House Power Failures and Mac

w_tom wrote:
> On Feb 10, 4:56 pm, Dudley Henriques <dhenriq....RemoveThis@rcn.com> wrote:
>> I just want to thank everyone who answered in this thread. I read all of
>> it and appreciate your time. I learned a lot from your input.
>
The best information on surges and surge protection I have seen is at:
http://omegaps.com/Lightning%20Guide_FINALpublishedversion_May051.pdf
- "How to protect your house and its contents from lightning: IEEE guide
for surge protection of equipment connected to AC power and
communication circuits" published by the IEEE in 2005 (the IEEE is the
dominant organization of electrical and electronic engineers in the US).
And also:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf
- "NIST recommended practice guide: Surges Happen!: how to protect the
appliances in your home" published by the US National Institute of
Standards and Technology in 2001

The IEEE guide is aimed at those with some technical background. The
NIST guide is aimed at the unwashed masses.

>
> Read numeric specs for a UPS. Where are numeric claims for hardware
> protection? It does not. Why does the manufacturer not even claim
> what others have posted here?

Contrary to w_’s beliefs, both the IEEE and NIST guides say plug-in
suppressors are effective. Ratings range from junk to very high. The
same protection can be built into UPSs. Any surge suppressor in the US
should have a UL1449 listing.

>
> Second, why would a UPS protect Ethernet ports?

All interconnected equipment needs to be connected to the same plug-in
suppressor, or interconnecting wires need to go through the suppressor.
External connections, like ethernet, phone, also need to go through the
suppressor. Connecting all wiring through the suppressor prevents
damaging voltages between power and signal wires. These multiport
suppressors are described in both guides.

According to NIST guide, US insurance information indicates equipment
most frequently damaged by lightning is
computers with a modem connection
TVs, VCRs and similar equipment (presumably with cable TV
connections).
All can be damaged by high voltages between power and signal wires.

> Protection is defined by earth ground. A protector with
> that short (less than 10 foot) connection to earth has THE only
> required component in every protection solution: earth ground.

w_ has a religious belief (immune from challenge) that surge protection
must use earthing. Thus in his view plug-in suppressors & UPSs (which
are not well earthed) can not possibly work. The IEEE guide explains
plug-in suppressors work by CLAMPING the voltage on all wires (signal
and power) to the common ground at the suppressor. Plug-in suppressors
do not work primarily by earthing. The guide explains earthing occurs
elsewhere. (Read the guide starting pdf page 40).

>
> Every wire in every cable (including underground cables - see that
> figure) makes a short connection to single point earth ground where
> the cable enters a building. A 'whole house' protector in a breaker
> box can do just that.

A service panel suppressor is a good idea.

For best protection, the phone, cable, ... entry protectors need to be
connected with a *short* wire to the earthing wire *at the power
service*. When a strong surge is earthed, the 'ground' voltage in the
house can rise thousands of volts above 'absolute ground'. The goal is
to minimize the voltage between signal and power ground references. The
effect of a ‘ground’ wire that is too long is illustrated in the IEEE
guide starting pdf page 40.

> TV
> (coax) cable drops down to make an earthing connection before entering
> the building.

Commenting on cable entry ground blocks, the IEEE guide says “there is
no requirement to limit the voltage developed between the core and the
sheath. .... The only voltage limit is the breakdown of the F
connectors, typically ~2–4 kV.” And "there is obviously the possibility
of damage to TV tuners and cable modems from the very high voltages that
can be developed, especially from nearby lightning."

========================
The Pournelle Byte article that Howard referred to is at
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/computing/august89.html
A 16,000V power line dropped on the 120V line to his house. Surge
suppressors (plug-in or service panel) are not made for the long
duration of such an event. The author of the NIST guide has said "in
fact, the major cause of TVSS [surge suppressor] failures is a temporary
overvoltage, rather than an unusually large surge."

Pournelle had a computer on a UPS that continued to function through
the event (how did that happen w_?)

The IEEE guide describes at length that in a plug-in suppressor the
protected load can be connected across the MOVs or connected ahead of
them. If the protected load is connected across the MOVs, it will be
disconnected when the MOVs are disconnected on failure (as now required
by UL). A few plug-in suppressors disconnect on overvoltage. A UPS may
switch to battery on overvoltage.

