hibernate and suspend after defragmentation

[Shirka2010]

after defragmentation there is 'turn off' option, but I would appreciate if I could also SUSPEND or HIBERNATE my system (instead of turning it off). what do you think?

[Rob Defraggle]

Yes, I would like option to Hibernate rather than Shutdown. I don't tend to use the "Shutdown" feature though, as when I did try it, on powering on, Windows would start and then shutdown again requiring an additional reboot for some reason.

[Super Fast]

I would much rather have a Standby option.

 

Hibernate works finicky & even causes some systems to lock up trying to come out of it!

Plus, it takes as long or longer than a reboot, on some systems!

Why use hibernate if rebooting is just as quick, & it causes crashes?

 

I much rather have a Standby option.

 

Standby is very reliable, is a low power sleep state (not quite as low as hibernate, but still really good!)

Standby never seems to crash a computer.

Standby resumes very fast. Usually 2 or 3 seconds.

 

Would love to add a low power state after defrag, but make it standby please, or if you have to include hibernate, at least include standby too!

 

Thanks!

 

+ 1 to the idea!

[Shirka2010]

I would much rather have a Standby option.

 

Hibernate works finicky & even causes some systems to lock up trying to come out of it!

Plus, it takes as long or longer than a reboot, on some systems!

Why use hibernate if rebooting is just as quick, & it causes crashes?

 

I much rather have a Standby option.

 

Standby is very reliable, is a low power sleep state (not quite as low as hibernate, but still really good!)

Standby never seems to crash a computer.

Standby resumes very fast. Usually 2 or 3 seconds.

 

Would love to add a low power state after defrag, but make it standby please, or if you have to include hibernate, at least include standby too!

 

Thanks!

 

+ 1 to the idea!

 

 

But that is exactly what I had in mind - to have bothe options - standby and hibernate. The issue with standby is that it is not turning off your system. Hibernate does. And it does not interfere with pc operation (eg. open documents) as is keeps memory records while cutting off the power.

 

Concerning standby - in my experience it is much less reliable, especially on onlder machines, when a standard was that pc was not resuming from suspend and hard-reset was required to use the machine again. Hibernaing as a windows feature and not hardware one (APM etc. related) was always more reliable too me and my friends. Plus - you have to have all drivers 100% windows certified and compatible to have the suspend work fine. Your problems may be HDD or memory related. When one of those components is broken it is likely that hibernation will fail as the memory is stored on the disc and backards.

 

You say that rebooting is faster than resuming from hiberbation... There is no experience like that on the world I know. Rebooting means that windows has to close, and then load all drivers and software again. You are the first person who stated that rebooting is fastest method of starting work with a pc... even microsoft does not believe in it.

 

Second - It seems to me that you never actually turn off your machine. Some people would think that is not worth to spend money to keep their machines continuously running (eg. in the night). I am forgetting about the noise which is obvious... Additionally, the longer your pc is turn on, the most likely it will experience electricity shortage, which means possible hdd errors even on ntfs partitions. You have to include good UPS system on your configuration to keep running... Expenses, expenses, and more expenses...

 

Lets don't make a choice on it. As many people I know would likely choose to turn off their machines with hibernate rather than standy them. Hibernation is much closer to turning off.

[Rob Defraggle]

Hibernate works finicky & even causes some systems to lock up trying to come out of it!

Plus, it takes as long or longer than a reboot, on some systems!

Why use hibernate if rebooting is just as quick, & it causes crashes?

 

Hibernate works reliably with solid drivers, I hardly ever Shutdown Windows 7 because the regular OS updates mean frequent reboots anyway.

 

Not only does it turn your machine off and re-boots to useable Desktop faster, but Hibernate restores the desktop appliction setup to exactly where you left off, so you can resume next morning without pain of re-logging in and restarting applications.

 

Sleeping is not a feature necessary for me, as I have it kick in automatically on idle.

 

What would be useful is if Defraggler was able to disable all Power Saving Suspends, until it finished so you can leave system unattended without altering the Power Management policy to allow time to finish the defrag.

[Super Fast]

The issue with standby is that it is not turning off your system. Hibernate does. Hibernation is much closer to turning off.

 

Hibernaing as a windows feature and not hardware one (APM etc. related) was always more reliable too me and my friends. Plus - you have to have all drivers 100% windows certified and compatible to have the suspend work fine. Your problems may be HDD or memory related. When one of those components is broken it is likely that hibernation will fail as the memory is stored on the disc and backards.

 

Rebooting means that windows has to close, and then load all drivers and software again. You are the first person who stated that rebooting is fastest method of starting work with a pc... even microsoft does not believe in it.

 

The longer your pc is turn on, the most likely it will experience electricity shortage, which means possible hdd errors even on ntfs partitions. You have to include good UPS system on your configuration to keep running... Expenses, expenses, and more expenses...

 

- Hibernation is a deep sleep. Standby is a light sleep. Sure, hibernation is much closer to being "off". But since my system can fully load windows in less than 25 seconds (or less) why do I want to waste time with hibernation when it takes 15 seconds (or more) to fully waken? I'd rather just shut it down or use standby. If it isn't pretty instant, I have no use for it. And hibernate is not instant.

 

- Usually, suspend/hibernate problems are the result of not having the correct ACPI drivers, or sometimes AMD/ATI away mode drivers installed. Memory corruption can cause it though, as well as other things. Standby just always works for me. As long as you have the right power drivers installed. Have found that if a system doesn't respond to standby or come from it, it's usually power driver problems most of the time.

 

- Notice that I did not say rebooting was faster, but that is was almost as fast. I would rather reboot than to hibernate to say a mere 5 or 10 seconds off a 25 second boot from cold.

