It costs just $1.36 to charge an iPad for a year

That coffee you're drinking while gazing at your iPad? It cost more than all the electricity needed to run those games, emails, videos and news stories for a year.

The annual cost to charge an iPad is just $1.36, according to the Electric Power Research Institute, a non-profit research and development group funded by electric utilities.

By comparison, a 60-watt compact fluorescent bulb costs $1.61, a desktop PC adds up to $28.21 and a refrigerator runs you $65.72.

The group, known as EPRI, studied the power consumption of Apple Inc.'s iPad to determine the effect that the newly-popular devices might have on the nation's electricity use.

The answer: not much.

If the number of iPads triples from the current 67 million, they would need the electricity from one small power plant operating at full strength.

But if people are using iPads instead of televisions to play video games, or ditching their desktop computers for iPads, the shift to tablets could mean lower overall power consumption. A desktop computer uses 20 times more power than an iPad.

Baskar Vairmohan, the EPRI researcher who conducted the iPad test, said the group is now studying usage to understand whether the explosion of tablets is adding to power consumption, or reducing it.

Residential power demand is on track to fall for the third straight year, according to the government. A weak economy is keeping people in smaller houses and shacked up with others. At the same time, efficiency programs are pushing more efficient light bulbs, air conditioners and other devices into homes. Refrigerators use a quarter of the power they used a generation ago, according to EPRI.

For the iPad test, Vairmohan measured the amount of power used to charge up an iPad with a drained battery. He assumed that users would charge up every other day. Over a year, the latest version of the iPad consumed 11.86 kilowatt-hours of electricity. (Older versions consume somewhat less power.)

The juice would cost $1.36 at the U.S. average residential price of 11.49 cents per kilowatt-hour.

But there's an even cheaper way to go than the iPad. EPRI calculated the cost of power needed to fuel an iPhone 4 for year: just 38 cents.

By JONATHAN FAHEY, AP Energy Writer – Jun 21, 2012 Copyright © 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

STEVE JOBS WINS

Adobe is Ditching Flash

It has been just over two years since Steve Jobs wrote his "Thoughts on Flash" essay.
Jobs criticized Adobe because, "flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice...But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls short."
Apparently Jobs was right.
In a blog post yesterday, Adobe addressed concerns that it would no longer support mobile flash on Android's latest operating system, Jelly Bean. The flash-maker confirmed previous news that they in fact will not support mobile flash but instead the company will focus on flash for PC.
Back in 2010 Jobs said, "flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it."
We never will see it. After August 15 of this year mobile flash will begin to fade out of the picture. Don't worry, if you already have flash installed on your device. Adobe will still continue to issue security updates and other vital patches for existing users.
Being able to access flash-based web content from Android devices was once a huge selling point for Google based tablets and phones.
Going forward Adobe says, "the easiest way to ensure ongoing access to Flash Player on Android 4.0 or earlier devices is to use certified devices and ensure that the Flash Player is either pre-installed by the manufacturer or installed from Google Play Store before August 15^th."

Thanks: Business Insider

The Microsoft Surface Tablet Is Going To Be A Total Flop

The Microsoft tablet, the Surface, is going to be a total flop.

The more information that leaks out about it, the more it seems clear that Microsoft is not going to kill the iPad with the Surface, at least not on this first try. And, more likely, never.
There are a couple of reasons the Surface won't be a success, but the two main points are:

• The premise is flawed. Microsoft's appeal to consumers is that the iPad can't do enough. The Surface is supposed to replace the tablet and the laptop. Consumers are happy with the iPad as an additive product — it's not meant to replace a laptop right now. Trying to be two things at once will lead to the Surface being neither.

• It will start at $600. Why pay a premium for an inferior product? The iPad 2 costs $400, and it's great. The new iPad is $500 at entry level and it's really great. The Kindle Fire costs $200, and it's adequate. Microsoft isn't going to win the high-end battle, and it's not fighting the low end.

Lesser reasons: Microsoft is only selling the Surface at its stores, the battery life might be worse, it has a kickstand, consumers don't think of Microsoft as a great, hip, cool brand, the Zune, its biggest selling point is a keyboard almost no one has used, etc.
If Microsoft can't sell tablets, it's not going to inspire its already hesitant partners to build their own versions of Windows tablets. If they don't build tablets to challenge Apple, then Apple could run away with the market.
If Apple runs away with the market, Windows is in real trouble. Steve Ballmer said at the Surface presentation that Windows is at the core of everything Microsoft does. If Windows is at risk, Microsoft is at risk.
That's a lot of ifs. But we're not the only ones who think the iPad is a big threat to Windows. Microsoft wouldn't have taken the drastic step of releasing its own hardware if it wasn't scared to death of Apple.

Source: Business Insider