It's weird they didn't also include a simple web browser test that navigates a set of web links and scrolls the window occasionally. Just something very light at least, doesn't even have to be heavy like video playback.
Power consumption is incredibly difficult to benchmark in a meaningful way because it is extremely dependent on all the devices in the system, all the software running, and most power optimizations are workload dependent. Tons of time went into this in the windows fundamentals team at Microsoft.
This effect is likely vanishlingly small, definitely overshadowed by engineering considerations like the voltage used when walking pixels through changes and such. But still, it's a physics nudge towards "yes".
It would be interesting to test it over a remote desktop session where the screen on the device under test is off. That would eliminate a lot of factors related to the display. Presumably you'd see that the network traffic is either larger to begin with, or doesn't compress quite as well, giving you another reason to say "yes, but what if..."
It is like worry about Carnot’s limit… for a motor boat.
I've met managers who literally lock the conference room door when it hits :00.
That's a little crazy in my view, but there are definitely places where it's the norm.
There are basically two ways of managing expectations around meeting times. The first is that it's acceptable for meetings to run late, so it's normal and tolerated for people to be late to their next meeting, and meetings often start something like 5 minutes late, and you try to make sure nothing really important gets discussed until 10 minutes in. The other is that it's unacceptable for meetings to start late, so people always leave the previous meeting early to make sure they have time for bathroom, emergency emails, etc. In which case important participants wind up leaving before a decision gets made, which is a whole problem of its own.
I'm one of those freaks who have this on and I honestly like it a lot. It gives me a feeling of certainty, grounding, and precision.
Primary driver for turning it on was their redesign of the clock flyout to be, uhh, nonexistent with Windows 11, which I'd previously use on demand for seconds information. I was also worried about this being a nonsolution and a distraction initially, but it ended up being fine.
The compromise for GNOME Terminal is that the cursor will stop blinking after a terminal has been idle for ten seconds.
This is undoubtedly the answer, and I suspect that if any actual effort were made by Microsoft, the problem might be eliminated entirely. Maybe.
Most likely, the update is implemented calling a standard stack of system calls that are completely benign in a normal application, which is already limiting power savings in various ways. But when run by itself, the call stack is triggering a bunch of stuff that ends up using a bit more power.
The big question is: Can this actually be optimized with some dedicated programming time? Or is the display/task bar/scheduling such a convoluted mess in Windows that updating the time every second without causing a bunch of other stuff to wake up is impossible without a complete rewrite.
[1] The caveat is that the majority of the time the system will not be idle but doing something else possibly even more energy-intensive.
Let’s be honest, implementing this would be up to a bunch of offshore contractors because corporate can’t bring itself to pay software engineers to implement this feature thoughtfully and comprehensively.
Meanwhile, build database centers at incredible scale to run AI and force it into those same consumers in every way possible, but never tell them how much power that wastes.
Yes, it would require a small API addition to the desktop server (wayland, X11, ...) to "register"/transfer/update those 10 frames, their locations ... whenever the user initializes or changes the fonts, font size, ... the context switch can be totally eliminated.
The bigger problem is waking up the GPU and all the communication between components, which is why the computer with integrated graphics takes a smaller hit than the one with dedicated graphics. And why the ARM laptop did even better, because they were optimised for this usecase.
Jaxan•10h ago
lxgr•10h ago
If, as tested, this setting makes a double-digit percentage difference, I'm glad Microsoft exposes it in the UI. I'd also be glad if they didn't do as much weird stuff on their user's devices as they do.
pavel_lishin•10h ago
I'd rather them write more performant code. This feels like your car having the option to burn motor oil to show a more precise clock on the dash; you don't get kudos for adding an off-switch for that.
minitech•10h ago
In keeping with the theme of the comment you're replying to, writing better-performing code and providing performance options are not mutually exclusive. Both are good ideas.
> This feels like your car having the option to burn motor oil to show a more precise clock on the dash; you don't get kudos for adding an off-switch for that.
