Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 26 May 2010 14:24:30 +0200 | From | Florian Mickler <> | Subject | Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) |
| |
On Wed, 26 May 2010 14:01:49 +0200 Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Florian Mickler <florian@mickler.org> wrote: > > > This is not "protection". This is functioning properly in a real world > > scenario. Why would the user change the kernel, if the device would be > > buggy after that? (Except maybe he is a geek) > > Hmm... Why would the user continue to use the program if it slows down > his device and sucks the battery as a vampire (Except maybe he's a > moron)? ;) > > ~Vitaly
Because he is using a robust kernel that provides suspend blockers and is preventing the vampire from sucking power?
Most users don't even grasp the simple concept of different "programs". They just have a device and click here and there and are happy.
Really, what are you getting at? Do you deny that there are programs, that prevent a device from sleeping? (Just think of the bouncing cows app)
And if you have two kernels, one with which your device is dead after 1 hour and one with which your device is dead after 10 hours. Which would you prefer? I mean really... this is ridiculous.
Cheers, Flo
| |