Depends what you call 'on 24/7'.
24/7 ON (fully awake, not in standby)
I put mine to standby when not in use, but it has mains 24/7.
Are you being deliberately obtuse? As a PVR it wouldn't fulfill its primary function if it spent a significant proportion of its time with no power.
Shops have an electricity supply 24/7, but a 24/7 shop is open for walk-in business (without having to knock up the storekeeper) all day every day. Analogously, a 24/7 HDR-FOX is awake and available without delay (while waking up out of standby) at all times (as mine are), crashes or automated power-cycle reboots notwithstanding.
24/7 Advantages:
- Instant availability for normal TV use (no boot delay)
- Instant availability for network access to CF (use of WebIF)
- Instant availability as network media server
- No more than 10 minutes delay collecting new instructions from RS
- Less heat, mechanical, and voltage cycling stresses potentially resulting in longer life
24/7 Disadvantages:
- Greater chance of "unattended crashes" ceasing service until manual (or timeswitch) reboot
- Measures required to prevent stale EPG
- Costs £37 per annum (per HDR-FOX, assuming 28W @ 15p/kWh)
Timeswitch-Interrupted 24/7 Advantages:
- Instant availability (except during interruption) for normal TV use (no boot delay)
- Instant availability (except during interruption) for network access to CF (use of WebIF)
- Instant availability (except during interruption) as network media server
- No more than 10 minutes delay (except during interruption) collecting new instructions from RS
- No measures required to prevent stale EPG
- Maximum duration of inoperable state (due to crash) limited to 24 hours
Timeswitch-Interrupted 24/7 Disdvantages:
- Brief period of unavailability (not good for insomniacs)
- Potentially reduced life due to heat, mechanical, and voltage cycling stress
- Costs £37 per annum (nearly)
Non-24/7 Advantages (system in standby when not in active use, or standby induced by internal timer):
- Reduced probability of crashes, no unattended crashes (therefore immediate intervention)
- No measures required to prevent stale EPG
- Electricity costs proportional to usage (£37 PA max)
Non-24/7 Disadvantages:
- Inconvenience of start-up delay
- Inconvenience of manual start-up for network access to CF
- Inconvenience of manual start-up for network access to media server
- Collection of new instructions from RS limited to ON periods – no unplanned remote scheduling
- Potentially reduced life due to heat, mechanical, and voltage cycling stress
- Internal timers unable to clear crash state
Take your pick.
Unless you regard the electricity consumption as significant (and you have to balance that against the cost of decreased life and the environmental issues of disposal), it seems to me the choice is between the 24/7 plan and the interrupted 24/7 plan (but keep the interruption to an absolute minimum to minimise the thermal cycling). What could be even better is some kind of device which detects a crash and quickly cycles the power (only when there is a crash rather than daily) – but I've had that on the back burner for quite a while now. Make it able to respond to network on/off commands and it could also provide the remote control needed by Non-24/7 stalwarts!