[Martian]

If we are computing runtime, we should be discussing the actual battery storage capacity of the UPS’s.
My Belkin (660W, 1100VA) unit has a lead acid battery rated at 12V & 5Ah which computes to a nominal 60 Wh. Nominally, this should give a runtime of 12 minutes with a 300W load, or say 9 minutes if you don’t want to deplete the battery below say 25%.
With my 4-5 year old battery (battery age matters), I can run for 5 minutes till the Mac’s Energy Saver says 25% battery level (but is 25% reading really accurate?). The whole load (Mac Pro 2 monitors 2 routers + other minor stuff) measures 2.25A @ 120V with my simple inductive meter. That’s 270 VA, but I have no idea what power factor correction to use to convert to proper Wh.

[duality]

Martian said:

... I just USB connected it to the Mac Pro now and without any Belkin software, the Leopard “Energy Saver” recognizes the 4-5 year old UPS and the shutdown settings work perfectly.

In the past, I've had issues with open apps not closing (most often, Safari) when the Energy Saver panel attempted to effect a scheduled shutdown. Did the shutdown you observe get "hung up" on any open apps?

Martian said:

All I need now is a new battery — I don’t seem to have much reserve time, though probably the 2 modems, 2 routers, 2 monitors, and cordless phone base station don't help here.

>
I wonder if it pays to replace the battery, compared to replacing the entire UPS.

[duality]

Martian said:

>... . The whole load (Mac Pro 2 monitors 2 routers + other minor stuff) measures 2.25A @ 120V with my simple inductive meter. That’s 270 VA, but I have no idea what power factor correction to use to convert to proper Wh.
I thought the Mac Pros had min/max wattage ratings between about 155/320 watts and 170/250 watts, depending on the model. If so, then your measurements must've caught your system while it was idling.

[smax013]

duality said:

I agree. But few users would expect that 43 minutes is an “up to” statement reserved for 50-watt lightbulbs!

Maybe. But, all it takes is a little more reading on the box rather than looking JUST as the big "up to" marketing BS that is on the front. The box for my recently purchased APC BX1500LCD has a nice big "up to 154 minutes runtime" marketing BS thing on the front. But, if one looks at the little chart on the top of the box (says "Which APC Back-UPS XS Model is Right for You?"), it also lists 154 minutes as the maximum runtime, but it also has a little asterisk next to the Maximum Runtime label that leads to a footnote that says "Please see back for runtime details". So, if you turn the box around, there is a runtime chart. And that runtime chart shows different runtimes for different computers with different monitors...from a iMac G4 with a 15" screen (130W per Apple Specs) running 154 minutes on it to a Tower PC with a 17" CRT (no specs given so don't know what wattage specifically) running 39 minutes.



The point is that while the "up to 43 minutes" part was nice marketing BS, I have no doubt that there was a chart on the box that gave mor realistic scenarios. Face it, all companies will put their product in the best like possible, even if that means being slightly to grossly misleading. And that is why it is up to customers to be smart...you walk in assuming that some company is pulling a fast one.

duality said:

APC’s entire section on UPS products is heavily oriented towards computers—not televisions, radios, or 50-watt lightbulbs, none of which folks would have much of a need to “protect” during a power outage.

As I said before, computers are by and far the most common use. BUT...they are NOT the only use. And to be fair, the "up to 43 minutes runtime" did not specify that it was "up to 43 minutes runtime for a computer" (at least not on that big marketing BS thingie on the front). Any association with a computer to the 43 minutes would be purely due to an assumption/inference by the person reading it (unless it specifically talked about 43 minutes with a computer elsewhere). And you know the saying about making assumptions. ;)

duality said:

True. And I’m sure that’s what bud (above) understood when he bought his unit. And, quite frankly, so did I. And I wasn’t all that concerned about the precise amount of runtime I could expect, as I also expected that the PowerChute software (touted as “Automatic Shutdown Software”) would be compatible with my OS (but it’s not), as well as provide a “graceful” shutdown in the event of a power outage (but it doesn’t—regardless of the OS).

As to the PowerChute software, I agree that it sucks that it does not work with Leopard...BUT...I will note that the "Built for Mac OS X" label on my box for my APC BX1500LCD has a statement next to it that specifically says "Apple Computers Supported; All iMacs and G4s and G5s running Mac OS 10.4". No where on that box does it offer compatibility with Leopard or even capatibility with an Intel based Mac. It specifically only mentions OS X 10.4. Thus, you assumed again and did not read what was clearly (if smally) indicated.



Now, even though it does not specifically say compatible with an Intel Mac, it in theory should still work with an Intel Mac for it primary purpose except for what the APC tech offers in [~7504]'s post (see below)...i.e. providing an amount of time to run on battery so that YOU can shutdown the computer after saving stuff. I will admit that I don't have a desktop Intel Mac, so I don't know how well the built-in auto showdown routine in the Mac OS will work with an Intel Mac on various APC UPS systems. But, I do have a G4 Tower connected to an APC Back-UPS XS 1000 that is only using the Mac OS' built-in auto shutdown (NOT the PowerChute software) and it works just fine. And that APC unit has a 19" CRT in addition to the G4 Tower as well as some miscellanous other items (my cable modem and router, if I recall correctly). I also have a running APC Back-UPS XS 1500 that powers my Dell P4 Tower, a 19" CRT, a 19" LCD and some external hard drives and a phone...and only use Windoze XP's built in shutdown function NOT the PowerChute software...works fine for me.

duality said:

Tell that to bud (above), who was told by the APC tech that he needs to buy a “Smart UPS” rated at 500 watts/750 VA and designed to protect networks and servers ( not desktop machines), at 5 times the cost of the 330 watt/550 VA unit he just purchased, to “protect" his 280 watt iMac.

Actually, per the APC tech in [~7504]'s post, the problem is that Intel Macs are too "good" (my word...not the APC techs) for their standard UPS systems for desktops. The problem (apparently) is that Intel Macs are such that you need to have a VERY quick switch over response time, which only APC's server class UPS units have. If so, blame Apple, not APC for having to get the more expensive UPS unit.



