Re: win95 on 701cs observations ...

["John H. Kim" <jokim@MIT.EDU>]

On Thu, 3 Oct 1996, Charles Y. Choi wrote:

> Two months ago I bit the bullet
> and installed win95 over the OS/2 pre-install
> on my 701cs.  It has been a mixed-blessing.
> 
> I've found that battery life is shorter where
> on a NiMH I'd get 3:23 on OS/2 versus 2:40 on Win95.

My hunch is that OS/2 (and Linux) use the halt instruction to slow
processor to 0 MHz, whereas Win95 doesn't.  If you use the 701 on
your lap. you can feel that it runs cool with Linux, but runs hot
with Win95.  It'll run hot with Linux if you keep a CPU-intensive
background task running.

I've long since stopped expecting Microsoft to actually use all the
performance-enhancing hardware features widely available on today's
computers.  These are the same people who refused to make a PS/2
mouse, saying laptop users could get along with a serial mouse and
an RS232-PS/2 adapter.
--
John H. Kim
jokim@mit.edu