I went to sleep at just past three this morning for reasons that are no longer known to me or anyone else. Well, maybe God, but we’re not even sure we know whether he exists - not to mention whether he knows why I went to sleep at three last night.
Somehow I still managed to wake up in time for class at nine. That’s becoming a more common occurance these days: since I failed the midterm, I feel obligated to go to class, even if it doesn’t help me at all for the final. So this is supposed to be about naps. I took one in my eleven o’clock class - a short one, approximately ten minutes.
I made it through lunch without catching anymore sleep and listened to my friend try to play the first couple stanza of One More Time, One More Chance with mild success. I didn’t actually think I’d fall asleep in my one o’clock class, but before I knew it, fifteen minutes had passed and my back was kinda sore. Still, I made it through the rest of my classes - well, one and a half classes - without incident.
And dinner, too. And wham. I slept from six to seven too.
They make 32GB SDHC cards these days. They also make 1500GB 3.5″ hard drives these days. 1500GB is roughly 47 32GB SDHC cards which is somewhat of a large number of SDHC cards. My point, though, is that 47 SDHC cards actually take up less volume than a 3.5″ hard drive, which means that flash memory is actually physically denser than traditional spinners now.
Yes, this is a bad comparison. I should probably be comparing the size of the individual flash chips to the size of the platters in a standard hard drive. But I’m just trying to make a point here.

Earlier I went on at some more length about a Compact Flash card, an Ultra IDE adapter, and an HP TC4200. Now, in are the votes and closed are the polls: Compact Flash kinda raped my old drive:


Ok, ok, it’s a bad comparison again. I should technically be testing important things like IOPS, but HDTune free version is kinda limited in what it can bench. Even HDTune less than free version can only test like sequential writes, though I don’t imagine that to be too much slower. At the very least we can conclude that a 4GB, 300x CF card kills a 40GB, 5400RPM HDD when it comes to reads. Any kind of’em.
But ok, reads and random reads aren’t the only thing we care about. My main concern is actually battery life. So throughout the past two days, I used my computer in class and took down the durations for which the laptop was used and the corresponding drop in battery life.
67, 20
19. 07
40, 15
06, 03
55, 21
55, 18
21, 09
You tally up those numbers, minutes in the left column and percents in the right column, and you get 307 and 107, that’s 2.86 minutes per percent of battery which is 286 minutes which is 4.76 hours which is… well, absolutely ridiculous and probably wrong. I couldn’t touch that when the battery was “new”, despite having a traditional disk.
Nonetheless, ignoring the ridiculousness of this figure, I think it’s safe to say that there IS a decrease in power consumption, even if the overall battery life isn’t 286 minutes which is 4.76 hours. I haven’t done any recent tests with my old drive, but my occasional mental calculations were putting battery life in the three hour range, so…
Ok, that’s it for today; I’m going to watch some effin Animu.