On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:12:27AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > Micha Feigin wrote: > > No, but the cpu cycles required to handle all the overhead do take more > > power (more memory usually means someone is using it, otherwise it > > really is bloatware), and yes its the cpu that is causing the power > > consumption (and even if you do use accelerated graphics to reduce cpu > > work, then it would be the graphics card that takes to power, and newer > > laptop graphic chips can also scale power consumption according to usage) > > Now you're just spreading FUD. I could write a script that would load up > 200Mb of data and then just sit there calling sleep. Stuff loaded into RAM > doesn't equate to CPU consumption, sorry. >
Of course you could, but that wouldn't be very proper programing. Assuming proper coding it does imply in certain cases (and window managers usually fall into that category) on computational complexity. > -- > Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your > PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. > -------------------------------+--------------------------------------------- > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > This Mail Was Scanned By Mail-seCure System > at the Tel-Aviv University CC. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