(Sounds more like you're arguing that it should be forced off instead of being an option? Reasonable take in this case, but not the same argument.)
jjj123•9h ago
I think we all agree there needs to be some additional power draw for the seconds feature, but it’s unclear how much power is truly necessary vs this just being a poor implementation.
ants_everywhere•8h ago
morganherlocker•9h ago
aksss•9h ago
Energy isn’t free.
Even if they wrote more performant code, it would just mean less relative loss of energy to show seconds but still loss compared to not showing seconds.
pavel_lishin•9h ago
orangecat•9h ago
I actively don't want to see seconds; the constant updating is distracting. It should be an option even if there were no energy impact. (Ditto for terminal cursor blinking).
p_ing•9h ago
GLdRH•8h ago
eviks•2h ago
lucb1e•2h ago
criddell•9h ago
My expectations of Microsoft software aren't terribly high. I'd say Windows is performant (ie it works about as well as I expect).
daveoc64•7h ago
The feature is off by default in Windows 11 and was not offered in any previous non-beta Windows version.
anonymars•5h ago
(Have I mentioned how much I loathe Windows 11?)
Xylakant•9h ago
Delk•8h ago
Delk•8h ago
The recommendations suggest, among other things, switching to power-saving mode, turning on dark mode, setting screen brightness for energy efficiency, and auto-suspending and turning the screen off after 3 minutes.
Power-saving mode saves little at least on most laptops but has a significant performance impact, dark mode only saves power on LED displays (LCDs have a slight inverse effect), and both dark/light mode and screen brightness should be set based on ergonomics, not based on saving three watts.
When these kinds of recommendations are given to the consumer for "lowering your carbon footprint", with a green leaf symbol for impact, while Microsoft's data centres keep spending enormous amounts of power on data analysis, I find it hard to see that as anything more than greenwashing.
ctoth•10h ago
They send any text you type in a form to their AI cloud and hold on to it for 30 days.
Any form.
On any website.
What the actual fuck?
smokel•10h ago
atq2119•9h ago
perching_aix•9h ago
justsomehnguy•7h ago
If there are a bunch of these corrections you know something is wrong there. IMO 30 days is quite modest and if this is properly anonymized..
Edit: dear HN user who decided to silently downvote - you could do better by actually voicing your opinion
perching_aix•7h ago
Sure, I'll bite. Let's address the obvious issue first: what you're saying is speculation. I can only provide my own speculation in return, and then you might or might not find it agreeable, or at least claim either way. And there will be nothing I can do about it. I generally don't find this valuable or productive, and I did disagree with yours, hence my silent downvote.
But since you're explicitly asking for other people's speculation, here I go. Advanced "spellchecking" necessitates the usage of AI, as natural languages cannot ever be fully processed using just hard coded logic. This is not an opinion, you learn this when taking formal languages class at university. It arises from formal logic only being able to wrangle formal logic abiding things, which natural languages aren't (else they'd be called formal languages).
What the opinion is, and the speculation is, is that this is what the feature kicks off when it sends over input data to MS's servers for advanced "spellchecking", much like what I speculate Grammarly does too. Either that, or these services have some proprietary language engine that they'd rather keep on their own premises, because why put your moat out there if you don't strictly have to.
Technologically speaking, at this point it might be possible to do this locally, on-device now. This further didn't use to be the case I believe (although I do not have sources on this), and so this would be another reason why you'd send people's inputs to the shadow realm.
demarq•6h ago
Better to say what you need to say. Leave the defense for the occasion someone misunderstood what you meant to say.
perching_aix•6h ago
throw10920•6h ago
I can't count the number of times on HN that I've seen responses to posts that took advantage of the poster not writing defensively to emotionally attack them in ways that absolutely break the HN guidelines, and weren't flagged or downvoted. And on other sites, like Reddit, it's just the norm.
The defensive writing will continue until morals improve.
Xorlev•6h ago
Logs are always generated, and logs include some amount of data about the user, if only environmental.
It's quite plausible that the spellchecker does not store your actual user data, but information about the request, or error logging includes more UGC than intended.
Note: I don't have any insider knowledge about their spellcheck API, but I've worked on similar systems which have similar language for little more than basic request logging.