Now, as I said before, I don't have an Intel Mac desktop (only have an Intel MacBook Pro...which has a "built-in UPS"...aka a laptop battery ;) ). So, I have no direct experience with which to confirm or deny what the APC tech is offering.

duality said:

Let’s put it in perspective: I dare say, no one expects the mpg ratings coming out of Detroit to be accurate predictors of actual on-the-road auto performance. However, I doubt that folks would find a car advertised as getting “50 mpg in highway driving” to be anything near a reasonable claim if the car only gets 5 mpg in “real life” on-the-road use.

[color="#333333"]Interesting that you bring up fuel economy for cars. Car companies are actually starting to be come more guilty of misleading. It used to be that by law they had to show the official EPA city AND highway fuel economy numbers (which are BS representations anyway...they are NOT accurate for real life circumstances even IF you were to drive EXACTLY like the EPA test pattern is...there is a "fudge" factor in there that gets from the "real" number even if you could drive exactly the same...I have a relative who in heavily in the fuel economy world). That is no longer the case. So, now they ONLY give you the highway number and they usually are NOT too outright with the fact that it is a highway number. So, when the VAST majority of people drive in more city like conditions and NOT true highway driving, they get no where near the advertised value.[/color]



[color="#333333"]Now, it is not as an extreme of variation in actual useages for cars and fuel economy as for UPS units. In otherwords, you cannot physically get a car that can do 50 mpg on the highway (which actually does not exist...the most fuel efficient car on the road in the US is a Prius...its official highway mpg is 45...its city is 48 mpg [hybrid actually work better in the city as the braking creates electrical energy which is put in the battery meaning less fuel is used to load up the battery]...and those number are the artificially high, BS numbers...they are high by about 10% or so compared to real work driving) but then drive it in a realistic scenario to get only 5 mpg actual. About the only way to get that is to sit there idling the Prius for long periods of time using up fuel but going no where. On the other hand, there are plenty of useful things that you might want to have on battery backup that draws very minimal power and could realistically achieve those "up to 43 minutes" claims. While not the most common or typical use, you could use such a UPS to have a radio plugged into it so that IF you lose power for a LONG period of time, you would still have your radio (of coure, it would be easier to just have a radio that uses standard batteries)...or you could want a UPS that does power a 50 W light...if you have a loss of power for an extended period of time. The point is that while not typical uses, they are realistic uses.[/color]




...and APC leads folks to believe (incorrectly) that the PowerChute software it includes with its products serves such a purpose.

Do you know of any freeware/shareware that provides “graceful shutdown” during a power outage? If so, then the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of APC’s runtime estimates would be almost moot.
Actually, APC CORRECTLY leads people to believe that their PowerChute software will serve such a purpose with supported systems. It was that some people did not fully read the information on the box and ASSUMED that PowerChute would run with their OS (Mac OS 10.5) and it turned out they assumed incorrectly and likely should have read the box more carefully (unless that box is different that my APC box).



In the end, do I like the whole practice of doing marketing BS in big print and then putting more detailed information in tiny obscure places and print? Nope. It is deliberately deceptive and crappy. BUT...it is how the world is. And anyone who has been "around the block" at least once should KNOW that such things happen and thus should know that it is a "buyer beware" world where you need to look for the fine print and read it...because if you don't, then ultimately there is no one to blame but yourself. Am I condoning what they do? Nope. I am merely pointing out the reality of what is out there and that whether it is justified or not, it DOES put some oneous back on the consumer to be smart and know what they are doing.



The Mac OS includes a auto shutdown function. And the APC tech in [~7504]'s post suggested that it would work just fine. The problem was that [~7504] has was that the UPS units that he had did not switch over to battery fast enough for an Intel Mac (at least that is what the APC tech was saying). If it could, then he could have used the Mac OS' auto shutdown function to do timed, auto shutdowns when the computer was unattended in a power outtage.

[Dan Frakes]

>

Martian said:

> But I just USB connected it to the Mac Pro now and without any Belkin software, the Leopard “Energy Saver” recognizes the 4-5 year old UPS and the shutdown settings work perfectly.
I'm not sure what the "shutdown routine" actually accomplishes. It seems to me that all it does is postpone the inevitable loss of power to your Mac. In other words, if you're not around to "gracefully" shut down your Mac (save docs, quit apps, and click on "Shut Down...") when an outage occurs, eventually the UPS battery will drain and your Mac will suffer the same kind of "rude" shutdown that would occur in the absence of the UPS.

Quote

Do you know of any freeware/shareware that provides ?graceful shutdown? during a power outage? If so, then the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of APC?s runtime estimates would be almost moot.

When you connect most recent UPS units to your Mac (running 10.4 or later) via a USB cable, the Energy Saver pane of System Preferences gives you a new "UPS" screen that lets you choose how your Mac responds when a power outage occurs. For example, you can have your Mac automatically shut down after 10 minutes of UPS power, or when the UPS battery has only 15% charge remaining. At that time, your Mac will shut down, automatically, just as if you'd issued the Shut Down command manually.

Of course, as with any type of automated shutdown on a Mac, unsaved documents can prevent shutdown, as programs will throw up a dialog asking you if you want to save changes before quitting.

[Martian]

[quote name='duality']
>

Martian said:

> ... I just USB connected it to the Mac Pro now and without any Belkin software, the Leopard “Energy Saver” recognizes the 4-5 year old UPS and the shutdown settings work perfectly.
In the past, I've had issues with open apps not closing (most often, Safari) when the Energy Saver panel attempted to effect a scheduled shutdown. Did the shutdown you observe get "hung up" on any open apps?

I always save and close all files before I leave the computer for more than a couple of minutes. I don't seem to recall a problem with apps quitting as long as all its files are closed — but maybe I just haven't been observant. If you have a particularly problematic app, you could just make it a point to always quit it too.

>

Martian said:

> All I need now is a new battery — I don’t seem to have much reserve time, though probably the 2 modems, 2 routers, 2 monitors, and cordless phone base station don't help here.
I wonder if it pays to replace the battery, compared to replacing the entire UPS.

