From: alex wallis <alexwallis646_at_googlemail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 23:36:57 -0000

> alex wallis wrote:
>>
>> Hi. because, what happens if a user wants to change a setting that
>> impacts on how music is played back they wouldn't be able to do it
>> if settings was turned into a plugin and battery bench was left in
>> its current state.
>> They would therefor have to disable battery bench, change the
>> setting, run battery bench again and restart playback, you must
>> admit that would be a very annoying situation.
>>
>
> The entire point of battery bench is that you should NOT be doing anything
> to trigger the backlight, change what's on the screen, spin the disk, or
> otherwise tax the player above and beyond basic playback preferably with
> the default WPS once you start the plugin. That would include changing
> settings. Taking a plugin's size from the audio buffer is exactly the
> opposite of trying to get an accurate benchmark (by the way, I doubt it's
> 512 bytes, it may not use the whole 512 kilobytes of the plugin buffer but
> that sounds extremely small). I mean all you'd be doing by moving the
> battery bench into the audio buffer would be making it even easier to
> create inaccurate battery benches, because they start of biased slightly
> toward a worse time than you'll normally see.


But you can almost certainly guarantee there wil be at least one person who
say decides they want to change an album so it gets shuffled for example.
Yes I no that would lead to an inaccurate battery test, but i'm sure you
will find there is at least one person out there who does that.
Besides I like thomas's idea of being able to see what affect the use of
other plugins has on battery life, it could make for some very interesting
intertarget comparisons.
Received on 2008-10-28