[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: problem with APM on a Vaio FX501



Sony made an effort for FX501 battery compared to FX401 ones:
Battery power on FX401: 25.16Wh (14.8V 1700mAh)
Battery power on FX501: 44.4Wh (14.8V 3000mAh)

I didn't made some testing but i think you should be able to use the VAIO
more than one hour with the new battery pack.


Regards,

Pascal Beck

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Thomas Seyrat [mailto:thomas@glou.net]
Envoyé : lundi 4 mars 2002 11:36
À : debian-laptop@lists.debian.org
Objet : Re: problem with APM on a Vaio FX501


shoegoo3 wrote:
> APM stuff is not working fine: the battery has a very short life-time when

> I use my laptop unplugged.

  This is a known problem on this series of VAIOs, such as FX301, 401,
  etc.

  In fact, all the battery consuming elements are controlled through the
  ACPI interface, thus, power management is not 100% functional yet.
  Plus, Sony put very low autonomy batteries by default on these models
  which provide, even when running an OS communicating through ACPI,
  about one hour of spare time.

-- 
Thomas Seyrat.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-laptop-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org


***********************************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. 

This email and any response may be monitored by Sony United Kingdom Limited.
(04)
***********************************************************************************************



Reply to: