| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/06/2007 03:13:12 AM · #1 |
black google
Quoted from Trendhunter.com:
Blackle is a custom Google search engine that claims to save energy simply âbecause the screen is predominantly black.â The siteâs only differing function from Google is the fact that its background is black and the results are white - making it a hard-to-read, but allegedly power-saving, adaptation of the worldâs favorite search site.
Apparently, the idea for the site was born from a 2007 blog post, Black Google Would Save 750 Megawatt-hours a Year, which proposed that a black version of the Google search engine would save a fair bit of energy and the fact that âa given monitor requires more power to display a white (or light) screen than a black (or dark) screen.â
None of this has been proven, but the creatorâs of Blackle say they believe that there is value in the concept because even if the energy savings are small, they all add up. Of course, they believe Blackle every time someone loads the Blackle web browser it will remind them to take steps to save energy. Whatever works, right?
Do you know that your computer consume about 74 watts when you have WHITE open window? (example: a Word Document) And if you open a BLACK window in your computer consume 59 watts only, less 15 watts! Take the Google main page for example: if Google change their color to black, and according with their huge users, should be possible to save 750 megawatts/hour. Concern with this and to answer that matter, Google create the www.Blackle.com that work as the original version BUT consume less energy! So⦠letâs Blackle! |
|
|
|
07/06/2007 03:29:25 AM · #2 |
on the other hand, if the text is harder to read, you will have to spend more time looking through the pages and the monitor will run longer before it can switch to energy saving mode...
|
|
|
|
07/06/2007 03:52:46 AM · #3 |
It doesn't seem that hard to read ... but I like Mamma.com better as a general search engine ...
|
|
|
|
07/06/2007 03:55:09 AM · #4 |
I do believe it, that is why for the last month I'm just been doing everything with my monitor off. You should see how much energy I save by typing in the dark. ;)
I can't wait to see which racially bias comedian picks this bad boy up and talks about how one color uses more or less energy than the other. I can just hear the jokes now.
Message edited by author 2007-07-06 03:56:38. |
|
|
|
07/06/2007 03:57:38 AM · #5 |
| i actually find the text to be easier to read and its all nicer on the eyes |
|
|
|
07/06/2007 10:08:02 AM · #6 |
It may seem save energy, but the costs are really higher.
Since the site is harder to read, it will increase eyestrain. That means that more people will need glasses. Quality of life issues aside, those glasses impart an increased cost to the consumer and, they require the consumption of energy to produce. Also, you would need to consider the energy consumtion involved in traveling to the eye exam, in the equipment used to give the eye exam itself, and also the energy consumed by the people themselves. Not to mention that the ocular capability of the affected individual will continue to decline and require repeating this vicious cycle of waste annually, if not more often.
After thinking about it and analyzing it in detail, I'll stick with regular Google. |
|
|
|
07/06/2007 10:16:13 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by eyewave:
on the other hand, if the text is harder to read, you will have to spend more time looking through the pages and the monitor will run longer before it can switch to energy saving mode... |
If everyone who uses electricity to heat water would use a timer to heat the water only when needed, along with installing an insulation blanket, this would dwarf the pitiful 15 watt saving this "blackle" claims.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2007 11:33:46 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by noisemaker:
i actually find the text to be easier to read and its all nicer on the eyes |
In all seriousness, this doesn't surprise.
At work, we have a method of screening students with overlays for their readings. The overlays are a variety of colors and range from a very pale pink, to a very dark blue. They are simply colored transparencies.
The effect is that when they are laid over a white page, it becomes physically easier on the eyes, and thus reading is physically easier, and more effective. For students with reading disabilities, comments like "Wow, the words stopped moving," and "Hey, the letters look like they are supposed to" are very common.
Even though I do not have a reading disability, it is much more comfortable to read with one of the pale pink or pale blue overlays. Red and "goldenrod" hurt my head though.
My point? I really don't have one except that it doesn't surprise me that someone finds white on black easier to read. It's okay for me (not as easy as black on white), but screens with red on them (either text or background) have a short screen time for me. :) |
|
|
|
07/06/2007 12:37:09 PM · #9 |
So a monitor uses less energy when viewing "black".
If I color a web page black and one completly white and spend exactly a minute viewing each one, you're telling me that the black page will use a measurably less amount of energy?
I'd have to see the proof before I'd advocate changing all web pages to black. |
|
|
|
07/06/2007 12:41:26 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by sabphoto:
I can't wait to see which racially bias comedian picks this bad boy up and talks about how one color uses more or less energy than the other. I can just hear the jokes now. |
Chris Rock? :-)
|
|
|
|
07/06/2007 12:44:31 PM · #11 |
DPC should become energy conscious and only have low key challenges .:-)
|
|
|
|
07/06/2007 01:01:12 PM · #12 |
|
|
|
08/02/2007 11:09:02 AM · #13 |
Dat's a goot Vun!!! ...
In all seriousness, I hope this Blackle web page - if ANYTHING - gets people thinking about other ways to save energy.
For example:
I drive a standard 5-speed civic HX and use neutral whenever the gas pedal isn't needed,
I installed those spirally bulbs which use 1/8 the energy or something like that,
Maybe I'm trying to invigorate this thread into a ways to be a:
Practical Environmentalist
Photographers are thinkers right? What do you do?
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
DPC should become energy conscious and only have low key challenges .:-) |
|
|
|
|
08/02/2007 11:14:11 AM · #14 |
FWIW, a predominantly (or even completely) black screen saves *no* energy on an LCD monitor. The backlight is still on, and all the drive electronics are still on. The energy consumption is the same.
There are marginal energy savings on a CRT monitor... but who (besides dinosaurs like me) still has a CRT? The majority of the world has gone LCD. |
|
|
|
08/02/2007 11:27:10 AM · #15 |
| Imagine all of the wasted ink to print a page of results with a black background! :P I guess you could do a select all/copy then paste it to a word doc. Doesn't seem to save much energy that way. |
|
|
|
08/02/2007 11:53:41 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
FWIW, a predominantly (or even completely) black screen saves *no* energy on an LCD monitor. The backlight is still on, and all the drive electronics are still on. The energy consumption is the same.
There are marginal energy savings on a CRT monitor... but who (besides dinosaurs like me) still has a CRT? The majority of the world has gone LCD. |
Boringly enough, but this isn't true. The energy required to turn a typically white LCD pixel to black is higher than the energy to leave it white.
Upshot of that is, normally white LCDs typically use more power to display black pixels and normally black LCDs use more power to display white pixels.
Most backlit LCDs are normally white displays, so black google has a (marginally) higher power consumption on most LCDs.
The original justification is based on the idea that about 75% of the computers in the world use CRTs, so any potential saving should be based on that.
A better option would be to turn down your refresh rate if you want to save some power.
Message edited by author 2007-08-02 11:55:28.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 10:57:10 AM EDT.