I am assuming a simple gel cell isn’t that expensive — but I haven’t yet priced one. Regardless, since my UPS works so well with a new Intel Mac, I would be willing to pay a premium to not have a potential hassle. Avoiding hassles is one of the reasons we all pay a premium for Macs anyway.

[Martian]

[quote name='duality']
>

Martian said:

> ... . The whole load (Mac Pro 2 monitors 2 routers + other minor stuff) measures 2.25A @ 120V with my simple inductive meter. That’s 270 VA, but I have no idea what power factor correction to use to convert to proper Wh.
I thought the Mac Pros had min/max wattage ratings between about 155/320 watts and 170/250 watts, depending on the model. If so, then your measurements must've caught your system while it was idling.

Maybe when I get around to installing Aperture (the shrink wrapped box is still on my desk) I can run a full power test, though there still is the mysterious power factor compensation issue. But more importantly, the power draw when unattended and idle, followed by the shutdown routine is more relevant to the UPS discussion.

[duality]

[quote name='smax013']

>

duality said:

I agree. But few users would expect that 43 minutes is an “up to” statement reserved for 50-watt lightbulbs!

Maybe. But, all it takes is a little more reading on the box rather than looking JUST as the big "up to" marketing BS that is on the front. The box for my recently purchased APC BX1500LCD has a nice big "up to 154 minutes runtime" marketing BS thing on the front. But, if one looks at the little chart on the top of the box (says "Which APC Back-UPS XS Model is Right for You?"), it also lists 154 minutes as the maximum runtime, but it also has a little asterisk next to the Maximum Runtime label that leads to a footnote that says "Please see back for runtime details". So, if you turn the box around, there is a runtime chart. And that runtime chart shows different runtimes for different computers with different monitors...from a iMac G4 with a 15" screen (130W per Apple Specs) running 154 minutes on it to a Tower PC with a 17" CRT (no specs given so don't know what wattage specifically) running 39 minutes.

I read the box. I went to the APC website and, per its recommendations, ran the configurator (which, BTW, can yield noticeably different results for virtually identical loading, depending on how you use it). I spoke to the folks selling the product at the retail level (who, when pressed further, reached out to their tech support staff). And I even called APC. In short, I did my ?due diligence.? And I received a lot of conflicting information, which I attributed to varying degrees of ?marketing BS? (to use your expression), product ignorance, and lack of Mac knowledge. However, there was one common thread: The BE550G would meet my key operational (power and shutdown) requirements. Specifically, during a utility outage it would immediately provide sufficient power to keep my iMac running, while initiating an ?auto shutdown.?

smax013 said:

The point is that while the "up to 43 minutes" part was nice marketing BS, I have no doubt that there was a chart on the box that gave mor realistic scenarios. Face it, all companies will put their product in the best like possible, even if that means being slightly to grossly misleading. And that is why it is up to customers to be smart...you walk in assuming that some company is pulling a fast one.

You?re suggesting that I erred due to inattention to detail, and lack of some degree of market sophistication.

I?ve been to quite a few rodeos in my time, so this was not a stroll down a garden path. If I erred at all, it was in not finding the ?runtime charts? when I went to the website?charts which, unlike the configurator, are not offered when you follow the site?s ?helpful? instructions for determining which UPS might best suit your needs. As a matter of fact, unless you knew such charts existed, I?m not sure you?d ever find them, except by accident.

My point is that while ?caveat emptor? indeed is the operative phrase, it is unreasonable to suggest (as you seem to be doing) that the responsibility for any and all lack of product understanding is entirely the customer?s?especially when the customer did exercise a reasonable amount of care researching the product.

[quote]
[quote name='smax013']
>

duality said:

APC’s entire section on UPS products is heavily oriented towards computers—not televisions, radios, or 50-watt lightbulbs, none of which folks would have much of a need to “protect” during a power outage.
As I said before, computers are by and far the most common use. BUT...they are NOT the only use. And to be fair, the "up to 43 minutes runtime" did not specify that it was "up to 43 minutes runtime for a computer" (at least not on that big marketing BS thingie on the front). Any association with a computer to the 43 minutes would be purely due to an assumption/inference by the person reading it (unless it specifically talked about 43 minutes with a computer elsewhere). And you know the saying about making assumptions. ;)

I?m not sure how you?re distinguishing ?jumping to conclusions? (i.e., making assumptions) from ?reaching reasonable conclusions.?

Let?s look on the product package (I?ve added the bold emphasis):

?The APC Back-UPS ES 550 provides up to 43 minutes of battery backup for home
computers in the event of power outages or when utility voltage fluctuates outside safe
levels. ...And the included PowerChute Personal Edition Software saves your open files and
gracefully shuts down your system in the event of extended power outages. Together, these
features make the Back-UPS ES 550 the best value for home and home office computers. ?

Also on the package:

?POWERCHUTE PERSONAL EDITION
Monitors performance of APC Back-UPS
and performs graceful, unattended operating
system shutdown in the event of an extended
power outage. ...?




In addition, let?s go online to APC?s Knowledge Base. Type in ?Back-UPS Installation questions and answers.? The first answer it returns is ?How do I get started?? It contains 7 Q&As. And where they deal with equipment, they are entirely computer oriented.

Here?s one of those Q&As (again, I added the bold emphasis):

?How do I know what to plug in where?
This depends on the user. APC recommends that the Computer and monitor be plugged into the “backup plus surge protection outlets”, and as for any other device you need to ask yourself “When power goes out do I need to….Insert device’s function”

Example: You have a 15 inch monitor, a small desktop computer, a printer, a scanner, a cable modem, speakers and a USB hub.
- When power goes out do I need to Shutdown the computer? Yes so this would go into the battery outlets.
- When Power goes out do I need to print from the printer? No so the Printer would be plugged into the surge only outlets.
- When Power goes out do I need to Scan something? No, so the Scanner would be plugged into the surge only outlets.

