131–140 of 245 posts
There's also the Starlabs Starfighter which is somewhat similar: https://starlabs.systems/pages/starfighter
The backside of this magazine is a full-page ad for this exact laptop.
[1]: " c't Make: Sonderheft Elektro-Technik " https://www.heise.de/select/make/2022/7
[2]: Seriously, 12,90€ for one edition is IMHO too much to just buy every single one without all the content being something I'm really interested in.
Isn't it a searing indictment of the entire Intel laptop chip lineup that a MacBook Air M1 has half the battery capacity (50Wh) while giving easily twice the battery life with as good or better performance -- and with no fans!
It's also a searing indictment of Linux. I get less than half the battery life on my Alienware AMD laptop under Linux than under Windows. I don't know what Linux is doing wrong here, but it is not energy efficient.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's not Linux's fault per se It IS linux's fault, in the way that whenever someone new comes into the ecosystem and says "hey this important thing doesn't work well or is broken for me" and get accosted from all directions by crazy people who haven't touched mac or windows in 20 years who insist that what you describe isn't possible, linux is super easy to fix yourself (lol), and that ideas from computing in the 60…
I think Linux is not less efficient than other major OSes. I am able to squeeze 5% more battery from a MacBook Air 11'' Late 2012 using Linux vs macOS. This is possible because the machine is basically a pure Intel device, so in-kernel support for most hardware components is good. The key aspect is to implement fairly aggressive udev rules and to use no desktop environment, so that the CPU stays in powersaving states…
> The key aspect is to [...] use no desktop environment, [...]
Is this satire?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also a searing indictment of Linux. I get less than half the battery life on my Alienware AMD laptop under Linux than under Windows. I don't know what Linux is doing wrong here, but it is not energy efficient.
There's a lot of Linux apologists in your replies but my experience is exactly the same _with a laptop that supports Linux_ (Framework laptop). I'm running a very recent kernel in Fedora and have tried numerous power saving mechanisms (currently autocpufreq, although it's results are not much different from gnome PPD) and I'm lucky if I get 3 hours from the thing while running 10-15 FF tabs and a single instance of V…
> It's not Linux's fault per se, it's just that there's considerably less engineering manpower going into tuning the power efficiency of laptop hardware on Linux.
You're not wrong, but it's worse than that. A lot of the power management is tied in to proprietary firmware. Then there's the whole Intel Gen12 debacle...
I would argue that Chromebooks are pretty solid proof that it isn't Linux's fault, because they by and large Linux systems that get fantastic power management results.
> People get up in arms because they can't reconcile the fact that "Windows is bloated" with the fact that it gets better battery life, but if you think about it for a few seconds it really shouldn't surprise anyone.
Windows gets better battery life on laptops designed for better battery life with Windows. At the same time, it is often surprising how running a program under WINE on Linux will outperform the same program running on Windows. ;-)
Coming from Macbook I'm pretty happy with it. I got used very fast with KDE (I used it on desktop computer in the recent years from time to time). Touchpad it's great, keyboard is the same as on Macbook. Battery lasts about 5h now when programming (some Node.JS, compiling some Rust or Go services).
I had a 2016 Macbook Pro 15 with I7 and 16gbRAM, now it compiles a Rust service I'm working on in 1 minute compared to 6 minutes on the old laptop.
The laptop specs I'm having is the same as the Tuxedo and the same chassis: i7-12700H, 16gb Ram(updated it to 40gb myself), 512gb NvMe, 99wh Battery.
Isn't it a searing indictment of the entire Intel laptop chip lineup that a MacBook Air M1 has half the battery capacity (50Wh) while giving easily twice the battery life with as good or better performance -- and with no fans!
12700H has comparable single core performance and significantly faster multi core performance than M1.
It's seem to be about at the same level as M1 Pro/Ultra just with much poorer energy efficiency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, one of these vendors has also access to undocumented APIs that the others need to discover and reverse engineer to level the playing field: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2022/10/improving-firefox-responsi...
It's not quite "reverse engineering" if you just need to read the kernel code (which Apple publishes). It's undocumented , yes - but it's not like it wasn't there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Linux is not less efficient than other major OSes. I am able to squeeze 5% more battery from a MacBook Air 11'' Late 2012 using Linux vs macOS. This is possible because the machine is basically a pure Intel device, so in-kernel support for most hardware components is good. The key aspect is to implement fairly aggressive udev rules and to use no desktop environment, so that the CPU stays in powersaving states…
> I am able to squeeze 5% more battery from a MacBook Air 11'' Late 2012 using Linux vs macOS. > The key aspect is to [...] use no desktop environment, [...] Is this satire?
You can run bare X or Wayland, plus a window manager and cherry-picked daemons, to achieve the same sort of functionality e.g. desktop notifications, network roaming or device automounting.
My point is that bare X plus cherry-picked services tends to be much more efficient, because you don't need to pay a performance tax for the things you don't use.