Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!haven!decuac!shlump.nac.dec.com!jareth.enet.dec.com!edp
From: edp@jareth.enet.dec.com (Eric Postpischil (Always mount a scratch monkey.))
Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds
Subject: Re: Battery problem in 48SX?
Keywords: 48SX,batteries,I/O,alarms
Message-ID: <16465@shlump.nac.dec.com>
Date: 18 Oct 90 12:05:18 GMT
References: <1990Oct18.013921.28895@santra.uucp>
Sender: newsdaemon@shlump.nac.dec.com
Reply-To: edp@jareth.enet.dec.com (Eric Postpischil (Always mount a scratch monkey.))
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 17

In article <1990Oct18.013921.28895@santra.uucp>, k36853p@saha.hut.fi (Tapani
Otala) writes:

>Also while I'm certainly not an expert on 48SX, I should think that the
>checking of pending alarms does drain the batteries somewhat even when
>the machine is turned off.

I doubt it.  HP posted specifications on power drain, and the 48 uses very
little when it is turned off.  Observe that the number of alarms you have is
irrelevant; all that is necessary is to check the earliest pending alarm.  I'd
expect the hardware to have a register for the current time and a register for
the earliest pending alarm, and some clock circuitry updates the current time
and generates a power-on interrupt of some sort when the pending time is
reached.


				-- edp