Live data from Hacker News

Why we challenge Microsoft’s battery test

opera.com

21–30 of 220 posts

Re: Why we challenge Microsoft’s battery test

#21
Obviously this is anecdotal but I've been messing around with my laptop a lot recently trying to get to a full day of work on battery, and the best setup I've found is windows 10 Insider with Edge + adblock.

Opera battery saver is great but they should enable it automatically whenever you're on battery, as it has no performance impact that I've noticed.

Re: Why we challenge Microsoft’s battery test

#22
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they say "Opera Developer (39.0.2248.0)" - which is presumably a dev build of the browser. Like it would be fine if they say "in next version we will retake the top" or whatever but don't try to dispute their results by providing something they had no way of measuring.

The developer stream is public, and so is the exact build they used[1]. [1] http://get.opera.com/pub/opera-developer/39.0.2248.0/

I wouldn't switch to an unstable browser just to improve battery life. It just shows that they're not really trying to get a fair test. I'm running ad blocker in Chrome and it works perfectly. I'd be interested if they could improve on that significantly, but I trust Google more in creating a stable software.

Re: Why we challenge Microsoft’s battery test

#23
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't be too hard to dual-boot Win10 on Apple hardware and compare them, but it might be a little awkward for Microsoft to do so officially.

The OS is a pretty obvious confounding factor, don't you think?

I think it would still be interesting. Win10 + Edge vs macOS + Safari.

In the end the user does not care which OS runs in the background, just which platform offers the best experience - in this case the longest battery time.

Re: Why we challenge Microsoft’s battery test

#24
post #4

Opera with an ad blocker vs Edge without it doesn't seem like an ubiased test.

It doesn't. But there's no reason anyone should be running a browser without an ad-blocker in the first place. Edge should have a lightweight ad-blocker built-in by default.

Considering Microsoft recently added ads to the Windows 10 login screen, I wouldn't hold my breath on Edge coming with an ad blocker out of the box.

EDIT: Downvotes? Really this is factually accurate:

http://lifehacker.com/windows-10-is-showing-ads-on-your-lock...

Re: Why we challenge Microsoft’s battery test

#25
post #16
post #4

Opera with an ad blocker vs Edge without it doesn't seem like an ubiased test.

Even with the ad blocker being a feature in opera out of the box? They were trying to show that opera can achieve better battery performance based on it's features and optimizations. Does that not include the ad-blocker?

In that case you might as well browse different websites because using adblocker makes your browser render different content.

Re: Why we challenge Microsoft’s battery test

#26
post #15

Definitely not a fair test... Edge was rendering a lot more without an ad-blocker.

You might argue that not rendering ads is a valid method to save battery.

Correct, it is a valid method to save a battery. It makes the comparisons invalid though, since you are not testing with the same input.

Re: Why we challenge Microsoft’s battery test

#27
post #4

Opera with an ad blocker vs Edge without it doesn't seem like an ubiased test.

It doesn't. But there's no reason anyone should be running a browser without an ad-blocker in the first place. Edge should have a lightweight ad-blocker built-in by default.

The thing is, ad blocker is disabled by default in Opera.
Post reply on HN