This is a utility that allows you to partition your Mac’s hard drive or SSD – effectively splitting it in two – leaving the main macOS on one partition, and then allowing you to install Windows on the new partition. This was a benefit to Apple because it took away one of the biggest concerns of Windows users when considering a move to the Mac – it meant they could bring Windows and their Windows software with them.Īnd, in true Apple style, it came up with an elegant solution, known as Boot Camp. Personally I look for workstation class laptops that don’t sacrifice performance (or ports, keyboard depth, etc) for aesthetic purposes, but I agree it is getting harder to find this on the consumer side.When Apple moved to Intel processors back in 2006-2007, it also brought the ability to run Windows to the Mac because the macOS and Windows OS suddenly spoke the same language (the x86 instruction set used in Intel processors). Luckily, everyone has picked up thermal issues as a design feature, and the playing field should be more level these days. I don’t use laptops much, so I don’t have much experience optimizing for battery life, for this reason I won’t attempt a blind guess □ A lot of posts about linux optimization suggest a tool called TLP, which is in many linux repos. That’s interesting, the phoronix power test didn’t reveal anything close to a 2.5X gap, It’s hard to say what could be causing that without digging deeper. Firefox (web pages are a battery hog on every platform), Terminal with SSH sessions, text editor. Something like 10 hours with Windows to 4 hours with Fedora. My evidence is between a brand new T420 with Windows and with Fedora. The thing is I think linux and windows are both using more power than macos does, and I’d kind of like to know if it’s due to hardware or software differences. The other linux distros look like they’re in the running alongside windows 10. His averages put windows 10 as using ~ 1% more power than the linux distros, however his graph shows that he may not have given the system enough time to settle and over a longer period it looks like ubuntu could have fared the worst on average given more time. Unfortunately his graph doesn’t show enough detail, he should have used a bigger graph with a logarithmic IMHO. Phoronix did an article about it a few years ago. There’s a big difference between Windows and Linux too. ![]() I did get a macbook pro loaner for one project a few years ago, but it actually under-performed compared to my acer at the time, which was unexpected because the mac’s specs were actually much better, however I’ve come to recognize that many macbook pros will under-perform due to thermal throttling issues as a result of apple’s design choices. ![]() How much power is used at idle? Is the CPU entering sleep states under linux? At there more interrupts under linux? Are the clock speeds comparable? Fan speeds? Under load, is the same work getting done per unit time? How does memory & disk usage compare? Is there more disk activity/thrashing under linux? Does macos put more peripherals to sleep? Alas, I’m not going to buy a macbook just to try these tests, but gosh darnit somebody should □ Like you I’m very curious as to what’s going on. I tried to find a review that compared linux and macos battery life on the same hardware, but came up empty-handed. I do believe you, I’m just curious about the “why” part. I would like to do these power tests myself to get a bearing on the problem. All of my FOSS tools work plus many commercial tools.Īs much as I’d rather support desktop Linux, it’s still a third wheel, and it has poor battery life. I like it because it’s a Unix which gets commercial support and has rather good battery life. Things like VirtualBox, controller support for Steam, DropBox, Little Snitch, and more all come with kernel extensions, so there’s definitely chances you might be running some without even realising it. If you use macOS, run kextstat | grep -v com.apple to see how many third party kernel extensions you have running. Kernel programming interfaces (KPIs) will be deprecated as alternatives become available, and future OS releases will no longer load kernel extensions that use deprecated KPIs by default. ![]() At WWDC19, we announced the deprecation of kernel extensions as part of our ongoing effort to modernize the platform, improve security and reliability, and enable more user-friendly distribution methods. System extensions on macOS Catalina (10.15) allow software like network extensions and endpoint security solutions to extend the functionality of macOS without requiring kernel-level access. This has been known for a while, but you might not even know you’re using kernel extensions in the first place. Just another heads up that kernel extensions on macOS will soon stop working.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |