Vista won't wake from hibernation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Hi,

I'm running a Windows Vista Beta test nmachine with Office 2007 beta
installed. The machine goes into hibernation\sleep mode but won't wake up
again on input. I have to force a power cycle to get the machine live again.
I'm running an HP DC7600 USDT with 2.8Ghz processor, 512 Mb RAM. Any
advice\solutions gratefully received.

Cheers,
Matt
 
Hi,

Sounds dumb but, don't use hibernation - many of the drivers don't support
it very well yet. Hopefully this will get better. Alternately, you could
check with the various manufacturers of your hardware (meaning not HP) for
Vista drivers.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
One possibility, and only a theory here, you may not have enough RAM. 512MB
is the minimum for Vista, but you need 1GB or more for all the features of
Vista Fabulous, er, Ultimate. Since the new Hibernate/Sleep thing uses Ram
while it sleeps, your system may not have enough RAM available to wake-up.

For reference, when XP was first unleashed, the minimum requirement of RAM
was 64MB. Would you install/run XP on a computer with 64MB of RAM?

Just a theory, though.
 
There are known issues with hibernation. It works here ok, but more then
just a few do have problems.
Rule of thumb is that when the option is offered, it just should work. If it
was greyed out not, but that is not the case here. Btw, not quite correct
(vista quality) Hardware drivers mainly cause problems.

--
Leen
==> Please only reply in the newsgroup <==
*** This means, DO NOT send me Email also!!! ***

How to burn an ISO file :
http://iso.snoekonline.com/iso.htm
 
I agree that Hibernate writes everything to a file. However, the OP was
asking about the newfangled "Sleep" mode, which is apparently a hybrid of
the old "Standby Mode" and "Hibernate") which writes the same type of file
but also keeps the system state in memory. From the Vista Help File:

"Sleep is a new power state that combines the power-saving and data-saving
features of Standby and Hibernate. Like Standby, Sleep saves all of your
work to memory so that you can resume working almost immediately after
waking your computer. Like Hibernate, Sleep saves all of your work to your
hard disk, including information about the programs that you were using,
such as window location and size. After saving your work, Sleep puts your
computer into a power-saving state."
 
But it doesn't need more ram to sleep than it needs when running. Sleep
just redundantly retains soft memory for some unknown reason.
Personally I don't see the point. Either you want the machine shut down
(hibernate) or you want soft memory retained. If you want a backup in case
power fails in the old standby mode, install a UPS.
 
Well, hypothetically, let's say the OP has Vista Ultimate running with glass
enabled and his sidebar turned on, some sort of anti-virus, hasn't
turned-off any default services and nothing else running on his computer.
(This would qualify as a normal idle state for a typical user). Now,
admittedly, I have a little more RAM installed, but if I boot to Vista,
log-on and wait for indexing and whatnot to all catch up ( I gave it an
hour, this morning), I am using 614MB of RAM. The OP has 512MB of RAM
installed, in total. Add to that, the system the OP is writing about came
standard with integrated graphics with three additional graphics card
choices; the OP doesn't specify which graphics scenario he has, but if it is
integrated graphics, the system in question has even less system RAM
available. We'll assume the system does not have integrated graphics.. I
maintain that there simply is not enough RAM in the OP's system to run Vista
Ultimate. And surely, for a system to wake from a stasis state, turn on a
monitor, some peripherals and read data from a hard drive takes some RAM.
So, if the Sleep mode stores the system state in RAM, and, as I theorize,
most of the RAM is "filled" with this data at the time of wake-up, there
isn't enough system RAM available to both hold the system state and turn-on
the monitor.

Like I said earlier, just a theory, but I bet I'm more right than wrong.

Also, the only benefit I see to this new Sleep mode is notebook users who go
into Sleep, either have no A/C access or forget they haven't turned the
unit off, and then the battery drains down, so this would save the data.
Other than that, I see no use for it either.
 
Yeah... one other use for Sleep mode... one has a Dell XPS Gen 2 that's as
loud, if not louder, than a dang kitchen "microwave over the stove" fan
blowing full bore... as soon as I'm done using that PC, put the sucker to
sleep! Please!
 
Sorry to debunk your theory, but I have a Dell XPS Gen 5 with 1Gb of RAM and
I get the same error. Here is the MO of my little tragedy, which happens
regardless of the updated video drivers...
When I set my BIOS to S3 sleep mode (works like a charm in XP, as it
should), my computer shows me the sleep mode as default option. If I select
S1 in the BIOS, then the Hybernate is the default (not a viable option since
it takes the PC 3 minutes to wake up, much like it takes a bear to wake up
from the winter slumber.... although it works).
When using the S3 mode, as I should be able to, after initiating the sleep
command the monitor shuts down for about 10 seconds, then it comes back on
looking like a chalk board after you try to wipe it (no discernable image)
for about 5 seconds, and then the machine shuts off.
I could live with that display of imagery, if it wasn’t for what happens
after I try to wake the computer up. Most of the times the screen will come
back up immediately and perfect, I can move the mouse as well, but that lasts
about 20 seconds before the machine reboots on its own only to come back to a
message saying that windows could not load the restore data and I am prompted
to try again or simply have windows start fresh.
So why don’t I use the sleep with the S1 mode? Simple, the fans in my
machine never shut down with that configuration.
I thought at first I was plagued by some fluke issue, as I had not been able
to find the same error reported on any forum, but then I had a friend of
mine, who claimed to not have the problem, change his settings to S3 and
voila… same problem. Anyone have the same issue?? Anyone solved it yet??
Please… let me know.
 
Back
Top