On Thursday, 26 October 2017 22:56:18 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 17:52:08 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:10 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 24/10/2017 02:45, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 12:55:04 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 01:28:42 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

====snip====

I found the filament style 60W equiv lamps
to be very good a true match for light output and a pretty good
CRI.

That'll be on account the 806Lm lamps "Wattage" rating is based
on
the
more efficient American 120v 750 hour tungsten filament lamp type
than
on our less efficient UK 240v 1000 hour lamp type.

It's taken quite a few years longer than promised by Cree but
we're
finally seeing LED lamps with efficiencies above the best on offer
of
81Lm per watt of the past five years now raised to somewhere in the
region of 120 to 130Lm per watt.

I'd think most know an LED is more efficient than tungsten. My
problem
is buying one which says it is a 100 watt equivalent only to find it
is
not -
and noticeably so.

If I'm happy with a particular light level/quality, that's what I
want
of any replacement, since it is the primary purpose of a light.
Seems
to
me many think saving money is the primary purpose of a light. In
which
case leave it switched off. ;-)

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs
compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point, especially
true
in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as much
as
convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights switched on
between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn them
on and off when needed?

You might trip over trying to find the lightswitch, especially if
elderly or infirm.

Not if you have movement sensors instead of light switches.

Then other things can turn them on like pets,

Not when you position them proper and have the right type of movement
sensor.

Another reason not to have them.


also sometime yuo just don't want the light coming on.

What I said, stupid.

which makes auto on, not an idea option.


Main problem is when you wonder about the noise outside
in the middle of the night and want to see what the potential
criminal is up to without it being clear that you are watching.

If it were me I'd have a video cameras
to see what he was up to and record,

Sure, but when its clear that something is up, you may well want
to have a look yourself too, without the house lights coming on.

True, hopefully I'd have an app on my phone for viewing .


if I were bothing with sensors switching on lights that is.

Why fart around with manual switches at all anymore ?

Because they are still more practical for most.
Here we have a new building with auto lights. Trouble is at night
going into the toilet it;s dark, until after you enter then the lights flicker on as they use a sensor inside and not on the door, so the lights don't come on until you are in the toilet, OK when you;re used to it and know, otherwise you g=have to stand there until the lights come on.
So a tweeking of sensors of having them operate when you open the door, rather than wait until you have walked in would be better.



All easily fixed with a Hue system that you can tell to ignore the
movement sensors in that situation before checking. Not cheap tho.