Hibernation

I am considering removing the Hibernation file from Disc Cleanup since I never hibernate. I just sleep when I bring it around and turn off the screen when idle. Does anyone actually use hibernate, and if so, why?

 

Battery life, and it takes no time for my dell to come out of it.

 

What's the difference between hibernation mode and sleep mode?

 

I do, especially when the battery is near empty; this way, there is no way that I'll lose any data. However, hibernating on Vista (or Kubuntu, I admit) is painfully slow. Developers need to speed up the process somehow.

 

I switched off Hibernation since I never really power down my computer. Sleep works better for my needs.

Hibernation saves your current session to disk and then turns off everything. When restarting your machine, the saved session is loaded back so you can resume right where you left off. It's handy when you have lots of applications open and don't want to waste time opening them back up when you resume your computer.

Sleep mode keeps your system running in a low-power state, turning off practically everything except memory. Waking the computer would turn on everything and allow you to get back to work almost immediately, with little to no wait time for the computer to get ready.

 

Sleep mode turns the HDD and screen off and uses ~1%battery per hour in sleep mode as the PC is tech not off. Hibernation takes a quick snap shot of what is running and creates a file on the HDD for a quicker boot back to exactly what the PC was doing when you hibernated.

edit: you beat me too it!

 

I don't use hibernate - Sleep mode is enough for me

PS: 1% per hour? My Vaio uses about 4% per hour on sleep mode...

 

I use hibernate often, even on my desktop (where battery life isn't a concern). Usually if I'm in the middle of tons of work and am running out for a few hours, I'll hibernate. When leaving the computer for a long time, when I don't have much stuff open, I'll shut down.

Mostly I choose to hibernate rather than sleep as a concern about saving electricity. Even though the cost difference in a year is probably negligible. Keep in mind, that I'm the type of person who is concerned about how much electricity my microwave and coffee maker use when plugged in, and not in use.

 

Hibernation is awfully slow in Vista.

 

Yep, same here.

It's more like 4% for me, too. 'Course it all depends on the memory and the battery.

I actually disabled Standby for quite awhile, as Hibernation is quick enough (XP) that I didn't see much of a point for Standby.

And I half-lied in the poll. Not using Hibernation in Vista is also a valid answer for me, by default. But I voted "Yes" since that seems to be the point of the poll.

 

No slower for me than XP with the same amount of RAM. The size of RAM plays a large roll in the time it takes. And since most folks have twice as much RAM with Vista, it takes twice as long. The speed is a simple matter of how fast the ram contents can be written to disk, as there is virtually no "processing" going on when hibernating.

Gary

 

It's faster than shutting down and doing a re-boot.

 

I don't user hibernate, just sleep and shut down. My laptop is plugged in most of the time, so I either just leave it on or put it to sleep when I'm not using it for a while.

 

I have found that vista will automatically switch to hibernation after a certain amount of time in sleep or if the battery gets too low. Vista has pretty decent power management considering what it has to deal with "vista". And developers have speed up the process.. its called windows seven. I think the answer would be to use windows seven and install the fastest Intel SSD drive you can find and be done with it. That way a full boot in 15 seconds! I also just bought a 8800 MAH extended battery which really helps.

The other thing I don't care about hibernation is when you boot back you get all the nice superfetch disc thrashing for several minutes. I admit, superfetch is needed because vista is more or less pathetic without it. Therefore, I generally use sleep during the day and shut it down and night. SSD is probably the only feasible solution to the current state of OS's and how freaking huge they have become. I always find it funny that people will spend so much money on getting the fastest processor when I think they would get more performance for the buck by getting a slower dual core and a SSD drive.

 

That is a solution to the problem, but it creates another problem if Vista hangs in the process and the laptop is sitting in, say, the owners knapsack during a class. This can cause damage to the internals...