


HP Introduces New Technology to Save Mobile Battery Life 225
fenimor writes "HP researchers have developed new technology to save battery life on mobile devices. Targeting one of the main culprits of battery consumption -- the display -- they've developed an energy-aware solution that dims parts of the screen that aren't in use. Display battery life lasts from two to 11 times longer, depending on what the user is doing."
HP innovation! (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, this is the kind of thinking and research development that I would expect from HP! This technology combined with optimizations in the OS like Quartz [apple.com] could be a real boost to the way we interact with our portable devices, allowing for progressive dynamic layering of items that are important to view. Shoot, one could even link it into search engines to render only what is relevant for display.
Now if they could just put a little innovation into their calculators again....
Re:HP innovation! (Score:4, Interesting)
What? They're not supposed to just buy up some half-baked company that's struggling with quality issues and try to merge the two disparate entities together using words like "Synergy"?
Dang. It is a rebirth of HP!
Re:HP innovation! (Score:5, Informative)
It came with the new Xorg+New Nvidia Drivers+KDE Beta... with those three things you can turn on transparency where every window EXCEPT the one that is currently in focus is transparent.
Combine this with "Focus follows mouse" and it basically "highlights" the thing you are currently working on... while everything else melts into the background... literally!
If they integrated this with flat panels I could see it being useful for the only thing that was at full brightness is the window that is currently active... while the rest has been dimmed. I think this is pretty close to what the research in this story did (except it looks like they might have been even more fine grained than that).
Not only would it be a usability improvement... but also a savings in power. I'm interested to see if they can bring it to market!
Friedmud
Re:HP innovation! (Score:4, Insightful)
While it would be incredibly cool if this technology could be used with PC LCD monitors, don't get too excited yet.
LCD screens generally rely on a single backlight for illumination. Swithing to multiple backlights is certainly possible, but don't expect to be able to control power consumption on a pixel by pixelbasis anytime soon.
Re:HP innovation! (Score:2)
Re:HP innovation! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:HP innovation! (OT Sig nitpick) (Score:2)
Sick of people being jealous because gentoo's package management system is better?
Portage is not a package management system. It contains one, but it isn't one. Neither is apt. Neither is yum. Neither is ports.
As for portage as a software distribution system, it is quite good. As for me, I prefer Crux ports, since they're much simpler to hack to my preference.
By the way, I was the original 'sick of Gentoo zealots throwing plugs in unrelated topics?' guy. I took it down because people misunderstoo
Make mine moo (Score:2)
Re:HP innovation! (Score:2)
Or it could be a major pain in the neck, like the "reverse-backlit" monochrome Palm PDAs. In dim lighting conditions, you turn on the backlight, right? But instead of the white pixels lighting up, increasing contrast so you can see, the BLACK pixels light up. Now the backlit black pixels are approximately the same luminosity as the unlit white pixels, rendering the display a muddy, unintelligible mess of green and gray.
The older Palm pilots did it right, lighting up the white pixels
Mod this down overrated. (Score:2)
Re:HP innovation! (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, HP's *development* is great. If the article is accurate, they seem to have fine-grained control over the whole screen. Chang et al. have the adaptivity right but lack the LCD development to get more than full-screen control. There's absolutely no way that an academic group can compete with the development power of a private company. I'm really glad to see that HP has gotten on the bandwagon because I spend most of my time working in a terminal and/or text editor. :) However, I'd just like to clarify that people have been proposing and implementing ideas like this for at least 6 years before we raise our hopes too much for HP's return.
Re:HP innovation! (Score:3, Funny)
I'm cool like that.
Well... the slashdot world needs more people like you. Right on.
Thank you.
Re:HP innovation! (Score:2)
So slashdot needs more subscribers who get to read and post on the article ahead of time?
Re:HP innovation! (Score:2)
Re:HP innovation! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:HP innovation! (Score:2)
"...The Low Power LCD mode lowers the refresh rate to extend battery life. An easy way to understand this may be to think of it this way: when on AC power, the Mobility Radeon 7500 uses higher clock speeds and more voltage for more performance; when the Mobility Radeon 7500 is in DC mode, it lowers the clock speed and voltage for maximum battery life..."
Self Defeating (Score:5, Insightful)
If you said "Maximize it!", then you're right! Sadly, this ends up being self-defeating.
