"kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:2dd2e39g86vtkcf8lmmt655ieccvi6tu5f@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 09:04:51 GMT, "Noozer"
> <dont.spam@me.here> wrote:
>
>>Might be a dumb question, but the expensive part of a UPS is converting
>>the
>>AC to DC for storage, then back to AC for use.
>>
>>Why not put the UPS *after* the PSU... three (?) mini UPS's actually - 5v,
>>12v and 3.3v... and the -5v, etc if necessary. It could possibly even
>>mount
>>into a 5.25" drive bay.
>>
>>Sounds simple, doesn't it?
>>
>
>
> You write about putting it in a 5.25" bay which would
> require very small batteries, meaning it couldn't have much
> runtime. If long runtime for a system (only, including no
> monitor or other peripherals if not powered by the system)
> is not required, then we avoid the expensive larger,
> traditional UPS, and can instead use one of the basic
> commodity $40 types.

True, but I'm thinking of something that would let the PC run for a 10
second interruption, then signal the PC to hibernate. Probably looking at
about 2 minutes of run time. No extra loads like monitors or printers to
worry about either.

Considering how much people rely on PC's I'm surprised that there isn't a
better power solution than the 120v AC UPS's.

....not to mention that most consumer UPSs put out really crappy power and
don't do ANYTHING to protect against power surges/etc.