--
bud--
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

In article
<alpine.OSX.1.00.0802102049250.93076.RemoveThis@hagrid.ewd.goldmark.org>,
Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody.RemoveThis@goldmark.org> wrote:

> In <rowbotth-808C2A.12581910022008.RemoveThis@news.newsgroupdirect.com>, Rowbotth wrote:
>
> > And another benefit to the APC UPS that I have is that they plug into
> > the Mac with a USB Cable, and it goes right into the Energy Saver under
> > System Preferences, and it sees the UPS I have.
>
> Wow. I've been using apcupsd on a couple of systems for no good reason if
> this is built into System Preferences.
>
> -j
>
> PS:
>
> Answer: No
> Question: Is top-posting a good way to carry on a conversation?

Granted. But I was not wanting to snip for the benefit of those who
were interested in my response and what had prompted it. So I committed
what I hope to have understood as the lessor of two sins...

(and not trying to justify, but the emailers do add newer posts to the
top rather than the bottom of the message. So this is sort of one of
the inconsistencies of e-comm that makes life just so very fascinating
and clique-y...)

Apologies, folks.

H.
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

In article <x5qdnac6O9KaYTPanZ2dnUVZ_rignZ2d.TakeThisOut@rcn.net>,
Dudley Henriques <dhenriques.TakeThisOut@rcn.com> wrote:

> I guess I'm a normal home user with an IMac. I've been thinking about
> how I use the computer vs a potential house power failure and how that
> might effect the computer if it's on or sleeping when that happens.
>
> My system is up for about 18 hours a day; either in use, on the screen
> saver; or in sleep mode. Sometimes when we go out I'll shut it down in
> case of a Thunderstorm, but otherwise it's up and running.
>
> I let it sleep all night usually and it's here I'm worried about a power
> failure and what that might do to the Mac.
>
>
> Obviously I could purchase a battery power supply backup system but
> that's a fairly large expense for a home user.
>
> Can you let me in on how some of you deal with this issue?
>
> One thing I'd like to know is how my Mac would suffer or not suffer in
> the event of a house power failure. My PC with Windows was a mess when
> this happened (twice) but so far I've been lucky with the IMac.
>
> If I do get nailed, what's the prospect for damage and are there built
> in utilities in my OSX that I can run after a failure to help restore
> things back to normal?
>
> How do you other home users deal with this?????

Get a UPS, they are cheaper than you think. You can get a Belkin or APC
UPS for around $150 that will shut down your Mac if the power fails. If
that is too costly for you, then at least get a good surge protector and
put all your disk drives and your iMac on it.
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

In article
<da802076-7288-4a17-bfe8-74f87b6b7c07 RemoveThis @s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
w_tom <w_tom1 RemoveThis @usa.net> wrote:

> On Feb 11, 1:24 am, Jolly Roger <jollyro... RemoveThis @pobox.com> wrote:
> > You can talk until you are blue in the face about how you believe the
> > need for a UPS is a myth, and how it won't protect anything.  All that
> > talk doesn't change the fact that in the past 9 years none of the people
> > whom I have set up with UPS devices have lost a single Ethernet port,
> > power supply, etc. - compared to several who lost them prior to that
> > without UPS devices. Why does it work?  I don't know - does it even
> > matter? If it works, that's good enough for me.

> blah blah blah blah blah blah

Is your face blue yet?

--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.

JR
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

In article <gkreme-689644.12410311022008 DeleteThis @news.giganews.com>,
Lewis <gkreme DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:

> In article
> <jollyroger-8D1582.12202711022008 DeleteThis @earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger DeleteThis @pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <alpine.OSX.1.00.0802111047350.93076 DeleteThis @hagrid.ewd.goldmark.org>,
> > Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody DeleteThis @goldmark.org> wrote:
>
> > > Would you mind sending me your scripts as models that I could work from?
> >
> > Sent! Check your email. Let me know if you have questions.
>
> I'd be interested as well, though I currently only have one machine on
> my UPS, I have had three at times int he past, and quite probably at
> times in the future.

Sent. Enjoy. : )

--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.