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
I don't like your attitude, young man.
Re:Self Defeating (Score:3, Interesting)
Contrast. Unless you can modify the backlight at a per-pixel level, dimming a text area would actually decrease the readability.
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2, Informative)
Because Windows and Maximize are so often used on mobile devices!
This is intended for phones, PDAs, media players, etc. not for laptops etc. If you RTFA you'd have noticed the study was done on PDAs and MP3 players.
Re:Self Defeating (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course, I'd love to see a solution using electrochromic polymer (needing a single application of charge to change state, not continuous) pixels with an adjustable backlight for when it's dark. In bright light conditions, you'd have a screen like an adapting piece of paper. During daylight, you'd only need power when a pixel changes, so the battery life would theoretically be huge. Plus, I would expect it to be easier on the eyes. Anyone aware of any research on this front?
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
The power below you has a good point, though: while the screen may cease to be a major power draw, the CPU will continue to.
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
You haven't met my boss have you? He's determined, for every webiste, to use each one of those 640 x 480 pixels. He paid for them, dammit, and by god he's gonna get his money's worth.
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:3, Funny)
It says you're a Linux user on the cheapest LCD flat panel you could find. Duh!
Re:Self Defeating (Score:4, Informative)
Rather, it's often because the apps put enough controls and toolbars up that maximizing is the only way to comfortably work in the software.
(With most of the MIDI/music sequencers and hard disk recording packages, it feels like you never have enough room for the mixer sliders, time counter window, musical notation window, and so on. They may as well hard code maximizing windows into those things!)
Even if you own a top-notch flat panel that does 1600x1200 resolution - the fonts are going to look awfully small at that point. (And yes, you can select "large fonts" in the Windows control panel, but that tends to be self-defeating -- sacrificing most of the screen real-estate you gained by going to a higher resolution in the first place.) 1024x768 is pretty much the "most common" resolution I see Windows desktops running in (assuming you don't have a wide-screen type display) - and I think it's because it's roughly the best compromise between resolution and overall font size. (Especially for older PC users, they really struggle with apps like Excel when you crank the resolution up higher - regardless of monitor sharpness.)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2, Insightful)
Let me guess - the thought that a user might actually want to be able to see more content never, ever, ever entered your mind? AND that the major applications that many Windows users use (Firefox and Thunderbird) are completely cross-platform, look
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
Windows is well suited to working full screen because when Unix workstations had pricey 19" xterms, Windows had 14" monitors with 640x480 VGA.
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
Secondly, 1024x768 is a comfortable resolution for standard tasks (writing code, watching movies). Hell, the only time I boost up to 1600x1200 is when I'm playing games (and the extra detail comes in handy). Having a desktop at 1600x1200 is fun until you're trying to point something out to someone else, and they can't read it because it's so tiny.
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
Re:Self Defeating (Score:2)
Nothing. Except that it keeps the entire screen in use, thus defeating this new wonder technology. That's all.
Creative Displays (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Creative Displays (Score:2)
What does the result say?
Re:Creative Displays (Score:2)
in other news (Score:3, Insightful)
TURNING THE FUCKING PHONE OFF
Re:in other news (Score:2)
-nB
Meh.. (Score:5, Funny)
savings? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:savings? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:savings? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:savings? (Score:2)
Re:I can solve that! (Score:2)
Re:I can solve that! (Score:2)
Re:I can solve that! (Score:2)
Re:I can solve that! (Score:2)
2nd - I have a 1st generation 20GB iPod that is over 2 years old. The battery life on it was down to about 4 hours per charge. Not great, but better than most 2 year old laptop batteries.
3rd - I just replaced my battery today (maybe 2 hours ago) with a Newer technology replacement battery that is supposedly higher capacity than my original batter. It cost $39 and took 5 minutes to replace. So far, it works great. They had another battery that was $29 which had the same c
Re:I can solve that! (Score:2)
Re:I can solve that! (Score:2)
Unimportant pixels (Score:5, Funny)
Occasionally I get devices from companies that have proactively singled out these unimportant pixels.
OLEDs (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:OLEDs (Score:2)
Re:OLEDs (Score:2)
You're right, they should just spend a good deal more money to solve the same problem.