 

- Electricity shortage? You are right! Most people are either unprotected, or protect their pc but forget to protect their internet (where up to 90% of power spikes can come from). I have all my pc power filtered through APC battery backup, & I haven't had a problem in 5 years. APC is the best.

[Rob Defraggle]

- Hibernation is a deep sleep. Standby is a light sleep. Sure, hibernation is much closer to being "off". But since my system can fully load windows in less than 25 seconds (or less) why do I want to waste time with hibernation when it takes 15 seconds (or more) to fully waken? I'd rather just shut it down or use standby. If it isn't pretty instant, I have no use for it. And hibernate is not instant

Because hibernation is really turned off, but with the state saved so it can be restored on reboot. This is faster for most people, than having the desktop restarted and all those services restarted.

 

Sane people, don't want a 25s boot, only to then spend a minute on mouse clicks to reorganise their applications. They'd rather have it all just come back the way they left it, which happens with Hibernate and allows a full power off including the PC power suppy.

[Shirka2010]

Because hibernation is really turned off, but with the state saved so it can be restored on reboot. This is faster for most people, than having the desktop restarted and all those services restarted.

 

 

I would like only to mention that on my old XP machine, with P4 2GHz, 2GB of RAM and old Seagate 160GB:

 

a ) entering hibernation takes 12secs (while waiting for system to properly shut down - 20-25secs)

b ) resuming from hibernation takes about 15 secs (while booting my system with all the startup applications is about 120secs - time to have the pc fully operational with no hdd activity)

 

I really wonder how it is possible that your system starts in 25 secs and you do not benefit from hibernation? Hibernation would take 2-5 secs on that kind of machine. Suspend would be useless.

 

When speaking about starting your system consider all the startup apps not only time after which desktop shows, because after that there is a lot of time for services and startup apps to load, and pcs are practically unusable then. I have a lot of experience with pcs and laptops with 3GHz duos and quatros PCUs and a lot of fast DDR RAM and SATA drives, and it is possible to start them in less than 20 secs, but that is with clean windows setup. Try to install MS Office, and use you system for month or two, and booting takes 30-40 secs, put Outlook to start automatically, and it lasts almost forever...

 

In my office, while using Oracle and MS SQL - my life would be very difficult without hibernation - waiting 5 minutes for system to close, and then 10 minutes to start. Great.

 

I really envy that kind of a machine you own. But I really do not understand why to keep your machine running all the time with that UPS constantly loading. I believie that you do not have a couple of servers to keep the world running. So It does not make any sence. You can have money but think about all the wasted energy, and equipment...

 

You can equally buy new batteries each day, put them into your flashlight, turn it on and put it into closet to have it always ready. Do you see a kind of insanity in that kind of a behaviour? You do not do that, do you?

[Super Fast]

 

I really wonder how it is possible that your system starts in 25 secs and you do not benefit from hibernation? Hibernation would take 2-5 secs on that kind of machine. Suspend would be useless.

 

I really envy that kind of a machine you own. But I really do not understand why to keep your machine running all the time with that UPS constantly loading. I believie that you do not have a couple of servers to keep the world running. So It does not make any sence. You can have money but think about all the wasted energy, and equipment...

 

 

- It is possible, because I have a fast machine + I never have anything loading at startup other than the essentials, namely my antivirus & locate 32. Locate 32 is faster than windows search, & can find all the files instantly. 10,000 + files (if your looking for music, documents, whatever) can load pretty much instantly, or in just a few seconds. Besides this, I do use office, but I don't allow it to load at startup. I simply have no need to.

 

- So far as the machine running all the time, standby saves some power. Sure, not as much as hibernate, but it's better than full power on. So far as saving power, I used to have a 17 inch CRT NEC monitor. It was good, but when it kicked the bucket, I immediately switched to a 19 inch widescreen LCD monitor.

 

Did you know that an LCD monitor uses 25% the power of a CRT? Additionally, I use CFL lights in almost all the lights in my trailer, + I own my trailer. CFL lights use around 20 to 25% the power of normal lights.

 

So I am not concerned about power use.

 

Thanks!

 

Oh, yeah.

 

Forgot to add.

A BIG slowdowner is always having updates turned on.

I always have them turned off because of the occasional "drive" update that MS updates that bluescreens your PC, & over time, updates do greatly slow your PC as they multiply hundreds of thousands of patches on top of each other. Noted that on many occasions while looked at PC's that the ones with them turned off never seem to slow down, so long as you always keep it properly cleaned/defragged/free of malware/viruses.

 

This was, however, just an observation in my testing of things. But I am sure that you will want to always have updates on, because they are patches, & patches may fix holes. The biggest hole you can fix is by using a more secure browser, since McAfee researcher found if you use IE 6, 7, 8 (possibly 9 too) that they can craft an XML page to whitelist bad controls, causing the comp to be able to run exploits while silently evading UAC + memory DEP protections.

 

Internet Explorer = bad. Very bad. Active X. Never have a problem with Firefox. Of course, there is Chrome, but chrome & opera have ahem, usability issues I don't want to delve into here.

 

Keep your system patched man. I just don't update mine cause I am a daredevil that doesn't care because I have all my stuff backed up & I know my ins & outs on computers. You will want to be sure you always keep yours up to date with the latest patches, so don't do like I do, cause it might be dangerous for you. Only trained pro's do what I do, so be sure you always keep yours up-to-date with the latest patches cause everyone else does it, its the cool thing to do, & it's safer... I guess.

 

I do notice large amounts of patches being devoted to "fix" internet explorer problems... related to buffer overflows, browser exploits, even things seemingly unrelated that ARE related due to the way the browser handles images, etc.... Maybe I just see things wrongly? Why use IE? Oh well, up to you though, man, just always keep your system patched & never try to do everything I do.

 

Thank you!