why use a shutdown controller???

cyjad · 11-26-2003, 04:25 PM

I'm using win98SE on a laptop P133....I know I know, wimpy wimpy wimpy.....but it only cost me $10 and it runs a gps and winamp.

Anyways whenever I turn off the car, it just kills the power to the mobo without going through the shutdown process and everything is just fine after several hundred ungraceful shutdowns.

So, whats the point using a shutdown controller, power sequencer, etc? Just use a dc2dc psu and thats it.

I'd eventually like to upgrade to win2k, but do I then have to worry about purchasing additional circuitry just to shutdown the os gracefully?

PS. I'm not sure if this is the right place for this thread but I thought you guys would know the answer.

Ricky327 · 11-27-2003, 01:21 AM

Because you can get lost clusters or cross-linked files if you dont shutdown properly. Even an application crashing can cause file damage.

I guess you just been lucky so far...one day you may find your file is corrupted.

Keep trying

hapoo · 11-27-2003, 02:48 AM

Isn't there any way to run all drives in read-only mode? That would make the whole shutdown process pointless.

fluffy2097 · 11-27-2003, 03:24 AM

So long as you aren't writing data when the system is shut down you're probably not going to have a problem. Even if the windows swap file is writing, it will just get cleared out and replaced on boot. I'd just run a scandisk once a month. If you haven't had problems by now, you probably aren't going to get them. What errors you do get will be minor, and even bad problems can be solved by a reformat/reinstall.

qjones · 11-27-2003, 03:29 AM

[QUOTE=cyjad]
So, whats the point using a shutdown controller, power sequencer, etc? Just use a dc2dc psu and thats it.
QUOTE]

Pretty simple here. Most of us are using some sort of method to speed up the boot process. Hibernate, or Suspend-To-Ram. Not only does this narrow the boot time to 15 seconds or less. It also give you the feature to resume exactly where you left off.

Quincy

GScherler · 11-28-2003, 04:37 AM

[QUOTE=qjones]

Quote: Originally Posted by cyjad

So, whats the point using a shutdown controller, power sequencer, etc? Just use a dc2dc psu and thats it.
QUOTE]

Pretty simple here. Most of us are using some sort of method to speed up the boot process. Hibernate, or Suspend-To-Ram. Not only does this narrow the boot time to 15 seconds or less. It also give you the feature to resume exactly where you left off.

Quincy

I have never used Hibernate, Suspend to Ram, etc and am looking at the Opus ATX Workstation or the Power Supply as an answer to the shutdown. How does that work. If it's in hibernate and then shuts down does it not need to boot up? I know I'm missing something but not sure what??? Can you lead me to the answer...?
Thanks much,
Gary

telekineticfool · 11-28-2003, 05:01 AM

Sure Gary. When I shut my car off, my opus senses that (no more 12V on the ignition lead) and signals the motherboard to shut down (just like you hit the button on the case). It give the computer a few seconds to shut down (or, in my case, go into hibernate mode), and then cuts power. Then, when I boot up, it boots up just like it does when normally coming out of hibernate...ie...right where you left off...middle of the song and everything.

GScherler · 11-28-2003, 05:09 AM

Thanks telekineticfool,
I did not realize that. I will have to try that on my home puter as well. I assumed that windows had to reboot from the begining to get windows up and running first and then go to the last placed you were at. Didn't realize that it would save all that time booting up. Learn something new everyday!
Thanks,
Gary

deadweasel · 11-28-2003, 05:10 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by GScherler

I have never used Hibernate, Suspend to Ram, etc and am looking at the Opus ATX Workstation or the Power Supply as an answer to the shutdown. How does that work. If it's in hibernate and then shuts down does it not need to boot up? I know I'm missing something but not sure what??? Can you lead me to the answer...?
Thanks much,
Gary

Well, there are two different modes. Sleep mode will suspend whatever you're doing to the memory, but then everything needs to be reloaded from scratch if you lose power. Hibernate actually saves your status to the hard drive so that boots happen faster. Either way, it's probably not a very viable solution for what you have, because 98 absolutely sucks for either one. Reliable sleep and hibernate recovery didn't really start coming onto the scene until XP. More often than not you will find yourself having to hard power it down and boot from scratch anyhow. I have been doing the hard shutdown method just as you have for almost three years now on a 98 system, and the biggest issue I had was one of the mp3s got gimped. Oooohhh... big problem! Wait... *copy from network*. What problem?