And you would repeat this with the rest of the equipment. If it turns out you have more things that need a surge only outlet it is recommended that you purchase an APC surge arrest. And if you need more Battery Backup outlets it is recommended to purchase an addition APC Back-UPS product keeping in mind not exceeding the watt rating.?


[quote name='smax013']
>

duality said:

True. And I’m sure that’s what bud (above) understood when he bought his unit. And, quite frankly, so did I. And I wasn’t all that concerned about the precise amount of runtime I could expect, as I also expected that the PowerChute software (touted as “Automatic Shutdown Software”) would be compatible with my OS (but it’s not), as well as provide a “graceful” shutdown in the event of a power outage (but it doesn’t—regardless of the OS).

As to the PowerChute software, I agree that it sucks that it does not work with Leopard...BUT...I will note that the "Built for Mac OS X" label on my box for my APC BX1500LCD has a statement next to it that specifically says "Apple Computers Supported; All iMacs and G4s and G5s running Mac OS 10.4". No where on that box does it offer compatibility with Leopard or even capatibility with an Intel based Mac. It specifically only mentions OS X 10.4. Thus, you assumed again and did not read what was clearly (if smally) indicated.

From the quotes I just provided, it appears that your box and mine differ. Notwithstanding our differing boxes, the APC website does indeed indicate that OS X is supported. In fact, it offers a PowerChute update (version 1.3.4) to the PowerChute version (v. 1.3.3) that is supplied on the product CD. However, it turns out that while PowerChute 1.3.3 supports OS X up to 10.4.1, the update (1.3.4) only takes it to OS X 10.4.4. Now, I didn?t know that Leopard wasn?t supported prior to purchasing the product, nor did I know that (contrary to everything else I had read) PowerChute for OS X (regardless of the version) doesn?t provide any kind of shutdown routine (other than simply waiting for the battery to drain). I only found that out after buying the unit, loading the software, and reading the ReadMe file (emphasis added):

?The OS shutdown performed by this application is
an emergency shutdown. No applications are closed and no
application data is saved. ...?

Perhaps it?s your position that?despite all of my initial efforts to learn about the product?it was my responsibility to also download the PowerChute update and read through it very carefully prior to purchasing the product? If so, I think that any reasonable person would conclude that your expectations are a bit unreasonable.
[quote]

[quote name='smax013']
Now, even though it does not specifically say compatible with an Intel Mac, it in theory should still work with an Intel Mac for it primary purpose except for what the APC tech offers in [~7504]'s post (see below)...i.e. providing an amount of time to run on battery so that YOU can shutdown the computer after saving stuff. I will admit that I don't have a desktop Intel Mac, so I don't know how well the built-in auto showdown routine in the Mac OS will work with an Intel Mac on various APC UPS systems. But, I do have a G4 Tower connected to an APC Back-UPS XS 1000 that is only using the Mac OS' built-in auto shutdown (NOT the PowerChute software) and it works just fine. And that APC unit has a 19" CRT in addition to the G4 Tower as well as some miscellanous other items (my cable modem and router, if I recall correctly). I also have a running APC Back-UPS XS 1500 that powers my Dell P4 Tower, a 19" CRT, a 19" LCD and some external hard drives and a phone...and only use Windoze XP's built in shutdown function NOT the PowerChute software...works fine for me.
>

duality said:

Tell that to bud (above), who was told by the APC tech that he needs to buy a “Smart UPS” rated at 500 watts/750 VA and designed to protect networks and servers ( not desktop machines), at 5 times the cost of the 330 watt/550 VA unit he just purchased, to “protect" his 280 watt iMac.

Actually, per the APC tech in [~7504]'s post, the problem is that Intel Macs are too "good" (my word...not the APC techs) for their standard UPS systems for desktops. The problem (apparently) is that Intel Macs are such that you need to have a VERY quick switch over response time, which only APC's server class UPS units have. If so, blame Apple, not APC for having to get the more expensive UPS unit.

>
And, pray tell, how was bud?or anyone else, for that matter?supposed to know that? Even at this late date, the website still has not been updated per what the tech told bud (APC ?will be updating the APC web page with a new recommendation for the kind of UPS needed for Macs.?) To first blame the customer for not ?doing his/her homework,? and then to shift some of the blame to Apple for creating a superior product that APC can?t handle with its still-recommended products requires, IMHO, quite a bit of convoluted reasoning.

[quote name='smax013']
> Let’s put it in perspective: I dare say, no one expects the mpg ratings coming out of Detroit to be accurate predictors of actual on-the-road auto performance. However, I doubt that folks would find a car advertised as getting “50 mpg in highway driving” to be anything near a reasonable claim if the car only gets 5 mpg in “real life” on-the-road use.
[color="#333333"]Interesting that you bring up fuel economy for cars. Car companies are actually starting to be come more guilty of misleading. It used to be that by law they had to show the official EPA city AND highway fuel economy numbers (which are BS representations anyway...they are NOT accurate for real life circumstances even IF you were to drive EXACTLY like the EPA test pattern is...there is a "fudge" factor in there that gets from the "real" number even if you could drive exactly the same...I have a relative who in heavily in the fuel economy world). That is no longer the case. So, now they ONLY give you the highway number and they usually are NOT too outright with the fact that it is a highway number. So, when the VAST majority of people drive in more city like conditions and NOT true highway driving, they get no where near the advertised value.[/color]
>
[color="#333333"]Now, it is not as an extreme of variation in actual useages for cars and fuel economy as for UPS units. In otherwords, you cannot physically get a car that can do 50 mpg on the highway (which actually does not exist...the most fuel efficient car on the road in the US is a Prius...its official highway mpg is 45...its city is 48 mpg [hybrid actually work better in the city as the braking creates electrical energy which is put in the battery meaning less fuel is used to load up the battery]...and those number are the artificially high, BS numbers...they are high by about 10% or so compared to real work driving) but then drive it in a realistic scenario to get only 5 mpg actual. About the only way to get that is to sit there idling the Prius for long periods of time using up fuel but going no where. On the other hand, there are plenty of useful things that you might want to have on battery backup that draws very minimal power and could realistically achieve those "up to 43 minutes" claims. While not the most common or typical use, you could use such a UPS to have a radio plugged into it so that IF you lose power for a LONG period of time, you would still have your radio (of coure, it would be easier to just have a radio that uses standard batteries)...or you could want a UPS that does power a 50 W light...if you have a loss of power for an extended period of time. The point is that while not typical uses, they are realistic uses.[/color]
The next time I buy a car, I?ll be sure to ask the salesman if the steering wheel is included at no extra cost.
[quote]
[quote name='smax013']
> ...and APC leads folks to believe (incorrectly) that the PowerChute software it includes with its products serves such a purpose.
>
> Do you know of any freeware/shareware that provides “graceful shutdown” during a power outage? If so, then the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of APC’s runtime estimates would be almost moot.
Actually, APC CORRECTLY leads people to believe that their PowerChute software will serve such a purpose with supported systems. It was that some people did not fully read the information on the box and ASSUMED that PowerChute would run with their OS (Mac OS 10.5) and it turned out they assumed incorrectly and likely should have read the box more carefully (unless that box is different that my APC box).
See my previous comments.
[quote]

