Just came across this site today. Works like Google, but its all black.. Blackle[1] is powered by Google Custom Search. More info [2].
[2] http://www.blackle.com/about/
Amit Joshi wrote:
Just came across this site today. Works like Google, but its all black.. Blackle[1] is powered by Google Custom Search. More info [2].
AFAIK Blackle is just wishful thinking because:
1. Keeping the monitor black might sometimes work for CRT's but then are all internet searches done on CRT's
2. Blackle site cannot compare with Google in terms of search speed, hence we might just as well as use Google
3. I am not sure of this, but if guys at blackle were so concerned about the "whiteness" then why not just write a plugin / addon for browsers to do the conversion at the client end rather than put on a whole server / site to do it
Regards Surya
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 12:47 PM, Surya Pratap pratap.surya@gmail.comwrote:
Amit Joshi wrote:
Just came across this site today. Works like Google, but its all black.. Blackle[1] is powered by Google Custom Search. More info [2].
AFAIK Blackle is just wishful thinking because:
- Keeping the monitor black might sometimes work for CRT's but then are
all internet searches done on CRT's
- Blackle site cannot compare with Google in terms of search speed,
hence we might just as well as use Google
- I am not sure of this, but if guys at blackle were so concerned about
the "whiteness" then why not just write a plugin / addon for browsers to do the conversion at the client end rather than put on a whole server / site to do it
Hi,
There's already a Firefox extension by the name "stylish". It is customizable on a site to site basis. For example, suppose we want to make Google look all black, we can use the "darkoogle" plugin and so on. The Blackle guys use Google Custom Search. Ads are displayed whenever we try to search something on Blackle, as a result revenue is generated for Blackle. So basically it is a means of earning some money while doing some good. I like the idea of energy saving though. I don't think LCDs are very commonplace in India, so definitely some amount of power will be saved. These days, every bit helps. :)
Regards, Amit Joshi
On Tuesday 07 Oct 2008 13:59, Amit Joshi wrote:
LCDs are very commonplace in India, so definitely some amount of power will be saved. These days, every bit helps. :)
Typical hare brained costing. Energy savings have to be measured end to end to have any impact. while most schemes might save you some money in recurring energy costs, these saving methods are shifting the "saved" amount to some other place and you evantually wind up paying more and polluting more. The real requirement is consume less and consume only what can be replenished. But that involves a lot of hardship, so lets use black backgrouds and sms lingo...
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:07 PM, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
On Tuesday 07 Oct 2008 13:59, Amit Joshi wrote:
LCDs are very commonplace in India, so definitely some amount of power will be saved. These days, every bit helps. :)
Typical hare brained costing. Energy savings have to be measured end to end to have any impact. while most schemes might save you some money in recurring energy costs, these saving methods are shifting the "saved" amount to some other place and you evantually wind up paying more and polluting more. The real requirement is consume less and consume only what can be replenished. But that involves a lot of hardship, so lets use black backgrouds and sms lingo...
Hi, You removed the "I don't think" part while trimming the contents of my post. What I said was "I don't think LCDs are very commonplace in India..." takes quite a different meaning. I think it is safe to say that the number of people buying LCDs is growing. Only when somebody is interested in buying a new computer do they think of buying a LCD. Still some people end up buying CRTs because they are cheaper. Majority of the people are not interested in discarding their old working CRT monitor to buy a LCD one following the thumb rule - If it ain't broke, don't fix it. So the number of CRTs present is diminishing at a slower rate. Most of the people in India still use CRTs. So the amount of power consumed by all the computers would be lessened as a whole. Looking at the bigger picture, "measurable" amount of power will definitely be saved.
On Wednesday 08 Oct 2008 09:04, Amit Joshi wrote:
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:07 PM, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
On Tuesday 07 Oct 2008 13:59, Amit Joshi wrote:
LCDs are very commonplace in India, so definitely some amount of power will be saved. These days, every bit helps. :)
Hi, You removed the "I don't think" part while trimming the contents of my post. What I said was "I don't think LCDs are very commonplace in India..." takes quite a different meaning.
My point is that even if LCD are common, it wont make much difference cause the energy cost of building LCDs, cleaning up all the poison chemicals at the EOL etc are never taken into account. LCDs ofcourse are a lot better for many reasons other than saving the earth by reducing power consumption. Please dont push the green angle without a very thorough study. The results are wholly misleading.
So the amount of power consumed by all the computers would be lessened as a whole. Looking at the bigger picture, "measurable" amount of power will definitely be saved.
not when you look at the cost of manufacture and clean up.
Amit Joshi wrote:
I think it is safe to say that the number of people buying LCDs is growing. Only when somebody is interested in buying a new computer do they think of buying a LCD. Still some people end up buying CRTs because they are cheaper. Majority of the people are not interested in discarding their old working CRT monitor to buy a LCD one following the thumb rule - If it ain't broke, don't fix it. So the number of CRTs present is diminishing at a slower rate. Most of the people in India still use CRTs. So the amount of power consumed by all the computers would be lessened as a whole. Looking at the bigger picture, "measurable" amount of power will definitely be saved.
I wonder if it makes any positive impact to use LCDs. As screen sizes become bigger, these benefits get negated. A 21" CRT TV consumes 70W of power. A 32" LCD TV consumes 170W of power. As people switch over from CRTs to LCDs, they even go for bigger screens. Imagine how much power the 42", 52" LCD/Plasma TVs must be consuming.