Re:OLEDs (Score:2)
Assuming HP makes these displays and patents don't prevent them from doing that. In the mean time, they've come up with an improvement for existing LCDs and other manufacturers like Samsung could potentially license the technology and generate money without having to actually produce anything. From a business perspective it's simpler, quicker, and more profitable.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like OLEDs too, but that's not to
Re:OLEDs (Score:2)
OLEDs because they are more energy efficient
Focus dimming to increase OLED usage efficiency
Its great! I am using it right now! (Score:5, Funny)
This is my blog I am posting to right? Must be... Cant tell though...
Another sticker? (Score:2)
OLED (Score:5, Informative)
As far as I understand, Organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs) will emit light from each pixel much like an LED does. This will not require a battery sucking back-light, and if necessary it would be easy to dim areas of the screen, just make parts of it darker/black and less/no light will be emitted from it.
More info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED [wikipedia.org]
Re:OLED (Score:2, Informative)
Re:OLED (Score:2)
Absolutely.
However, one downside is a 15" OLED display will run you about $20,000.
Not really.
Re:OLED (Score:2)
Where's the energy to illuminate each OLED pixel going to come from, though? Still from the battery.
My understanding is that most modern LCD displays already use high-intensity LED banks for their backlighting. Unless OLEDs have significantly lower watts-per-lumen requirements, I don't think that OLEDs will have much effect on battery lif
Re:OLED (Score:2)
Of course this is true for conventional LEDs, as long as it is patterned pixel-by-pixel. OLEDs promise to be cheaper to build, thus making this technology reasonably affordabel. As far as I know, the OLED energy conversion is not that ef
Re:OLED (Score:2)
No. An OLED simply doesn't have this problem, it doesn't make the problem of an LCD go away. Why am I being so obnoxiously literal? Honestly, I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything. I'm pointing it out because a.) OLED's are not mass-market yet, b.) They're likely to be more expensive than LCD's eat least intially, c.) There will likely be other reasons why a manufacturer of a portable device would pick an LCD over an LED.
I may or may not be right in this
Well, but how really useful is this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Reminds me of other fallacies: the gigahertz myth, the LCD display reaction-time [xbitlabs.com]. myth
Already done (Score:2)
After reading TFA... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:After reading TFA... (Score:5, Funny)
Yup. The irony is, the CPU time it takes to keep this artificial intelligence running nullifies the effect of dimming pixels you aren't reading
Re:After reading TFA... (Score:2)
Yep, that and the chance of it trying to attach itself to your vertebrae once bringing it too close to your ear ;)
LCDs and Dimming (Score:5, Interesting)
If they can light up only a portion of the screen they must be using white LEDs or something like that where they can light up as many or as few as they want. If this is the case, i wouldnt hold my breath as to when it will reach the market.
Maybe if they refine the idea (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, the eye isn't equally sensitive to color, at all points, so you can gradually "bleed off" color as a function of distance, too.
For that matter, the eye doesn't see with a uniform resolution, so you can "skip" pixels as you move off-center.
Alternatively, you can say "screw it!" and represent all output with a row of 128 LEDs. This not only cuts down on power, but reduces the weight of portable systems, cuts down on environmental waste when the unit is recycled, and forces 99.9% of all the stupid idiots who just use computers for spreading viruses anyway to go out into the Real World and get something done.
(Hey, punch-cards worked just fine for ages, and they didn't go to 128 columns IIRC)
Seriously... (Score:2, Funny)
Tempting homebrew sol'n ; article unclear in part (Score:3, Insightful)
Why not add a switch so that the display only shows when it's pressed? (I know that some players do this anyway, but not my Rio S10.) I rarely look at the screen anyway. I bet it wouldn't be that hard to open it up and solder one in
I was a little fuzzy on the article on how they could dim parts of a normal LCD monitor screen, however. Isn't there only one backlight, so it's all or nothing? Are they proposing a grid of backlights instead of just one large one? Or is it that when the pixels are dimmed, the transistors use less power? That part wasn't very clear to me after reading TFA. -- Paul
I worry about burn-in... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I worry about burn-in... (Score:2)
The monitors, it displays a "No signal" message box when the screen saver kicks in (though only on some computers.) In the operations area where the monitors are on 24-7, there is a noticable shadow of the box "burnt" into the picture - just like the old CRT burn-in problem. That sucks.
