ps3 remote question

[dn3g3l]

is there any way to make it so that not any button will startup the ps3? the ps3 remote is on a coffee table where other remotes are, so a button always get pressed accidently and the ps3 will start up. it's starting to get annoying.

[Maxx_75]

If you find a way let me know. Its a pain in the buttocks. If I breath in the general dirrection of it my PS3 turns on.

[The Go 2 Guy]

um just turn it off. there's a switch in the back of the ps3. after you do that, there should not be a red light (standby) button on the front of your ps3. if you have the switch in the back on, but your ps3 is off it'll have a red light on the front near the eject.

[SickSol]

Yea I came home one day and found my ps3 turned on one of the cats must have hit the remote. I don't know how long it was on for. Now I set the remote out of the way. It is annoying though.

[Geonosis]

Yeah it's annoying, so I have my PS3 remote in a cabinet.

[CochiseGuy]

Originally Posted by The Go 2 Guy

um just turn it off. there's a switch in the back of the ps3. after you do that, there should not be a red light (standby) button on the front of your ps3. if you have the switch in the back on, but your ps3 is off it'll have a red light on the front near the eject.

That's what I do, and I don't even have the Sony remote - I hated that remote; so many little buttons that do absolutely nothing. I read the PS3 uses a fair amount of electricity in standby mode, so I switch it off in the back. I have to be at the console to feed it a disc, so that's when I turn it on.

I use the Blu Wave USB Remote, only $9.99 from Amazon. Just a few large, easy to see buttons to control playback. And it can't turn on the PS3 if I did leave it on in standby mode - no power to the USB ports when in standby.

[Kenshiro]

You can always just pop out one of the AA batteries.

[evizzle]

Originally Posted by CochiseGuy

I read the PS3 uses a fair amount of electricity in standby mode, so I switch it off in the back.

If you read the same article I did, then you misinterpreted standby as "off but ready to go" when the article mislead many others as well. The standby he was writing about was "on but not playing a game". Using more power than a refridgerator... was that the same article?

Definitely annoying about always turning on though, I just move the controller out of the way.

[Geonosis]

Originally Posted by evizzle

If you read the same article I did, then you misinterpreted standby as "off but ready to go" when the article mislead many others as well. The standby he was writing about was "on but not playing a game". Using more power than a refridgerator... was that the same article?

Definitely annoying about always turning on though, I just move the controller out of the way.

Can you post the article? I want to read it, thx.

[CochiseGuy]

Originally Posted by evizzle

If you read the same article I did, then you misinterpreted standby as "off but ready to go" when the article mislead many others as well. The standby he was writing about was "on but not playing a game". Using more power than a refridgerator... was that the same article?

Yeah, that was the one.

Originally Posted by Geonosis

Can you post the article? I want to read it, thx.

Here, you go, Yahoo News / Reuters, June 3

Power bills soaring? Turn off the Playstation: study

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Don't blame the fridge for your steep power bills -- an Australian consumer agency study has found that videogame consoles and plasma flat-screen TVs are major electricity guzzlers, even when left on stand-by.

The recent study by Choice said Sony Corp's Playstation 3, closely followed by Microsoft's Xbox 360 and plasma television sets, consumed the most power out of a list of 16 electronic devices tested, including laptops, stereo systems and DVD players.

"Our tests found that leaving a Playstation 3 on while not in use would cost almost... five times more than it would take to run a refrigerator for the same yearly period," said the study which was published on Choice's website www.choice.com.au.

"The plasma TV set was also a power hungry device, consuming over four times more power than a traditional analogue set. The average desktop computer was third on the list."

The report advised consumers to switch off their electronic devices at the source, rather than just from the remote control, which puts them on power-consuming stand-by mode. "This saves on money, not to mention carbon emissions," it added.

It is a bit misleading - the article twice mentions turning the PS3 off, not in standby mode, but now I read more closely the line about using more power than a refrigerator does specify "leaving it on while not is use".

Well, I only use mine for playback and currently not that often, so I'll just leave is switched off in the back until I'm ready to feed it a disc.

[Maxx_75]

What a complete load of bullshit. Comparing its power use to a refrigerator ? Even if the PS3 was under maximum load of both the GPU and the Cell and with both fans at maximum it wouldnt match the compresser on a refrigerator. Give me a break.