Amit Joshi wrote:
I don't think LCDs are very commonplace in India, so definitely some amount of power will be saved. These days, every bit helps. :)
Are there any statistics on the power difference between black and white images on CRTs?
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:
Amit Joshi wrote:
I don't think LCDs are very commonplace in India, so definitely some amount of power
will
be saved. These days, every bit helps. :)
Are there any statistics on the power difference between black and white images on CRTs?
Sure there are. Here are a few pointers.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=1082 http://probonostats.wordpress.com/2008/02/01/display-power-consumption/
Amit Joshi wrote:
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:
Amit Joshi wrote:
I don't think LCDs are very commonplace in India, so definitely some amount of power
will
be saved. These days, every bit helps. :)
Are there any statistics on the power difference between black and white images on CRTs?
Sure there are. Here are a few pointers.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=1082 http://probonostats.wordpress.com/2008/02/01/display-power-consumption/
The sites are about LCD-CRT comparisons. What I want to know is the difference in power consumption between a CRT running a white image and the same running a black image. IMHO, there is no noticeable difference as the EHT power is generated all the time and the control and signal processing circuits are running all the time. The small differences in the cathode voltage and subsequent control of the beam current does not make any power saving. The only advantage may be to the eye as it reduces glare.
As JTD mentioned, calculating environmental benefits involves an audit right from scratch and not the final finished product. A few days back there was an article about the real benefits of Eco-friendly hotels/buildings that import material from long distances by burning jet fuel in the atmosphere. Even the impact of transport used by those who internationally promote a greener world need to be audited.
On Wednesday 08 Oct 2008 13:24, Rony wrote:
The sites are about LCD-CRT comparisons. What I want to know is the difference in power consumption between a CRT running a white image and the same running a black image. IMHO, there is no noticeable difference as the EHT power is generated all the time and the control and signal processing circuits are running all the time. The small differences in the cathode voltage and subsequent control of the beam current does not make any power saving. The only advantage may be to the eye as it reduces glare.
Most of the power is consumed by the deflection circuits and the filament. Not the cathode which emits electrons. The brightness is determined by the acceleration grid (afair). With an LCD the backlight consumes substantial power and keeping a black image on screen makes no difference to the power consumption.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:58 AM, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
On Wednesday 08 Oct 2008 13:24, Rony wrote:
The sites are about LCD-CRT comparisons. What I want to know is the difference in power consumption between a CRT running a white image and the same running a black image. IMHO, there is no noticeable difference as the EHT power is generated all the time and the control and signal processing circuits are running all the time. The small differences in the cathode voltage and subsequent control of the beam current does not make any power saving. The only advantage may be to the eye as it reduces glare.
Most of the power is consumed by the deflection circuits and the filament. Not the cathode which emits electrons. The brightness is determined by the acceleration grid (afair). With an LCD the backlight consumes substantial power and keeping a black image on screen makes no difference to the power consumption.
-- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
A little late in the day to comment, but pray tell me: what does this discussion have to do with GNU/Linux?
Regards, Mohan S N
With an LCD the backlight consumes substantial power and keeping a black image on screen makes no difference to the power consumption.
-- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Actually,in a conversation with a game programmer,I found out that it isn't as simple as rendering a white pixel needs rendering of all colours while rendering a black pixel needs an absence of colours,thus power is saved.Even the black pixel rendered is not true absence of colour but actually a mix of the dark colours which is close enough to black for the human eye.So,power saved is basically nil.
A little late in the day to comment, but pray tell me: what does this discussion have to do with GNU/Linux?
Sometimes,a few off topic discussions are ok,because otherwise,IMHO,there's no life in a community when there's no healthy interaction on a wide variety of topics,and you are stuck with "Topic1 and related"
Regards, Easwar Registered Linux user #442065
On Wednesday 08 Oct 2008 18:12, Mohan Nayaka wrote:
A little late in the day to comment, but pray tell me: what does this discussion have to do with GNU/Linux?
Err... i stretched and twisted, but it wont fit with anything to do with GNU or Linux. But then GNU/Linux is so boring these days, everything works (except sound on Asus M2nMX-SE mobo). So please tolerate such posts. at least it's technical, especially considering that there were no posts for the past few days.
jtd wrote:
On Wednesday 08 Oct 2008 13:24, Rony wrote:
The sites are about LCD-CRT comparisons. What I want to know is the difference in power consumption between a CRT running a white image and the same running a black image. IMHO, there is no noticeable difference as the EHT power is generated all the time and the control and signal processing circuits are running all the time. The small differences in the cathode voltage and subsequent control of the beam current does not make any power saving. The only advantage may be to the eye as it reduces glare.
Most of the power is consumed by the deflection circuits and the filament. Not the cathode which emits electrons. The brightness is determined by the acceleration grid (afair).
Filaments are generally consuming 5W-6W each. In the old B/W sets, a few turns of wire across the EHT core would be used for powering the filament. The grid voltage sets the ambient level of brightness but the signal is given to the cathode and is inversely proportional to the white level. So a low signal level means more emission for white and high level ( including H & V blanking ) means low emission for black. Its been many years so I could be missing something.
With an LCD the backlight consumes substantial power and keeping a black image on screen makes no difference to the power consumption.
True! Is plasma better in power consumption?
HP appears to have developed a special laptop that consumes very low power and it has developed a new screen that is extremely low on power.
-
Amit Joshi -
Easwar Hariharan -
jtd -
Mohan Nayaka -
Rony -
Surya Pratap