JR
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

In article <isw-ED34F0.09231811022008.RemoveThis@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
isw <isw.RemoveThis@witzend.com> wrote:
> In article <u4t0r35852su0krkfp713obkl1ks96kk80.RemoveThis@4ax.com>,
> Howard Brazee <howard.RemoveThis@brazee.net> wrote:
> > I remember an article in Byte where Jerry Pournelle talked about what
> > happened after a car hit a nearby power pole. He had lots of
> > electronic equipment and most had some kind of power protector. But
> > they didn't all work adequately.
> >
> > Expensive TVs, stereos, and other appliances might be worth protecting
> > as well.
>
> I recall that article, too. In his very unusual case, the accident
> managed to cross an interurban feeder with the drop into his house,
> delivering something around six or seven thousand volts to his wall
> outlets.
>
> No protector you could afford to buy would protect your gear from that.

That's entirely correct, Isaac. However, it's not really the point if
you buy a surge protector with a good guarantee (and you MUST read those
guarantees VERY carefully). There are a very few surge protectors which
offer to buy you new equipment if the product doesn't protect your
devices. Tripp Lite Isobars and Isotels have been the most prominent to
do so in the consumer market, historically. Of course, you pay much more
for them. Part of the price is for a better mechanism (Tripp Lite's are
some of the best in the business); part is an imputed insurance premium.

With surge protectors, and surge protection built into UPSes, you get
what you pay for.

--Fred
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

On Feb 12, 8:51 am, Jolly Roger <jollyro....RemoveThis@pobox.com> wrote:
> Is your face blue yet?

A technically honest Jolly Roger would have posted manufacturer spec
numbers that define UPS protection. The manufacturer will not make
such claims. So Jolly Roger must do what myth preveyors do. He must
insult.

Jolly Roger ignores observations. He uses selective observation to
somehow know what engineers don't? He does junk science. Does he
provide any technical numbers? He cannot.

WHY does a UPS provides hardware protection? Jolly fears to answer
that question. Rather than learn technical facts, Jolly Roger again
attacks the messenger. Insult proves he is knowledgeable? Of course
not. Jolly does what any myth purveryor would do. Observation
somehow trump science facts and numbers - contrary to what is taught
in junior high science.. Jolly cannot post what does not exist. He
again replies with insult. Same techniques also proved Saddam's WMDs.
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

On Feb 12, 2:54 am, Shawn Hirn <s....TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote:
> If that is too costly for you, then at least get a good surge
> protector and put all your disk drives and your iMac on it

How does that surge protector eliminate problems created by data
loss?

The OP asked:
> ... are there built in utilities in my OSX that I
> can run after a failure to help restore things back
> to normal?

A surge protector will solve what software utilities would fix?
Where does that surge protector manufacturer make that claim?
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

Jolly Roger <jollyroger.TakeThisOut@pobox.com> wrote:

> In article <1ic3ntr.t24bta10flu02N%burt@mindstorm-inc.com>,
> burt.TakeThisOut@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
>
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger.TakeThisOut@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <1ic3fi0.18est761dftw9qN%burt@mindstorm-inc.com>,
> > > burt.TakeThisOut@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have had Macs since 1984. They have been through dozens of power
> > > > failures in those years. Never once had a problem afterwards.
> > >
> > > While I don't doubt you've had components fried, I do think you've
> > > probably had file system corruption due to power failures, because it's
> > > inevitable. You may not have noticed, or you may have attributed
> > > problems with your file system to other causes, but I have little doubt
> > > you've experienced it.
> >
> > Nothing more serious than happened through forced shutdown during system
> > crashes
>
> Yep. The two are essentially the same thing - a hard reset is as good as
> a loss of power in terms of disk cache flushes.

It helps to let the thing sit for a few minutes before the reset, in
case the disk cache flushing part still works.

--
Mvh./Regards, Niels Jørgen Kruse, Vanløse, Denmark
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

In article
<a251ab4b-805a-41a4-b97d-e0e9ce261f21 DeleteThis @s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
w_tom <w_tom1 DeleteThis @usa.net> wrote:

> On Feb 12, 8:51 am, Jolly Roger <jollyro... DeleteThis @pobox.com> wrote:
> > Is your face blue yet?
>
> A technically honest Jolly Roger would have posted manufacturer spec
> numbers that define UPS protection. The manufacturer will not make
> such claims. So Jolly Roger must do what myth preveyors do. He must
> insult.

You take my asking if your face is blue yet as an *insult*? You're a
funny guy. My single intent in asking that question is to find out if
you are tired of saying the same things over and over yet, because, as I
said, all your talk doesn't change my observed experience that UPS
systems do work.

