StarCraft Power Saver 0.3 released

Published
by
ossguy
on November 6, 2008
in Open source
. 6 Comments

StarCraft Power Saver has been updated to patch StarCraft 1.15.3 executables. You can find the new version on the StarCraft Power Saver web page. If you have any questions or if you are having trouble with StarCraft Power Saver, please add a comment to this post or contact me directly.

6 Responses to “StarCraft Power Saver 0.3 released”

Feed for this Entry Trackback Address
  1. 1 lordy
    November 28, 2008 at 6:53 am

    great work, is it possible to make a one for the recent starcraft update?

    i believe it is 1.16.0 now

    thanks

    this really help keep my laptop heating undercontrol

  2. 2 ossguy
    November 28, 2008 at 2:32 pm

    I'm not sure that you need StarCraft Power Saver anymore with the 1.16.0 release. From the release notes:

    Bug Fixes
    - Starcraft now only uses as much CPU as it needs to run smoothly.

    I will test out the new patch later today and let you know whether it solves the CPU consumption problem.

    Thanks for notifying me of the new release.

  3. 3 ossguy
    November 28, 2008 at 3:28 pm

    I just tested StarCraft 1.16.0 and I confirmed that it solves the CPU consumption problem. As a result, I will not be updating StarCraft Power Saver to work with StarCraft 1.16.0 because it is unnecessary.

    Now that StarCraft Power Saver is unneeded for new versions of StarCraft, I may put some time into getting it working with StarCraft 1.08b. This was requested a few months ago but I haven't had time to look into it. Since the update from 1.15.2 to 1.15.3 was quite easy, it might not be so hard to backport StarCraft Power Saver to 1.08b. We'll see how it goes.

  4. 4 lordy
    November 28, 2008 at 11:56 pm

    nice, i wonder why it took them this long to fix it. how if they fixed it with your method.

    thanks again ossguy!!

  5. 5 lordy
    November 29, 2008 at 12:08 am

    and*

  6. 6 ossguy
    November 29, 2008 at 6:12 pm

    After analyzing the patch a bit, it doesn't look like they used my method, which is a good thing because my method was not the right way to do it (but was the only practical way without access to the source code). I don't know exactly how they did it; I would have to analyze the code a bit more.

Leave a Reply