Re: Cancel Sleep
Re: Cancel Sleep
- Subject: Re: Cancel Sleep
- From: Andrew James <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 10:58:36 +1030
I am surprised that now you know the mission of the project that
already exists and is used by thousands of users, you will not assist
in finding a notification call that could be useful in other projects
besides the Insomnia project as well.
You should also be aware that there is so many warnings strapped to
the programs it is even more scary then trying to over clock a
machine, and in the whole life of the project there has never been a
reported case of someone causing damage because everyone has seen the
warnings and understand the facts. As well as i am aware of the hotter
it gets the smaller the life span is, but if you remove the point of
people putting it into a bag the machine will be running in the same
way Apple intended except for the need of extra hardware.
So seriously maybe i should start a new topic for this problem since
everyone has a mixed view on this, and no one will answer the current
question that in reality has no effect on the sleep behavior of the
system. so lets repeat the question just so everyone is clear.....
the mission at the moment is to find a way to receive the
notification of the lid state changing that does not mix up with
the power state changes.
On 02/01/2008, at 7:00 AM, Michael Smith wrote:
On Jan 1, 2008, at 12:03 PM, Andrew James <email@hidden> wrote:
Ill try those other mailing lists, and id like to remind everybody
the
solution exists to a extent as i am a developer of Insomnia and
InsomniaX. However i would just like to take this back to basics and
see if anyone can cover the biggest problem.
So if everybody can forget just for a second of the main goal, the
mission at the moment is to find a way to receive the notification of
the lid state changing that does not mix up with the power state
changes.
No, this is not what you are trying to do at all.
What you are trying to do is establish a new mode of operation for
the system; one that is currently explicitly precluded.
Current Apple portables are *not* designed to run without cooling;
the Intel chipset generates too much heat even in its lowest power
mode for the system to survive operation without airflow. As a
consequence, what you are trying to do is to define a mode of
operation that is simply not safe; once the clamshell is closed,
users will assume the system can be put into a bag or under a pile
of stuff with no ventilation, and it will overheat.
Certain Apple portables do support running with the clamshell
closed, but with other constraints applied that make it clear that
the user intends for the system to be awake and that more or less
require that it have adequate access to cooling (keyboard attached,
external monitor attached, explicit wakeup after the clamshell is
closed).
The consequences of overheating include emergency system shutdown
(the most common and intended response to thermal distress), but can
also include accelerated aging of components (backlight, fixed and
optical disks, display, cosmetic surfaces) and more subtle effects.
The system is designed to deal with being overheated occasionally
and accidentally, but not as a routine matter of course, which is
what your new mode of operation will facilitate.
Are you terribly surprised that nobody wants to help you?
= Mike
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden