Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

tuxedocomputers.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 245 posts

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#81

Post by mrguyorama »

seabrookmx wrote: post #75
slashdev wrote: post #25

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 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 60s are unambiguously the best ideas ever made in computing.

The linux ecosystem doesn't even have a legitimate window manager. When people tell the linux world "hey there's an issue" the linux world always responds with "fuck off"

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#82

Post by formerly_proven »

seabrookmx wrote: post #75
slashdev wrote: post #25

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…

Uh, I wouldn't consider that to be "supporting Linux" then. On a laptop - which isn't marketed as supporting anything other than Windows 11 - that has similar (but higher spec) hardware than the 12th gen framework I see anywhere between 8 to 20+ hours of battery life, greatly depending on load - largely equivalent to what it does running Windows.

The framework laptop would also seem to suffer from using user-replaceable DDR4 instead of, say, LPDDR5 like 12th gen compatriots generally do (higher performance, less power).

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#83

Post by lucb1e »

yamtaddle wrote: post #77
gandalfgeek wrote: post #19

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!

Some of it's the software being much better. See also: Android vs. iOS battery life. Android's gotten a little better over the years (for a good long while the difference was comically huge) but it's still the case that you need higher specs and a bigger battery to achieve similar apparent responsiveness and battery life with Android. And that's despite iOS bloating pretty badly over the last half-dozen versions. Or…

> Android's gotten a little better over the years

By breaking background services more and more with every release. By doing less, your battery lasts longer, but for what if you want to make use of that battery? (I'm an Android user because iOS is simply not an option for tinkering, but I am sour about the breakage with every version.)

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#84

Post by [deleted] »

barbariangrunge wrote: post #60
slashdev wrote: post #25

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.

I used a dell xps with ubuntu/gnome for years that used to get me 7-10 hours of battery life as long as I turned wifi off and was working in sublime text. This was more than I got on windows, and more than my macbook got at the time Linux is great Not sure why this is getting downvoted

[deleted]

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#85

Post by trelane »

imiric wrote: post #37
GreyStache wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the things I really considered is that if nobody gives these "independent" Linux-focussed vendors a chance, then Linux-on-the-desktop will forever remain a non-factory option and a second-class citizen in support manners.

That's not the way the market works. How about vendors focus on delivering a quality product, with good hardware and software, proper QA and support, and fair prices? Hell, I'm sure many Linux users would be willing to pay a premium if all the other aspects are there. Linux will never be a mainstream option with these low effort products.

> Hell, I'm sure many Linux users would be willing to pay a premium if all the other aspects are there.

Evidence so far indicates that they do not, when given the chance.

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#86

Post by shantara »

yamtaddle wrote: post #77
gandalfgeek wrote: post #19

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!

Some of it's the software being much better. See also: Android vs. iOS battery life. Android's gotten a little better over the years (for a good long while the difference was comically huge) but it's still the case that you need higher specs and a bigger battery to achieve similar apparent responsiveness and battery life with Android. And that's despite iOS bloating pretty badly over the last half-dozen versions. Or…

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...

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#87

Post by trelane »

GreyStache wrote: post #14
fbhabbed wrote: post #3

Good battery, good customizability, but I'm wondering: - Who is actually producing these? Are they resellers? For whom? - They mention TuxedoOS. Why? Can you have the same experience with a vanilla Debian or Arch? - Customs costs. They may inflate the price quite a lot depending on where you are

They use hardware from clevo-computers.com, but they select certain parts. The uefi is not the stock, so I'm assuming they do some tuning. TuxedoOS was very limiting to me; a vanilla Debian works very well.

Interesting. I wonder of they also work closely on the firmware like system76 does.

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#88

Post by shapefrog »

mrguyorama wrote: post #81
seabrookmx wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 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…

> linux is super easy to fix yourself

You just have to recompile the kernal.

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#89

Post by jchw »

eloff wrote: post #31
jchw wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that laptop support Linux? If not, I'd expect a key reason is simple; it likely is not using all of the power saving functionality supported by the laptop. This might include things like S0ix, throttling, proper sleep states, etc. There's a lot of factors going in, and I think by and large it is not actually an endemic issue with Linux itself. Consider for example that x86 Chromebooks have no issue fully exploit…

It does not. I use some extra software to try and improve that, which helps, but it also means the laptop is noticably laggy on battery. But you're right that is likely part of the equation. I don't think it's the whole story though, I see other people complaining of wise than Windows battery life on laptops that do support Linux.

The thing is, there aren't really that many laptops designed to run Linux. Even offerings like these and those from System76 are actually made largely based on designs made to run Windows and adapted later. Sure, this feels like a cop-out and is not really of much aid to anybody, but it's only fair to note. Generally, I do not have dramatically worse battery life on Linux vs Windows, but I also did stop buying laptops with NVIDIA graphics. (Irrespective of Linux, these have given me tons of trouble. Even on Windows, external displays were a painful experience on my Thinkpad P52 no matter what mux settings were set in firmware. I guess it works out OK since NVIDIA on Linux is far from ideal at the moment.)

Re: 99Wh Battery Linux Laptop

#90

Post by tmathmeyer »

mrguyorama wrote: post #81
seabrookmx wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 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…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN