leave on or turn off??

My father-in-law has a 5 year old computer and was told by
a technician that it is perfectly fine to leave the
computer on 24/7 and there will be no risk of damage or
other problems resulting from that.

What do all of you think?

I was taught that it is better on computer components if
they are given an opportunity to cool down and that
Windows was designed to be rebooted at least once every
day.

Karla
My systems are generally left on 24/7 - and rebooted at need (i.e. when it
starts behaving a little sluggishly, or shows signs of fatigue)

With most older systems, the only thing in any danger is the monitor (from
burn-in) - but turning the monitor off prevents that - and switching it back
on again is a lot quicker than rebooting.
With newer systems, the only danger is from overheating caused by fan
failure or vent blocking - and regular maintenance can prevent that.

The argument often comes from early PC's - where there were worries that
turning the system OFF too often may lead to burnout of components during
the reboot peaks - but more modern systems have very much better
voltage/current control than was the case in the '80's, and this is no
longer a problem.

HTH

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2004, Win9x)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.btinternet.com/~winnoel/millsrpch.htm
http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's

"Karla" wrote in message
...
My father-in-law has a 5 year old computer and was told by
a technician that it is perfectly fine to leave the
computer on 24/7 and there will be no risk of damage or
other problems resulting from that.

What do all of you think?

I was taught that it is better on computer components if
they are given an opportunity to cool down and that
Windows was designed to be rebooted at least once every
day.

"Karla" wrote in message
...
My father-in-law has a 5 year old computer and was told by
a technician that it is perfectly fine to leave the
computer on 24/7 and there will be no risk of damage or
other problems resulting from that.

What do all of you think?

Mine's on most of the time. I've got it set to turn off the monitor and
spin down the hard disks after an hour.

I was taught that it is better on computer components if
they are given an opportunity to cool down

Not that I've heard, but your sources could be different I guess. I've
worked in segments of the industry where we build things that are never
turned off. I recently talked to some folks from my former company and they
told me they were called in to fix a system which had been powered up since
1988. And even then they didn't turn it off to fix it (it was designed to
hot-plug components). The owner checked his logs and said it was the first
repair the machine had had in all that time. These were built using the
same components you'd use in a PC, they were just double screened (checked
twice, where normal parts are only checked once) before being put in the
systems.

and that
Windows was designed to be rebooted at least once every
day.

Well, not designed. You just kinda end up having to.

Seriously, I've had ME up for days at a time on (rare) occasions. I usually
end up rebooting because something wedges or it gets sluggish.

- Bill

"Karla" wrote in message
...
My father-in-law has a 5 year old computer and was told by
a technician that it is perfectly fine to leave the
computer on 24/7 and there will be no risk of damage or
other problems resulting from that.

What do all of you think?

I was taught that it is better on computer components if
they are given an opportunity to cool down and that
Windows was designed to be rebooted at least once every
day.

I leave mine on 24/7 and only reboot as required, i.e when Windows throws
wobblies. Longest uptime 350 hours - I think that's pretty good going for
WinMe.

"Karla" wrote in message
...
My father-in-law has a 5 year old computer and was told by
a technician that it is perfectly fine to leave the
computer on 24/7 and there will be no risk of damage or
other problems resulting from that.

What do all of you think?

I was taught that it is better on computer components if
they are given an opportunity to cool down and that
Windows was designed to be rebooted at least once every
day.

The majority of wear on any (properly maintained) system of moving parts
occurs during stopping and starting/heating and cooling. If the computer was
overheating then, yes, it needs turning off - but it then needs leaving off
until the cause of overheating is found and eliminated. If the machine is
running properly the least wear will occur if it's left running
continuously.

Windows ME certainly requires rebooting from time-to-time, but as to how
often depends in part on what you have installed, so only you can know when
yours needs rebooting.

My feeling is that wear from stopping and starting is very, very minimal and
what you save in time and money as a consequence doesn't by itself justify
adding to the pollution problem. I'd say, if you put rubbish in litter bins
rather than throw it in the street, turn the computer off when you're not
using it.

Shane

"Shane" wrote in message
...

"Karla" wrote in message
...
My father-in-law has a 5 year old computer and was told by
a technician that it is perfectly fine to leave the
computer on 24/7 and there will be no risk of damage or
other problems resulting from that.

What do all of you think?

I was taught that it is better on computer components if
they are given an opportunity to cool down and that
Windows was designed to be rebooted at least once every
day.

The majority of wear on any (properly maintained) system of moving parts
occurs during stopping and starting/heating and cooling. If the computer
was
overheating then, yes, it needs turning off - but it then needs leaving
off
until the cause of overheating is found and eliminated. If the machine is
running properly the least wear will occur if it's left running
continuously.