[CochiseGuy]

Originally Posted by Maxx_75

What a complete load of bullshit. Comparing its power use to a refrigerator ? Even if the PS3 was under maximum load of both the GPU and the Cell and with both fans at maximum it wouldnt match the compresser on a refrigerator. Give me a break.

I agree with your thinking, but the study was done by the Australian consumer group Choice, the largest consumer organization in Australia with over 200,000 subscribers.

The device that consumed the most power in our test when in use was the PlayStation 3, closely followed by the Xbox 360 and Plasma TV. Even when idle (on, but no in use), these systems consumed the most power of the devices tested. Incredibly, the Playstation 3 consumed over 10 times as much power as the Nintendo Wii.

Our tests also found that leaving a PlayStation 3 on while not in use would cost almost $250 a year in electricity bills (charged at 15c per kWh). This alone is around five times more than it would take to run a refrigerator for the same yearly period.

Link

If you think about it, a refrigerator runs its compressor & fans intermittently when needed to keep the set temperature, while the PS3 is running constantly.

And my apologies for completely derailing the thread about the remote turning on the console.

[DikkyMoe]

Originally Posted by CochiseGuy

I agree with your thinking, but the study was done by the Australian consumer group Choice, the largest consumer organization in Australia with over 200,000 subscribers.



Link

If you think about it, a refrigerator runs its compressor & fans intermittently when needed to keep the set temperature, while the PS3 is running constantly.

And my apologies for completely derailing the thread about the remote turning on the console.

I read the same article and looked at the chart. I did the math and it basically works out to just under .03/hr to play games or movies. The $260 per year cost is if it were on, running a disk 24/7 for the whole year. I would figure out energy cost using the .03/hr times the amount of hours you use it per day and there you go. 5 hour for about .15? Not bad, I say. The cost of it being in standby, red light only, it vitually inconsequetial at just over $2/year. Then again, I may be wrong.

[usckid]

Originally Posted by CochiseGuy

That's what I do, and I don't even have the Sony remote - I hated that remote; so many little buttons that do absolutely nothing. I read the PS3 uses a fair amount of electricity in standby mode, so I switch it off in the back. I have to be at the console to feed it a disc, so that's when I turn it on.

I use the Blu Wave USB Remote, only $9.99 from Amazon. Just a few large, easy to see buttons to control playback. And it can't turn on the PS3 if I did leave it on in standby mode - no power to the USB ports when in standby.

I have the same remote at the same price. Got gamestop's B&M store to price match their online website. $10 was all i wanted to pay for a remote.

[Kenshiro]

Originally Posted by CochiseGuy

If you think about it, a refrigerator runs its compressor & fans intermittently when needed to keep the set temperature, while the PS3 is running constantly.

And my apologies for completely derailing the thread about the remote turning on the console.

This is true for the 60GB PS3. Considering an effiecient modern fridge averages arounds 150 watts, the 60GB PS3, on average, uses slightly more power than an Xbox 360 and slightly less than a gaming PC.

http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-356-2.htm


However, this is not true for the 40GB PS3 which uses a smaller chipset and consumes less power.

http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/30/4...r-consumption/

40GB PS3 features 65nm chips, lower power consumption
by Conrad Quilty-Harper, posted Oct 30th 2007 at 9:54AM

It's been revealed that the new 40GB PlayStation 3 features more than just a cut down hard disk drive. Sony has also thought to stick the 65nm version of the Cell inside the new console, reducing the power usage down to around 135 Watts (down from 200 Watts.) That means the console also runs cooler and quieter, which is always a plus for a device that usually resides in the living room. Sony also jiggled around a few other components by making the heat pipe smaller, swapping out the motherboard for a new version, and added a button battery to keep time when the system is off. Looks like potential PS3 purchasers will be looking forward to a less noticeable din then.

Going forward all PS3's will use the smaller 65nm CELL and a 65nm GPU was recently confirmed to be coming soon also for more power cuts.

Originally Posted by CochiseGuy

And my apologies for completely derailing the thread about the remote turning on the console.

Its wasn't a derail, actually its very relevent to the topic.