If westom's correct, the only hardware protection an UPS provides is when an end-user is applying a BIOS flash on a non-dual BIOS motherboard. If a brown/black-out occurs, UPS battery provides enough power to complete the BIOS flash. Essentially, saving currently unsaved data is a one big feature of UPS.
I only hope we soften our tone during this discussion; some of the wording comes close to encroaching into the territory of what I would call "ad hominem against an expressed idea, concept, etc."
Personally I don't see any reason not to get a UPS. But that's just my opinion and for a protection tool that is around 100 dollars for a very good one.. why not?? Some of us spend lots of money on our computers and having one is a good way to protect that investment.
Backing up data is great but I also want hardware protection and to me a UPS is the best thing to get.
A warning from a retired fire chief: Surge protectors have finite, if unknown lives, and need to be replaced.
From one of my discussions of this on another forum:
"I recently replied to a thread on a DirecTV forum about a person who had a fire that was rather clearly caused due to the use of a life-expired surge protector. I posted a link to one of the many sites that discuss this issue, and even received a nice thank-you reply for so doing.
I don't know which particular URL I posted; here is one such:
http://www.howtogeek.com/212375/why-and ... protector/ "
An electrical substation in Albuquerque, New Mexico, recently took a direct lightning strike, despite the massive installation of lightning rods, which could be seen in a photograph in the local newspaper if you knew what to look for. While the sophisticated control equipment took the substation off-line nearly instantaneously, there was nonetheless a tremendous surge on the distribution system, which caused quite a lot of damage to electrical and electronic equipment. While the newspaper coverage did not specifically mention damaged computers, I would be surprised if there were no such incidents given the scope of reported problems.
I am not an electrical engineer, but I would surmise that the surge likely damaged quite a few surge protectors, many of which would likely not have any built-in indicators of their no longer working properly.
That's just one case and I don't see how that would be applicable to this discussion.
Even though spec numbers define it as worst protection. If one learns facts before making a conclusion, well, numbers are screaming no hardware protection.
Gaston County fire marshal demonstrates what so many already know. Plug-in protectors can even create fires due to undersized joule numbers and other design defects. A UPS has even tinier numbers. So where is this hardware protection?
APC recently admitted some 15 million of their products must be removed immediately because of fire. UPS has even tinier protection numbers.
For hardware protection, one must properly earth a 'whole house' protector. Only then do hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate harmlessly outside. Only then is hardware inside a plug-in protector or UPS protected. That superior solution even costs tens of times less money. Is found in facilities that cannot have damage.
Why would anyone spend $100 on a UPS when a 'whole house' solution costs $1 per protected appliance? Too many even 'feel' a UPS does protection that even the manufacturer does not say exists.
BTW, protectors do not life expire. These undersized protectors fail 'catastrophically' on a first surge - due to undersizing. Gaston County fire marshal describes numerous protectors all failed catastrophically on that first surge. More examples are shown in Truth About MOVs | Zero Surge
This does not recommend that zerosurge product. Protectors that are properly sized do not suffer that catastrophic failure. Zerosurge only shows inferior and expensive protectors; not effective ones.
Normal failure for any protector is to degrade. That means it never fails catastrophically. Only its let-through voltage changes after many decades. That protector remains functional - just at a changed voltage. That is completely different from a failure that happens in a defectively designed or selected protector - catastrophic failure. Catastrophic failure occurs when a protector is grossly undersized. Often because such failures get the naive to recommend that protector and even buy more. Catastrophic failure must never happen even to a protector that has degraded or is new.
Effective protectors mean nobody even knew a surge existed. Even a protector remains functional. That is why the fewest and informed properly earth one 'whole house' protector. Since near zero UPS and power strip protectors need that protection. To even protect from protector created fires (also called catastrophic failure).
UPS has one function. To protect unsaved data. IE to protect data not yet saved in a BIOS (Eprom also called NV memory). Actually maybe two - to save time so that one need not reboot after a blackout.
Do the words undersizing and fire have any relevance? A protector is for that type of transient. Lesser transients are already made irrelevant by robust protection already inside appliances. Some less transients, that cannot damage appliances, also catastrophically destroy protectors. Protection inside UPS is even tinier.
One installs protector for that type of surge and other potentially hardware destructive anomalies. This over 100 year old proven solution costs about $1 per protected appliance. One buys a UPS to protect unsaved data.
Just how many incidents need I post to make the point that surge protectors need to be replaced? One such should suffice to lead people to use the link in my post, or other searches for information to learn that the need exists, and is in my experience (as well as that of such organizations as the National Fire Protection Association which compiles massive data about fires,) not generally known to the public.
In short, I believe that my post is indeed applicable to this discussion.
It sounds more like you're trying to sell something here.
Correct me if I'm wrong..
Yes, grossly undersized protectors (not designed to protect from that Albuquerque anomaly) must be replaced often. Undersizing increases sales and profits. Meanwhile, if an effective 'whole house' protector fails catastrophically, then that venue needs a more robust protector. A protector must never fail catastrophically even in Albuquerque.
Not Myself said:
Recommendations must also come with numbers. A typical direct lightning strike is 20,000 amps. So a minimal 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. If that protector ever fails catastrophically (as indicated by its light), then replace it with a 100,000 amp protector. Because effective protectors remain functional for decades.
Your citation also includes some bogus recommendations. A best power strip has no protector parts. And has one feature essential for protecting humans - a circuit breaker. A power strip with protectors parts may be confiscated by a cruise ship - due to fire risk. A power strip without protector parts is safe - not grossly undersized and a fire hazard. A fire that is acceptable in a home is totally unacceptable on a ship. So that power strip with protector parts may be confiscated.
That indicator light can never report degradation - the acceptable failure mode. That indicator light can only report catastrophic type failures. Your citation never discusses those two failure modes. That light can only report a protector was grossly undersized. And must be replace by something that is properly sized - as defined by spec numbers.
Yeph. Knowledge. And protection of human life. Any recommendation I make from from long list of manufacturers known for their integrity.