In the end, do I like the whole practice of doing marketing BS in big print and then putting more detailed information in tiny obscure places and print? Nope. It is deliberately deceptive and crappy. BUT...it is how the world is. And anyone who has been "around the block" at least once should KNOW that such things happen and thus should know that it is a "buyer beware" world where you need to look for the fine print and read it...because if you don't, then ultimately there is no one to blame but yourself. Am I condoning what they do? Nope. I am merely pointing out the reality of what is out there and that whether it is justified or not, it DOES put some oneous back on the consumer to be smart and know what they are doing.
The buyer always bears some responsibility. So does the seller. You seem to minimize the latter.

The Mac OS includes a auto shutdown function. And the APC tech in [~7504]'s post suggested that it would work just fine. The problem was that [~7504] has was that the UPS units that he had did not switch over to battery fast enough for an Intel Mac (at least that is what the APC tech was saying). If it could, then he could have used the Mac OS' auto shutdown function to do timed, auto shutdowns when the computer was unattended in a power outtage.
So, we?re back to blaming bud and Apple, huh?

[smax013]

duality said:

I read the box. I went to the APC website and, per its recommendations, ran the configurator (which, BTW, can yield noticeably different results for virtually identical loading, depending on how you use it). I spoke to the folks selling the product at the retail level (who, when pressed further, reached out to their tech support staff). And I even called APC. In short, I did my “due diligence.” And I received a lot of conflicting information, which I attributed to varying degrees of “marketing BS” (to use your expression), product ignorance, and lack of Mac knowledge. However, there was one common thread: The BE550G would meet my key operational (power and shutdown) requirements. Specifically, during a utility outage it would immediately provide sufficient power to keep my iMac running, while initiating an “auto shutdown.”

A lot of this is new information. I only had what you had offered to go on. And up until this past post, you had only really mentioned the fact that the box stated "up to 43 mintues" and nothing else to put that in context. You had hinted at talking to APC techs, but specifically mentioned that the "knowledgeable" tech told you it would last about 3 minutes and the software would NOT work with Leopard. This was an after purchase conversation. I recall not mention previously of talking with APC prior to the purchase.



With this new information, I would agree you did due diligence (although I would say that from my experience generally asking most retail store staff is a complete waste of time...but you do find a few gems at such stores on occasion). As such, I was wrong...albeit I was going of incomplete information. If you were told conflicting information from APC folks prior to purchase in combination with bad information from the retail folks and the box information is not as detailed as what is on my APC box, then you are justified in being a bit upset.

duality said:

You’re suggesting that I erred due to inattention to detail, and lack of some degree of market sophistication.

I’ve been to quite a few rodeos in my time, so this was not a stroll down a garden path. If I erred at all, it was in not finding the “runtime charts” when I went to the website—charts which, unlike the configurator, are not offered when you follow the site’s “helpful” instructions for determining which UPS might best suit your needs. As a matter of fact, unless you knew such charts existed, I’m not sure you’d ever find them, except by accident.

My point is that while “caveat emptor” indeed is the operative phrase, it is unreasonable to suggest (as you seem to be doing) that the responsibility for any and all lack of product understanding is entirely the customer’s—especially when the customer did exercise a reasonable amount of care researching the product.

As mentioned above, it appears that I was wrong due to making an assessment on incomplete information. Thus, I apologize.



I will note that I had no problem finding those runtime charts on the APC website...and did not know they were there, per se. I figured that they had something like that, but not specifically those.

duality said:

From the quotes I just provided, it appears that your box and mine differ. Notwithstanding our differing boxes, the APC website does indeed indicate that OS X is supported. In fact, it offers a PowerChute update (version 1.3.4) to the PowerChute version (v. 1.3.3) that is supplied on the product CD. However, it turns out that while PowerChute 1.3.3 supports OS X up to 10.4.1, the update (1.3.4) only takes it to OS X 10.4.4. Now, I didn’t know that Leopard wasn’t supported prior to purchasing the product, nor did I know that (contrary to everything else I had read) PowerChute for OS X (regardless of the version) doesn’t provide any kind of shutdown routine (other than simply waiting for the battery to drain). I only found that out after buying the unit, loading the software, and reading the ReadMe file (emphasis added):

“The OS shutdown performed by this application is
an emergency shutdown. No applications are closed and no
application data is saved. ...”

Perhaps it’s your position that—despite all of my initial efforts to learn about the product—it was my responsibility to also download the PowerChute update and read through it very carefully prior to purchasing the product? If so, I think that any reasonable person would conclude that your expectations are a bit unreasonable.

[color="#333333"]If the boxes difference, I made an assumption that they would be similar and that old saying about assumptions would apply to me. If your box does not clearly state compatibility only Mac OS 10.4 as mine did, then you have a complaint. I will note that it is NOT very large or very obvious. Thus, are you sure you just did not miss it (on my box it was on one end of the box)? (note not intentionally trying to be "accusing" merely asking as I find it curious that they would go to such pains to have in one box but not another)[/color]

duality said:

And, pray tell, how was bud—or anyone else, for that matter—supposed to know that? Even at this late date, the website still has not been updated per what the tech told bud (APC “will be updating the APC web page with a new recommendation for the kind of UPS needed for Macs.”) To first blame the customer for not “doing his/her homework,” and then to shift some of the blame to Apple for creating a superior product that APC can’t handle with its still-recommended products requires, IMHO, quite a bit of convoluted reasoning.