Xterms (Score:3, Interesting)
Stupid question, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Stupid question, but... (Score:2)
1) Using current LCDs a white and a black cost about the same, power-wise...
2) Consumers want content on a white background, like they're used to in the real, non-cyber, world (National Inquirer, Cosmo, etc). Can you imagine reading the NY Times or WSJ on a black background ? Didn't think so...
Maybe they used an Intel Centrino laptop (Score:2, Informative)
http://developer.intel.com/technology/itj/2005/
Aha! (Score:2)
DVDs (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:DVDs (Score:2)
Old news (Score:3, Funny)
HP announcement - avoid the PhysORG tarpit (Score:2)
I'd REALLY have to see this in action. After HP abandoned the Jornada (their own Pocket PC, one with a much better human-engineered design) for the Heath-Robinson iPaq, I've taken everything they've said about handhelds with a shovel-full of salt.
What we _really_ need... (Score:2)
That way, you don't need to have the display lit up at all, regular ambient lighting can be used to read the display.
Re:What we _really_ need... (Score:2)
Coralized (Score:2)
JOhn
OLEDs, STN, laptops and other silliness (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Clearly moving quickly to a display technology that emits light efficiently ONLY WHERE YOU WANT IT, like OLEDs, is much smarter than the current backlit architecture, where you blast an array of FILTERS (devices design to THROW AWAY LIGHT) with a bright uniform backlight. The current LCD technology is about as stupid as it gets when it comes to energy efficiency.
2) I am constantly amazed that no laptop company has yet make a laptop with EXCHANGEABLE displays. There are times, in the dark, where you want a bright color display, BUT there are other times when you would be much happier with a passive/reflective/no backlight display, which, by the way, is far more energy efficient. If I'm working outside, for example, writing a paper or whatever, I really would be happier with a simple STN reflective, LOW POWER, NO BACKLIGHT, perhaps even monochrome LCD (the type on those old Palm V's would be perfect: very high contrast, very low power). So why not have a laptop that you can simply plug in different display screens, depending on your anticipated usage ? I would venture to guess that a standard modern laptop with a TFT and a battery life of 3 hours, would last 6+ hours using a passive STN display.
The fact is that in most daily human environments other than in a movie theater, it is expected that there will be sufficient lighting to read magazines, write postcards, etc, etc. So laptop displays need to take advantage of this, rather than the current (stupid) brute force method of trying to drown out the environmental lighting with a light-producing display.
Rumor says.. (Score:2)
Uncanny... (Score:3, Informative)
I like the idea though, Maybe if they could design a backlight that could just light say 2" around the mouse?
At the time I thought the idea was a bit far-fetched - seems like the HP engineers think otherwise.
When the new OLED technology becomes widespread this capability will be inherit to the display, and be controllable at the pixel-level. A simple color scheme using as much black as possible (ie white text on black) could conserve batteries significantly.
Dan East
Re:Uncanny... (Score:2)
What will Microsoft do, though? Office pretty much defaults to a very white-dominated scheme. Word is pretty scary with a dark background and light letters. I bet the Excel engineers don't want to go back to the Multiplan (MS's first competitor against Lotus 1-2-3) skin. Access would be OK, though.
They'll need to look at some of the various Winamp skins
strange... (Score:3, Interesting)
the funnyest thing was that they could remove the backside totay, basicly turning the screen transparent, and still be able to get a clear picture of the active elements of the image shown.
and you didnt need to have constanct power on like on a lcd or oled display.
the powersaveings on mobile devices with screens like these would be gigantic.
only problem is that i cant find any info on colordepth or refresh rate at the moment
Re:Is that it? (Score:2)
The summary says 2 to 11 times battery life. So, unless you have a really bad battery...
Re:hm... (Score:2, Informative)
I know, I know, language evolves, and it's futile to insist on keeping the purity of English as it has none, but damnit, I just can't take this alot business.
Maybe I'm alittle too sensitive or should just relax abit but whenyou startrunning wordstogether forno apparentreason wherethehellwillyoustop?
It's "A LOT", as in "A little" "a purple wotsit" "a mountain" It doesn't suddenly lose it's space just for being a lot.
This rant has been a
Re:hm... (Score:2)
My God! It's full of irony!