Columns

A letter that made its way into this issue's Mailbox has set me thinking. If you want to read it now, it's the star letter from Michael Lloyd, in which he bemoans the apparent backwards step taken in upgrading from the 2004 to 2008 editions of Office. In short, it made things run more slowly.

Now, I rarely use Office myself. For no particular reason other than the fact I don't have any need for its myriad features. I'm slimming down. But perhaps it should go further than just slimming my software, and encompass hardware, consumables and power.

I've recently switched electricity provider to a green supplier that uses the full value of my bills to fund hydro-electric generation. As a bonus, it also throws in a monitor that tracks every Watt as and when it's used, and that's been a real eye-opener.

The iMac is never allowed to sleep

ADVERTISEMENT

any more: when it isn't in use, it's off. Likewise, the router. Before the switch, it was on around the clock throughout the week, but by switching it off when I'm out at work I can run my lights every night for free.

But the bad news for Apple is that this new, slimline lifestyle means I'll not be upgrading my Mac in the very near future. I run a G5 iMac at home - a 20in model with an iSight - which according to Apple's own specs draws 180W at peak. That's increased by more than 10% in later models, and should I choose to upgrade to the 24in model, I'd be looking at an extra 100W of maximum consumption.

Ten per cent may not sound like much, but it is more than the router ever consumed. I may never have given it a second thought before, but since I've started using lighting as my benchmark - and I'm using energy-saving bulbs, so the calculations are ever more stark - it's assumed a greater relevance than ever.

So how does all of this relate to software? Well, in a very real way the more demanding the software, the more you could end up paying. And I'm not just talking up-front price, either. Have you ever noticed how your machine's fans ramp up when you perform a processor-intensive task? That's drawing more power and so is costing you money.

Scale back, I say. Use the least demanding tool for each job and your monthly cost of computing will, I can almost guarantee, be significantly lower in the long run.