I am not shifting blame per se but rather pointing out that I am assuming that APC was NOT aware of the changes in how Macs' power supplies work until recently. Blaming APC for recommending something that used to work that no longer works due to a change that Apple made is just as bad as blaming Apple for making the change. The point is that things changed, APC learned about them, and now if presumably going to adjust what they recommend for use with a Mac. It just like if HP learns that their printer does not work with a new Mac model...and then has to make adjustments. It appears that APC was unaware and has since become aware and in theory will change what they recommend for use with a Mac.



Now, of course, you and [~7504] would not know this. Thus, I certainly don't blame you for being upset if an APC product that you were told would work and thought would work does not. I will note that your complaint was more about the amount of time and lack of the PowerChute software working with OS X 10.5...I don't recall you specifically complaining about the fact that APC was now recommending more expensive APCs other than kind of referring back to [~7504]'s post.



Now, if that APC tech is right and the changes in how Mac work means they should be used with APC's Smart UPS line and APC has NOT changed their website, then shame on them. But, then against, maybe that APC tech was full of it. As I said, I have not personally used any UPS device with a desktop Intel Mac (which is what this problem applies to)...and I tend to be a little skeptical until I have independent confirmation (yes, I have trust issues :) ).

duality said:

The next time I buy a car, I’ll be sure to ask the salesman if the steering wheel is included at no extra cost.

Now you are just using over-exaggerated examples. I was merely pointing out that ANY company and their marketing/sales wonks will tend to focus on the good stuff and gloss over the less than good stuff. As such, a customer should take ANYTHING a sales/marketing wonk says with a grain of salt and look for some independent confirmation.


The buyer always bears some responsibility. So does the seller. You seem to minimize the latter.
Yes, I did...but that was based upon what was presented to me at the time of what appeared to be a rather minimal effort on the part of the customer. Based upon the new information that you have provided, it appears that the seller(s) do bear a significant part of the blame in this case. But, as you just said yourself, the buyer still bears some responsibility.


So, we’re back to blaming bud and Apple, huh?
Nope. Merely pointing out that the Mac OS has a function that will do what the PowerChute software will NOT do in Mac OS 10.5 (to some degree...the PowerChute software is more "robust", I believe...i.e. more features) and that the APC tech pointed this out. And the [~7504]'s problem was NOT lacking an auto shutdown ability (since the APC tech offered an alternative solution), but rather that the APC unit that he had was not able to work with the Mac he had. See above.

[duality]

[quote name='Dan Frakes']
> >

Martian said:

> > But I just USB connected it to the Mac Pro now and without any Belkin software, the Leopard “Energy Saver” recognizes the 4-5 year old UPS and the shutdown settings work perfectly.
> I'm not sure what the "shutdown routine" actually accomplishes. It seems to me that all it does is postpone the inevitable loss of power to your Mac. In other words, if you're not around to "gracefully" shut down your Mac (save docs, quit apps, and click on "Shut Down...") when an outage occurs, eventually the UPS battery will drain and your Mac will suffer the same kind of "rude" shutdown that would occur in the absence of the UPS.

> Do you know of any freeware/shareware that provides ?graceful shutdown? during a power outage? If so, then the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of APC?s runtime estimates would be almost moot.

When you connect most recent UPS units to your Mac (running 10.4 or later) via a USB cable, the Energy Saver pane of System Preferences gives you a new "UPS" screen that lets you choose how your Mac responds when a power outage occurs. For example, you can have your Mac automatically shut down after 10 minutes of UPS power, or when the UPS battery has only 15% charge remaining. At that time, your Mac will shut down, automatically, just as if you'd issued the Shut Down command manually.

>
I did find the Mac's "Native Shutdown feature" in the Energy Saver pane. What I wasn't sure about was what it actually would do to shut down the Mac?I thought it might not do anything, except wait till the battery drained. Now I know better! :) (To be fair to APC, I assumed its software?even if it were compatible with my iMac?didn't actually shut down the Mac either.)

Dan Frakes said:

Of course, as with any type of automated shutdown on a Mac, unsaved documents can prevent shutdown, as programs will throw up a dialog asking you if you want to save changes before quitting.

That explains the failure of my iMac to shut down at night per the schedule I set...I usually don't bother closing documents, especially open web pages in Safari.

[duality]

[quote name='Martian']
> [quote name='duality']
> >

Martian said:

> > ... I just USB connected it to the Mac Pro now and without any Belkin software, the Leopard “Energy Saver” recognizes the 4-5 year old UPS and the shutdown settings work perfectly.
> In the past, I've had issues with open apps not closing (most often, Safari) when the Energy Saver panel attempted to effect a scheduled shutdown. Did the shutdown you observe get "hung up" on any open apps?

I always save and close all files before I leave the computer for more than a couple of minutes. I don't seem to recall a problem with apps quitting as long as all its files are closed — but maybe I just haven't been observant. If you have a particularly problematic app, you could just make it a point to always quit it too.

No...you aren't guilty of being unobservant. It appears that I'm guilty of "operator error." ;)

Martian said:

>
> >

Martian said:

> > All I need now is a new battery — I don’t seem to have much reserve time, though probably the 2 modems, 2 routers, 2 monitors, and cordless phone base station don't help here.
> I wonder if it pays to replace the battery, compared to replacing the entire UPS.

I am assuming a simple gel cell isn’t that expensive — but I haven’t yet priced one. Regardless, since my UPS works so well with a new Intel Mac, I would be willing to pay a premium to not have a potential hassle. Avoiding hassles is one of the reasons we all pay a premium for Macs anyway.