> Jolly Roger ignores observations. He uses selective observation to
> somehow know what engineers don't? He does junk science. Does he
> provide any technical numbers? He cannot.

Others in this news group have already provided plenty of references
that say the opposite of your claims in this very thread. I notice
you've conveniently chosen to ignore them. I see no need to repeat what
others have already said, because (a) they already said it, (b) I'm not
your secretary, and (c) I'm no expert in the field anyway.

I've simply reported my experience. If it bothers you that my experience
happens to fly in the face of your opinion that UPS systems are useless,
that's unfortunate. But I'm not going to apologize to you for it - it's
just the way things are.

> WHY does a UPS provides hardware protection? Jolly fears to answer
> that question. Rather than learn technical facts, Jolly Roger again
> attacks the messenger. Insult proves he is knowledgeable? Of course
> not. Jolly does what any myth purveryor would do. Observation
> somehow trump science facts and numbers - contrary to what is taught
> in junior high science.. Jolly cannot post what does not exist. He
> again replies with insult.

I haven't insulted anyone in this thread. Grow up.

> Same techniques also proved Saddam's WMDs.

You seem to love to draw analogies such as this in an attempt to bolster
your arguments. If anyone is attempting to insult, it's you, friend.

--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.

JR
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

w_tom wrote:
> On Feb 12, 8:51 am, Jolly Roger <jollyro... RemoveThis @pobox.com> wrote:
>> Is your face blue yet?
>
> A technically honest Jolly Roger would have posted manufacturer spec
> numbers that define UPS protection.
..
Apparently w_ can’t google for specs because the institution only lets
w_ look at newsgroups - the internet has dirty pictures.
..
> The manufacturer will not make
> such claims.
..
Complete nonsense.
..
>
> Jolly Roger ignores observations. He uses selective observation to
> somehow know what engineers don't?
..
w_ ignores what electrical engineers say - 6 EEs wrote the IEEE and NIST
guides. Both guides say plug-in suppressors are effective. UPSs can
include the same protection.
..
> He does junk science.
..
Bizarre claim - plug-in surge suppressors don't work
Never any sources that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.
Ignores the IEEE and NIST guides that say plug-in suppressors are effective.
w_ does junk science.
..
>
> WHY does a UPS provides hardware protection? Jolly fears to answer
> that question.
..
w_ fears the answer because it conflicts with his religious belief in
earthing.

Clearly explained in the IEEE guide (starting pdf page 40) for those who
can think - the voltage on all wires (power and signal) is clamped to
the common ground at the suppressor.
..
> Jolly does what any myth purveryor would do. Observation
> somehow trump science facts and numbers - contrary to what is taught
> in junior high science..
..
w_ does what any myth purveyor would do - he ignores the science clearly
contained in authoritative sources - the IEEE and NIST guides.
..
> Same techniques also proved Saddam's WMDs.
..
w_ was an advisor to W on WMDs. Note the total lack of sources that
agree with w_’s claim that plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.

Is your face blue yet?

--
bud--
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

On Feb 12, 9:53 pm, Jolly Roger <jollyro... RemoveThis @pobox.com> wrote:
> My single intent in asking that question is to find out if you are
> tired of saying the same things over and over yet, because, as I
> said, all your talk doesn't change my observed experience that UPS
> systems do work.

Conclusions from observation is also why Saddam had WMDs. It's
called junk science. Jolly demonstrates no underlying grasp of the
technology, provides no numbers, and cannot even provide a single
reason 'why'. No 'why' means he must convert wild speculation into a
conclusion.

Even the UPS manufacturer will not claim what Jolly posted. That
UPS connects an ethernet appliance directly to AC mains (when not in
battery backup mode). Where is this speculated protection? It does
not exist. Where was protection for all those other undamaged
ethernet ports that have no UPS? Why does speculation ignore that
observation?

Reality: ethernet ports protected themselves with or without the
UPS. Others in the newsgroup have also said this. Should we ignore
anything that contradicts Jolly's speculation? For example isw says:
> In order to be a fair assessment of whether it "works", you
> need to include all the installations out there that have been
> running for years and years without UPSs, not just ones
> where you later added them.
>
>If you do that, you'll probably find that almost all systems
> survive just fine without a UPS.