Windows ME certainly requires rebooting from time-to-time, but as to how
often depends in part on what you have installed, so only you can know
when
yours needs rebooting.

My feeling is that wear from stopping and starting is very, very minimal
and
what you save in time and money as a consequence doesn't by itself justify
adding to the pollution problem. I'd say, if you put rubbish in litter
bins
rather than throw it in the street, turn the computer off when you're not
using it.

Shane

That's exactly the way I see it and handle it accordingly.
But in Karla's case its a matter of preference, I presume.

Harry.




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.727 / Virus Database: 482 - Release Date: 7/26/2004

I use an elegant, high-tech solution: I turn it off when I go to bed.

--
Walter Donavan, Author
Revelation: The Seven Stages of the
Journey Back to God
www.revelation7stages.com
www.1stbooks.com/bookview/15479

"Walter Donavan" wrote in message
...
I use an elegant, high-tech solution: I turn it off when I go to bed.

When I do turn it off, that's usually when I do it too.

- Bill

"Shane" wrote in message
...

"Karla" wrote in message
...
My father-in-law has a 5 year old computer and was told by
a technician that it is perfectly fine to leave the
computer on 24/7 and there will be no risk of damage or
other problems resulting from that.

What do all of you think?

I was taught that it is better on computer components if
they are given an opportunity to cool down and that
Windows was designed to be rebooted at least once every
day.

The majority of wear on any (properly maintained) system of moving parts
occurs during stopping and starting/heating and cooling. If the computer
was
overheating then, yes, it needs turning off - but it then needs leaving
off
until the cause of overheating is found and eliminated. If the machine is
running properly the least wear will occur if it's left running
continuously.

Windows ME certainly requires rebooting from time-to-time, but as to how
often depends in part on what you have installed, so only you can know
when
yours needs rebooting.

My feeling is that wear from stopping and starting is very, very minimal
and
what you save in time and money as a consequence doesn't by itself justify
adding to the pollution problem. I'd say, if you put rubbish in litter
bins
rather than throw it in the street, turn the computer off when you're not
using it.
Well said...great analogy!
--
Nomad

Your question is a timely one and was just raised on an AP news website,
from which I have extracted the text and deleted the pictures and ads.

==============================================

Q. I've heard that frequently turning my computer on and off can hurt the
performance of internal parts. But I don't want to leave it on all the time
either and waste power. What's the best course?
A. While it once might have been true that computer hard drives or
power-supply systems could be degraded over time by turning the machines on
and off, there's little reason now not to go the green (and money-saving)
route: Shut things completely down if you're not going to be using your PC
for many hours.
Recent tests at Canada's University of Waterloo found that computers with
Pentium 4 processors running at 1.7 gigahertz drew 110 watts of electricity
while booting up and 60 watts when they were on but idle. A 17-inch
cathode-ray tube (CRT) monitor added an additional 75 watts. Newer,
flat-screen LCD monitors use about half as much juice as CRTs.
In a sense, then, the PC isn't a big juice hog. A microwave oven devours
electricity at a rate of 750 to 1,100 watts, according to the U.S.
Department of Energy.
PCs in power-saving standby or sleep mode have even less of a presence. In
the Waterloo tests, they were draining 35 watts. That's roughly equivalent
to three clock radios.
But add up hours of standby time, and multiply that by the millions of
computers in the world, and it is some serious electricity.
In fact, microchip maker Infineon Technologies AG (IFX
http://money.excite.com/jsp/qt/full.jsp?time=0&symbol_search_text=IFX),
which is working on making electronics' sleep modes more energy-efficient,
estimates that a mere 1 percent decrease in standby power consumption would
save the nation 360 megawatts - the equivalent of a medium-sized power
plant. Put another way, 10 percent of an average home's electricity
consumption comes from machines of some kind sitting on standby, said
Infineon spokesman Saswato Das.
Dell Inc., the world's leading seller of PCs, has no official position on
whether its customers should leave the machines running or not. Leaving
computers on all the time doesn't erode their performance, but it doesn't
appear that turning them off and on does either, because the reliability of
key parts has improved significantly, spokesman Lionel Menchaca said.
"There used to be a bigger difference in terms of wear and tear when you
power up your PC, but it's not as much of an issue now," Menchaca said.
After the tests at Waterloo, Manfred Grisebach of the university's
information systems and technology group pointed out that hard drives that
never get shut down seem to live a long time. But, he said, so do drives
that get shut off all the time.
"What we can't say is which last longer," he said.

==============================================

Ken Bland