Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 25th Aug 2005 17:26 UTC
For off Windows XP machines offer several options - including hibernate, stand by and shut down. However, many users don't know the difference. What's worse, however, is that applications and drivers can veto a user's decision to hibernate or similar. In Vista however, applications will be warned that a computer is entering sleep and have a second or two to save what ever they need to, but the programs won't get a say in whether the machine slumbers.
Thread beginning with comment 23362
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
That's because all you know is Windows and the Windows way of thinking. Be prepared to be amazed : Linux can do this without problem for all apps without recoding anything. My shutdown sequence uses this as a last resort to assure the FS are consistent before halting the machine. It's very simple actually, no unmounting involved : you just remount all the FS read-only !! And this is in Linux since several years already (if not from the beginning of ext2fs).
For you to be more amazed, it takes only the time needed for the FS to put himself in a consistent state, which is less than 1 second for all the FS at home (and I have 10+ ...).
Just one more point where Windows is years behind, by your own admission.
Good comments, though I doubt that they will listen.
It's amazing, isn't it? I get frustrated when people spend time dealing with already solved problems...or even go out of the way to defend them as if that's the right way to do things!