HeavyStorm•4h ago
perching_aix•9h ago
They had searching on the web enabled... Pretty hard to search the web using Bing without sending along a search term.
lucumo•9h ago
freeone3000•6h ago
perching_aix•6h ago
foolswisdom•9h ago
perching_aix•7h ago
Note that this is from 2023. Their legal docs, last updated in 2024, claim a bit different: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/microsoft-edge/priva...
> By default, Microsoft Edge provides spelling and grammar checking using Microsoft Editor. When using Microsoft Editor, Microsoft Edge sends your typed text and a service token to a Microsoft cloud service over a secure HTTPS connection. The service token doesn't contain any user-identifiable information. A Microsoft cloud service then processes the text to detect spelling and grammar errors in your text. All your typed text that's sent to Microsoft is deleted immediately after processing occurs. No data is stored for any period of time.
Teever•9h ago
Does anyone know if that is true?
morkalork•9h ago
heavyset_go•4h ago
svnt•6h ago
Some people checked it with wireshark at the time and didn’t find anything other than what was stated. [0]
0: https://gamersnexus.net/industry/2672-geforce-experience-dat...
IgorPartola•9h ago
NewJazz•9h ago
saparaloot•9h ago
jbaber•9h ago
Microsoft ordered me to buy a new computer for Win 11, so I took said kids to Microcenter, asked for a machine whose specs could play a particular steam game on Linux, returned to my mortgage, installed Ubuntu and haven't given Windows a second thought in months.
fkrkrkgkgk•3h ago
vachina•3h ago
Lu2025•9h ago
perching_aix•7h ago
By default, when you implement a form that takes a password, you (the developer) are going to be using the "input" HTML element with the type "password". This element is exempt from spellchecking, so no issues there.
However, many websites also implement a temporary password reveal feature. To achieve this, one would typically change the type of the "input" element to "text" when clicking the reveal button, thereby unintentionally allowing spellchecking.
You (the developer) can explicitly mark an element to be ineligible for spellchecking by setting the "spellchecking" attribute to "false", remediating this quirk: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Reference/...
You (the developer) can of course also just use a different approach for implementing a password reveal feature.
As the MDN docs remark, this infoleak vector is known as "spelljacking".
IlikeKitties•7h ago
> Expect Privacy
> Don't get Privacy
SuprisedPikatchu.jpg
tspivey•6h ago
ape4•10h ago
bee_rider•9h ago
mouse_•7h ago
jasonthorsness•9h ago
trinix912•9h ago
HPsquared•9h ago
fkrkrkgkgk•3h ago
IgorPartola•9h ago
Kwpolska•9h ago
blibble•9h ago
and building multiple gigawatt consuming data centres to produce AI slop no-one asked for and no-one wants
powered by fossil fuels
netsharc•8h ago
ozgrakkurt•8h ago
Also airlines asking for extra money to offset emissions, just absolute insanity
dist-epoch•8h ago
Terr_•8h ago
That reminds me of Chrom[e|ium]'s insanely bad form suggest/autofill logic: The browser creates some sort of fuzzy hash/fingerprint of the forms you visit, and uses that with some Google black box to "crowdsource" what kinds of field-data to suggest... even when both the user and the web-designer try to stop it.
For example, imagine you're editing a list of Customers, and Chrome keeps trying to trick you into entering your own "first name" and "last name" whenever you add or edit an entry. For a while developers could stop that with autocomplete="off" and then Chromium deliberately put in code to ignore it.
I'm not sure how much of a privacy leak those form-fingerprints are, but they are presumptively shady when the developers ignore countless detailed complaints over many years in order to keep the behavior.
https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40093420
zozbot234•7h ago
userbinator•6h ago
This used to be done entirely in hardware (VGA text modes), and I believe some early GPUs had a feature to do that in graphics modes too.
cheema33•6h ago
It is not. This "feature" is disabled by default.
Google "manufactured outrage".
anonymars•5h ago
(For the record, I abhor Windows 11)
albert_e•1h ago