It depends on the particular UPS unit. So, for example, the APC BE550 costs $60 (but I got it for $50 "on sale"). Its replacement battery costs $36. Not expensive but, still, more than 70% of the cost to replace the entire unit. Having said that, I discovered that the BE650 and BE750, which currently are "on sale" for $70 and $90, respectively, use the same $36 battery as the BE550. So, battery replacement for those units are somewhat more reasonable, dropping to 50% and 40%, respectively, of the costs of total unit replacement. (Somewhere?it might have been one of the user evaluations on Amazon.com?I recall seeing someone claiming that the cost to replace the battery in one of the Belkin units was within only a couple of dollars of the purchase price of a new unit?not at all cost effective.)

[duality]

[quote name='Martian']

> [quote name='duality']
> >

Martian said:

> > ... . The whole load (Mac Pro 2 monitors 2 routers + other minor stuff) measures 2.25A @ 120V with my simple inductive meter. That’s 270 VA, but I have no idea what power factor correction to use to convert to proper Wh.
> I thought the Mac Pros had min/max wattage ratings between about 155/320 watts and 170/250 watts, depending on the model. If so, then your measurements must've caught your system while it was idling.
Maybe when I get around to installing Aperture (the shrink wrapped box is still on my desk) I can run a full power test, though there still is the mysterious power factor compensation issue.

Are you referring to the 1.25 factor that the APC tech told bud to use when estimating the actual power consumption of Macs?

Martian said:

But more importantly, the power draw when unattended and idle, followed by the shutdown routine is more relevant to the UPS discussion.

I agree. I'm inclined to believe (actually, I want to believe) that bud's problem was more related to power than switching response time, in which case his solution would simply be to replace his 330 watt BE550 with a 390 watt BE650 or perhaps a 450 watt BE750, instead of shelling out hundreds more for one of APCs "Smart" UPSs.

[duality]

[quote name='smax013']

>

duality said:

I read the box. I went to the APC website and, per its recommendations, ran the configurator (which, BTW, can yield noticeably different results for virtually identical loading, depending on how you use it). I spoke to the folks selling the product at the retail level (who, when pressed further, reached out to their tech support staff). And I even called APC. In short, I did my “due diligence.” And I received a lot of conflicting information, which I attributed to varying degrees of “marketing BS” (to use your expression), product ignorance, and lack of Mac knowledge. However, there was one common thread: The BE550G would meet my key operational (power and shutdown) requirements. Specifically, during a utility outage it would immediately provide sufficient power to keep my iMac running, while initiating an “auto shutdown.”
>

A lot of this is new information. I only had what you had offered to go on. And up until this past post, you had only really mentioned the fact that the box stated "up to 43 mintues" and nothing else to put that in context. You had hinted at talking to APC techs, but specifically mentioned that the "knowledgeable" tech told you it would last about 3 minutes and the software would NOT work with Leopard. This was an after purchase conversation. I recall not mention previously of talking with APC prior to the purchase.

Actually, if you look at my initial post, you?ll see I was upset about both issues?the shutdown software and power/runtime, in that order. But now I?m being unnecessarily ?nitpicky.?
[quote]

smax013 said:

With this new information, I would agree you did due diligence (although I would say that from my experience generally asking most retail store staff is a complete waste of time...but you do find a few gems at such stores on occasion).

Trust me: I never rely on the word of a minimum-waged college student. ;) I always press until either I get logical, meaningful answers from them (it does happen), or (more likely) once they realize I know more than they do, get them to call in a more-knowledgeable technical wonk or senior guru.

smax013 said:

As such, I was wrong...albeit I was going of incomplete information. If you were told conflicting information from APC folks prior to purchase in combination with bad information from the retail folks and the box information is not as detailed as what is on my APC box, then you are justified in being a bit upset.

Yes, smax013, inconsistencies abounded, and I attempted to weed out the seemingly one single strand of truth (that the BE550 would meet my minimum power and shutdown requirements) from a hairball of regurgitated nonsense.
[quote]
[quote name='smax013']

>

duality said:

You’re suggesting that I erred due to inattention to detail, and lack of some degree of market sophistication.
>
> I’ve been to quite a few rodeos in my time, so this was not a stroll down a garden path. If I erred at all, it was in not finding the “runtime charts” when I went to the website—charts which, unlike the configurator, are not offered when you follow the site’s “helpful” instructions for determining which UPS might best suit your needs. As a matter of fact, unless you knew such charts existed, I’m not sure you’d ever find them, except by accident.
>
> My point is that while “caveat emptor” indeed is the operative phrase, it is unreasonable to suggest (as you seem to be doing) that the responsibility for any and all lack of product understanding is entirely the customer’s—especially when the customer did exercise a reasonable amount of care researching the product.
>

As mentioned above, it appears that I was wrong due to making an assessment on incomplete information. Thus, I apologize.

Mea culpas accepted. ;)
[quote]

smax013 said:

I will note that I had no problem finding those runtime charts on the APC website...and did not know they were there, per se. I figured that they had something like that, but not specifically those.

Now you?re ?bragging.? ;)
[quote]

[quote name='smax013']

> From the quotes I just provided, it appears that your box and mine differ. Notwithstanding our differing boxes, the APC website does indeed indicate that OS X is supported. In fact, it offers a PowerChute update (version 1.3.4) to the PowerChute version (v. 1.3.3) that is supplied on the product CD. However, it turns out that while PowerChute 1.3.3 supports OS X up to 10.4.1, the update (1.3.4) only takes it to OS X 10.4.4. Now, I didn’t know that Leopard wasn’t supported prior to purchasing the product, nor did I know that (contrary to everything else I had read) PowerChute for OS X (regardless of the version) doesn’t provide any kind of shutdown routine (other than simply waiting for the battery to drain). I only found that out after buying the unit, loading the software, and reading the ReadMe file (emphasis added):
>
> “The OS shutdown performed by this application is
> an emergency shutdown. No applications are closed and no
> application data is saved. ...”
>
> Perhaps it’s your position that—despite all of my initial efforts to learn about the product—it was my responsibility to also download the PowerChute update and read through it very carefully prior to purchasing the product? If so, I think that any reasonable person would conclude that your expectations are a bit unreasonable.
[color="#333333"]If the boxes difference, I made an assumption that they would be similar and that old saying about assumptions would apply to me. If your box does not clearly state compatibility only Mac OS 10.4 as mine did, then you have a complaint. I will note that it is NOT very large or very obvious. Thus, are you sure you just did not miss it (on my box it was on one end of the box)? (note not intentionally trying to be "accusing" merely asking as I find it curious that they would go to such pains to have in one box but not another)[/color]
>
I did take a quick look, but don?t recall seeing it. It?s a bit late now, however, as I returned the unit this afternoon...I coughed up some more (actually, noticeably more) dough and bought the BE750, banking on the possibility (hoping against hope?) that bud?s problem was entirely due to an undersized UPS rather than a too-fast iMac.

