation is
that drive rated for? If the poster does not provide a
number, then he cannot provide a definitive answer - as others
have done here. No numbers means junk science reasoning.

Will Way Lee's disk drive life be prolonged if he powers off
every day? Yes. For disk drives, the most destructive
effects tend to be hours of operation. However and again,
that answer does not provide numbers and can be 100% different
if his operation (number of hours on and off) is different
from assumptions I am making. Conclusion can vary even for
different model disk drives.

But again, no responsible person here could answer his
question as some here did without those numbers. More often,
using the drive for only one hour every day (one power cycle
and one hour of operation) will prolong most disk drives
significantly. Why? Power cycling is not anywhere near as
destructive as was hyped here. Most often a 30 minute power
cycle every day will not impact the drive's life expectancy
consider other factors such as 'becoming obsolete in 8 years'.

So who cares. Leaving it one or power cycling it will mean
the drive may die well after it has been replaced. The drive
will be obsolete long before it should fail. Should you want
a Tivo drive for 15 years, then the answer must be tempered by
manufacturer's numbers for hours of operation and power
cycling. Generally, disk drive failure is more often due to
hours of operation.

One final point. What so often causes electronics failure?
Power cycling - that is also called normal operation. Those
transistors that drive a motor or operate inside a
microprocessor do not stay at the same temperature. They
temperature cycle greatly during normal operation. The point
of transistor switching consumes so much energy that the
transistor junction even transmits infrared light during
switching. If you believe power cycling to be so destructive,
then turn digital electronics off. Normal operation is
constant power cycling. Destructive thermal transitions are
constant during normal operation. In the early days of
transistors, one specification was the transistor's number of
switching transitions. Once the number of transitions in a
transistor was significant enough to be speced.

Power cycling inside a microprocessor is particularly
extreme. A microprocessor will go from less than 1 amp of
power to tens of amps - in microseconds. Why is this power
cycle so destructive? The time of transition - microseconds -
means normal microprocessor operation has extensive power
cycling stress (and junction temperature changes) during
something called normal operation. Myth purveyors instead
assume transistors stay at same temperatures during normal
operation. They assume because they don't have numbers.

But again, have I provided anything to draw a single and
definitive conclusion? No. Obviously not. I have left out
the numbers. I have only provided enough information for the
enemies among us - the junk scientists - to turn wild
speculation into political statements.

Anyone who provided Way Lee with a definitive answer was
simply lying to everyone.

In the meantime, learn from things observed every day - the
traffic light bulb. Power cycling does not cause light bulb
failure. Bulb that fails most often (and are therefore most
often replaced with LEDs) is the bulb with most hours of
operation. Light bulb life expectancy is measured in same
hours of operation whether it power cycles in a traffic light
or remains on constantly outside the doorway. Only myth
purveyors using junk science reasoning say that light bulb
life expectancy is shortened (significantly) by power
cycling. When one thinks (for so many decades) like an
product person, then one first demands the numbers. Only a
scum politician or junk scientist would rationalize a
conclusion without numbers.

No numbers means junk science reasoning. In this thread
were too many junk scientists promoting power cycling as most
destructive - only because they knew - numbers be damned.
That explanation about back EMF in a motor tells us zero about
when a motor might fail. But then back EMF and motor damage
is more important in operation under excessively low voltage.

Strongbox wrote:
> Motors will experience inrush current when started, since the back-EMF
> generated by the motor windings is not there yet to limit the current. It
> works simular to the cold vs. warm resistance function of a light bulb (most
> light bulb failures occur when turning them on). Current limiters can and
> do help this problem, but there is still inrush current none the less.
>
> The manufacturers don't spec this effect since they know most people fall
> into one of two catagories; 1) Those who use their PCs very little, so the
> HD doesn't collect a lot of on-air time during the life of the PC, and 2)
> Those who are heavy, must have the greatest and latest, users who cycle out
> the PCs and/or HDs long before they reach the end of their useful life.
>
> Although the hard drives are designed to meet their life specs while taking
> into account a reasonable amount of cold starts, Way Lee asked if the
> lifespan of the HD would be prolonged if it was turned off and on to avoid
> the 30 minute cache instead of letting it run continuosly. The answer is
> still no.
April 19, 2005 1:51:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

w_tom <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in news:42642554.7DBEB9CE@hotmail.com:

> The IES does provide numbers. Light bulbs are damaged by
> hours of operation, voltage (which determines filament
> temperature), and vibration (when filament is hot). IES even

We've already established you're not worth responding to, and despite your
claims to the contrary have little if any actual knowledge, but I just have
to point out that you are comparing light bulb filaments to actual moving
parts. People can make their own decision as to how reliable you and your
'information' are, but as for me, I wouldn't be surprised to see you
compare an internal combustion engine with a maple leaf next.

--
Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past Knowledge
stile99@email.com. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is irrelevant.
I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be assimilated.
no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf is futile.
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 3:08:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Thanks for all the input provided.

When I purchased this Tivo DVR last week, I expect to use it as a big VHS
recoder (80G is plenty to me) which I can watch while it records (You can't
do that with VHS recorder). I expect myself to program ahead of time and
machine should wake itself up couple of minutes before that so it does the
job I expect. I view the 30min loop as a bonus but I felt I might not have
a need to it. Will I power down the machine? No way, as it defeats the
purpose of a big VHS recorder, and it doesn't have that OFF button. Will it
waste power, I assume so. But I won't return the machine just because of
it.

Thanks for the input, and I am sure I will enjoy this machine for part of
its features. And I like the TV guide, even though I only have the 3-day
option.
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 3:08:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Way Lee wrote:
> Thanks for all the input provided.
>
> When I purchased this Tivo DVR last week, I expect to use it as a big VHS
> recoder (80G is plenty to me) which I can watch while it records (You can't
> do that with VHS recorder). I expect myself to program ahead of time and
> machine should wake itself up couple of minutes before that so it does the
> job I expect. I view the 30min loop as a bonus but I felt I might not have
> a need to it. Will I power down the machine? No way, as it defeats the
> purpose of a big VHS recorder, and it doesn't have that OFF button. Will it
> waste power, I assume so. But I won't return the machine just because of
> it.
>
> Thanks for the input, and I am sure I will enjoy this machine for part of
> its features. And I like the TV guide, even though I only have the 3-day
> option.
>
>

Very reasonable conclusions, I congratulate you on being able to use
your head and common sense and managing to pull some reason out of all
the bullcrap flying around ;-).

Randy S.
!