Anyhow, I wouldn't recommend 2000 for your machine either. It will really slow it down, and will take even more of your limited drive space. Yes, it's more stable than 98, but that's because it's designed to run with specific hardware. If you have a PII laptop, chances are your hardware won't work very reliably under 2000, and even if it did, you're looking at serious stupid long boot times. There is also the increased risk of filesystem damage due to a hard power down.

Trust me, unless you're willing to spring for a newer rig, or build your own more current-day machine, you should stick with 98. It's resilient, and won't require you to upgrade your memory.

My first ever carmp3 system was an old Compaq 1060 laptop. It was an early PII, and had a crappy little 1.2gb hard drive. I used mp3s on CDs for that thing, and used earbuds for sound, because my car didn't have a stereo, or even a harness to connect to one. (I was a po-folk back then).

GScherler · 11-28-2003, 05:20 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by deadweasel

Well, there are two different modes. Sleep mode will suspend whatever you're doing to the memory, but then everything needs to be reloaded from scratch if you lose power. Hibernate actually saves your status to the hard drive so that boots happen faster. Either way, it's probably not a very viable solution for what you have, because 98 absolutely sucks for either one. Reliable sleep and hibernate recovery didn't really start coming onto the scene until XP. More often than not you will find yourself having to hard power it down and boot from scratch anyhow. I have been doing the hard shutdown method just as you have for almost three years now on a 98 system, and the biggest issue I had was one of the mp3s got gimped. Oooohhh... big problem! Wait... *copy from network*. What problem?

Anyhow, I wouldn't recommend 2000 for your machine either. It will really slow it down, and will take even more of your limited drive space. Yes, it's more stable than 98, but that's because it's designed to run with specific hardware. If you have a PII laptop, chances are your hardware won't work very reliably under 2000, and even if it did, you're looking at serious stupid long boot times. There is also the increased risk of filesystem damage due to a hard power down.

Trust me, unless you're willing to spring for a newer rig, or build your own more current-day machine, you should stick with 98. It's resilient, and won't require you to upgrade your memory.

My first ever carmp3 system was an old Compaq 1060 laptop. It was an early PII, and had a crappy little 1.2gb hard drive. I used mp3s on CDs for that thing, and used earbuds for sound, because my car didn't have a stereo, or even a harness to connect to one. (I was a po-folk back then).

deadweasel ,
Thanx for the reply but I'm confused as I do have a newer puter. Check the signature. The signature is maxed out with what I have listed and do not have room to show that I am running Win XP Corporate version. I have just never used hibernate or anything beside shut down. For that matter, I usually leave my home puter up and running for days on end unless I install a new program or hardware.
Opps, just went back to the begining of the thread and realized what happened.
Have a good weekend,
Gary

telekineticfool · 11-28-2003, 05:23 AM

I think he confused you for the original poster

Your setup is certainly modern.

deadweasel · 11-28-2003, 10:03 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by telekineticfool

I think he confused you for the original poster

Your setup is certainly modern.

Oops. My bad. It was late. Too much turkey. Must...... sleep.....

Crav4Speed · 12-03-2003, 07:31 AM

I'm kind of confised here also... Why buy a shutdown controller when XP has its own controller? Couldn't you just get a dc-dc psu and have XP's power settings hibernate or go into standby on its own when leaving the carputer idle?

Alric · 12-03-2003, 08:54 AM

For those with Lilliput screens:

Can your system standby when the screen is connected? If I attempt to standby I get a message saying the touchkit software is preventing standby.

Thanks,

deadweasel · 12-03-2003, 10:04 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by Crav4Speed

I'm kind of confised here also... Why buy a shutdown controller when XP has its own controller? Couldn't you just get a dc-dc psu and have XP's power settings hibernate or go into standby on its own when leaving the carputer idle?

While it seems like it should work, if you think about it, what happens if you are in the car just listening to your tunes, when it decides it wants to go to standby? I know my machine doesn't pay any attention to the fact that it's still in use (Winamp). Videos seem to keep its attention, but anything else running, if I don't move the mouse or touch a key, down she goes.

That is teh sux0rz, as the l33t would say. Shutdown controllers give you more "control" over when and how that little monster goes into shutdown/standby/hibernate/pass-out-due-to-excessive-alcohol-consumption mode.

User Name		Remember Me?
Password