A majority said Col Mustard killed her in the study with a
candlestick. Must be true because the majority say so? That is
Jolly's reasoning. Even though a candlestick did not exist, and Col
Mustard was across town. Ignore facts that contradict observation?
That same logic also proved Saddam had WMDs. Jolly Roger - you are
supposed to learn from history and science. Instead you promote UPS
ethernet protection when:
1) UPS manufacturer makes no such claim
2) UPS connects AC mains directly to an ethernet device - where is the
protective device?
3) posts are devoid of any numbers or grasp of how electricity works
4) you feel protection exists - therefore protection must exist?

Experience or observation without fundamental knowledge makes one
his own worst enemy. Jolly's observations demonstrate why junk
science exists and is promoted. Knowing without even knowing 'why' is
wild speculation; classic junk science reasoning. The UPS does not
even claim to provide that ethernet protection. Why believe something
that even the manufacturer will not claim? isw explains why
observation only promotes an urban myth.

A UPS is for data protection from blackouts and extreme brownouts.
That UPS is for data protection; not for hardware protection.

The OP asks for computer protection. Why does your telco's $multi-
million computer connect to overhead wires all over town ... without
damage? Same inexpensive solution works in homes. One 'whole house'
protector. Earthing upgraded to meet and exceed post 1990 National
Electrical Code requirements. Even your telco wire has a 'whole
house' protector installed for free. But it too requires a short
connection to single point earth ground. Same applies to cable TV
wire. No protector required for cable. That 'less than 10 foot'
connection from cable to earthing provides better protection. Same
protection technique standard even 100 years ago does not use a 'magic
box'. Therefore many don't understand - are easily confused by myths
and junk science concepts.

Any protection that works at a computer is already inside the
computer. Protectiojn that remains effective when all incoming
utility wires have effective protection when wires enter the building
- a short connection to earth ground.
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac 

On Feb 12, 1:59 pm, Fred Moore <fmo....DeleteThis@gcfn.org> wrote:
> Tripp Lite Isobars and Isotels have been the most prominent to do
> so in the consumer market, historically. Of course, you pay much
> more for them. Part of the price is for a better mechanism (Tripp
> Lite's are some of the best in the business); part is an imputed
> insurance premium.
>
> With surge protectors, and surge protection built into UPSes, you get
> what you pay for.

Read the long list of exceptions embedded in that warranty. Routine
to have surges without damage. But those effective protectors don't
have poor reputations such as APC, Belkin, Tripplite, and Panamax.
Responsible surge protector manufacturers have names well known for
reliability and integrity: GE, Siemens, Intermatic, Cutler Hammer,
and Leviton. Tripplite is not listed. An industry benchmark -
Polyphaser - has no warranty. GM hypes a big warranty. Therefore GM
products are more reliable than Toyota? Of course not. GM is
desperate to promote something it does not provide.

No direct relationship exists between a warranty and an effective
device. In fact, one APC warranty says a protector in the building
from any other manufacturer means that APC warranty is voided. What
kind of warranty is that? $20,000 in big letters. Reality in fine
print.

Albert Spencil on 19 Jun 2003 in comp.home.automation In "UPS for
computer and TV"
> That UPS warranty is a crock ! They lay it out very
> clearly in the document that comes in the box. They
> will at their option repair or replace your equipment
> at the current value as given in Orion Blue Book.
> The value of a two year old home PC would not
> replace a motherboard.

Numerous responsible sources state that earthing provides hardware
protection. An effective protector is only a connecting device to
earth ground. Earthing (not a protector) defines protection. Where
is a protector in this industry rag? Two front page articles that
define protection as earthing, in Electrical Engineer Times on 1 Oct
and 8 Oct 2007 entitled "Protecting Electrical Devices from Lightning
Transients" at:
http://www.planetanalog.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201807127
http://www.planetanalog.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201807830

What provides hardware protection for the OP? Retail store salesman
will promote a big buck warranty (and ignore the fine print).
Engineers and a long list of other responsible companies define
protection in terms of earthing. Who should we believe? That
Tripplite hyped by retailers without a short connection to earth?
Same circuit in a Monster Cable product sold for $150? Or do we learn
from science - a solution that was well understood 100 years ago and
is routinely installed where damage is not an option?

Warranty says nothing technically useful. Warranty is hyped when
engineering facts are missing or ignored. A protector is only as
effective as its earth ground. That UPS does not even claim to
provide protection. Also obvious. Where is the UPS dedicated
earthing wire? No earth ground means no effective protection.
 >> Stay informed about: House Power Failures and Mac