On one of the ?long? sides of the still-unopened box that this unit is in there is mention of Mac being an Apple trademark, and on one of the ?end? panels it does mention OS X compatibility. So I assume that I must?ve just missed whatever similar statements were on the BE550 box. What?s interesting about the compatibility statement on this box is the claim that the unit will work with OS X 10.4.9?which is different from the latest (as of a few days ago) update I previously mentioned that I had downloaded from the APC site (i.e., PowerChute 1.3.4, which is compatible only up through OS X 10.4.4)


>
> And, pray tell, how was bud—or anyone else, for that matter—supposed to know that? Even at this late date, the website still has not been updated per what the tech told bud (APC “will be updating the APC web page with a new recommendation for the kind of UPS needed for Macs.”) To first blame the customer for not “doing his/her homework,” and then to shift some of the blame to Apple for creating a superior product that APC can’t handle with its still-recommended products requires, IMHO, quite a bit of convoluted reasoning.
>

I am not shifting blame per se but rather pointing out that I am assuming that APC was NOT aware of the changes in how Macs' power supplies work until recently. Blaming APC for recommending something that used to work that no longer works due to a change that Apple made is just as bad as blaming Apple for making the change. The point is that things changed, APC learned about them, and now if presumably going to adjust what they recommend for use with a Mac. It just like if HP learns that their printer does not work with a new Mac model...and then has to make adjustments. It appears that APC was unaware and has since become aware and in theory will change what they recommend for use with a Mac.
Perhaps. But no one I?ve talked to or exchanged eMails with at APC is aware of what?s going on; and there?s nothing on the website to indicate any changes have been/are being made to ?adjust? their product-line recommendations?notwithstanding the APC tech?s promises to bud that such changes would be forthcoming.
[quote]

Now, of course, you and [~7504] would not know this. Thus, I certainly don't blame you for being upset if an APC product that you were told would work and thought would work does not. I will note that your complaint was more about the amount of time and lack of the PowerChute software working with OS X 10.5...I don't recall you specifically complaining about the fact that APC was now recommending more expensive APCs other than kind of referring back to [~7504]'s post.
Well, I did begin my rant by saying I was ?pissed.? Truth be told, I was pissed not only because of the frustration of finding out that all my research effort had been for naught, but also for finding out after I had just bought what suddenly appeared to be a $50 paperweight, compounded with the possibility of having to spend $320 more all because of a seemingly concerted confluence of misinformation, misdirection, and malfeasance.

[quote]
Now, if that APC tech is right and the changes in how Mac work means they should be used with APC's Smart UPS line and APC has NOT changed their website, then shame on them. But, then against, maybe that APC tech was full of it. As I said, I have not personally used any UPS device with a desktop Intel Mac (which is what this problem applies to)...and I tend to be a little skeptical until I have independent confirmation (yes, I have trust issues :) ).
The article about power-corrected power supplies seems to provide him a reasonable platform for estimating UPS size requirement (unless, of course, he was the article?s author, and is grossly in error). I can?t comment on his claims about switching speed?but even if Macs are ?too fast,? the real issue is whether that would contribute to the kind of problem bud was having.
[quote]
[quote name='smax013']
> [quote name='duality']
> The next time I buy a car, I’ll be sure to ask the salesman if the steering wheel is included at no extra cost.

Now you are just using over-exaggerated examples. I was merely pointing out that ANY company and their marketing/sales wonks will tend to focus on the good stuff and gloss over the less than good stuff. As such, a customer should take ANYTHING a sales/marketing wonk says with a grain of salt and look for some independent confirmation.


> The buyer always bears some responsibility. So does the seller. You seem to minimize the latter.
>

Yes, I did...but that was based upon what was presented to me at the time of what appeared to be a rather minimal effort on the part of the customer. Based upon the new information that you have provided, it appears that the seller(s) do bear a significant part of the blame in this case. But, as you just said yourself, the buyer still bears some responsibility.

The buyer always bears some responsibility. But one needs to apply the ?reasonable person? test in any such situation, to appropriately assign responsibilities.

[quote]

[quote name='smax013']

> > So, we’re back to blaming bud and Apple, huh?
Nope. Merely pointing out that the Mac OS has a function that will do what the PowerChute software will NOT do in Mac OS 10.5 (to some degree...the PowerChute software is more "robust", I believe...i.e. more features) and that the APC tech pointed this out. And the [~7504]'s problem was NOT lacking an auto shutdown ability (since the APC tech offered an alternative solution), but rather that the APC unit that he had was not able to work with the Mac he had. See above.
<>

[Dan Frakes]

>

Dan Frakes said:

> Of course, as with any type of automated shutdown on a Mac, unsaved documents can prevent shutdown, as programs will throw up a dialog asking you if you want to save changes before quitting.
That explains the failure of my iMac to shut down at night per the schedule I set...I usually don't bother closing documents, especially open web pages in Safari.

If you have multiple tabs/windows open in Safari, yes, Safari will throw up a dialog asking if you're sure you want to quit. This is generally a helpful feature, but in this case, not so much ;) (There was a nifty utility for OS 9 and earlier called Okey Dokey that would automatically accept, after a user-determined period of time, the default button in any such dialogs. Unfortunately, I haven't yet found an OS X equivalent.)