Windows vs. Linux - Which gives better battery life On A Laptop?

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

creepindeth04

Moderator
Not sure how many responses this will get, but I was curious. I have a Lenovo SL500 with Vista Basic installed. Battery life is OK, around 4 hours. I recently installed Ubuntu Netbook Remix on my ASUS EEEPC 1000HE and I really like using Linux. So I was wondering if installing Ubuntu or even a Fedora distro on my Laptop would yield better battery life, or at least around the same. Or should I just wait for Windows 7?
 
Fr0dus Maximus said:
I'm pretty sure Linux will give you better battery life over Windows period.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm thinking too. But I've been doing a lot of research lately and a lot of people are reporting that battery actually gets slightly worse (this is mostly with Ubuntu, though.) I'm downloading it now and I'm going to experiment. Just wondering if anyone else has actually tried it and has noticed better battery life.
 
I didnt expect that an operating system would really alter the battery life of a computer, wouldnt it depend more on what you are doing and how many background tasks you have running? Doesnt Windows also have a battery saver mode and settings?

And how are you comparing the battery life of the Asus to the Lenova? Doesnt Asus use longer lasting batteries anyway?
 
Starrynite said:
I didnt expect that an operating system would really alter the battery life of a computer, wouldnt it depend more on what you are doing and how many background tasks you have running? Doesnt Windows also have a battery saver mode and settings?
Click to expand...

Yes it does, which is why I am asking. Both Windows and Linux run different types of processes in the background and I just wanted to get a feel of what those were. From my research it appears that certain Linux distros have the CPU running at full speed which seems to be why a lot of people are reporting worse battery life.

Windows does have a battery saving feature and I use it as often as I can, but it's Windows Basic and it's slow.

And how are you comparing the battery life of the Asus to the Lenova? Doesnt Asus use longer lasting batteries anyway?
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm not comparing my Lenovo to my EEEPC. I just mentioned it because I installed Linux on the ASUS and it turns out that I like Linux a lot more. Which is why I wanted to install it on my Lenovo. The battery life on my ASUS is about the same, but that's mostly because this particular distro was written for netbooks.


BUT... I did install Ubuntu 9.04 and it seems everything is working OK. It seems that I've lost about 30 mins. of battery life though. At least that's what Ubuntu was reporting (2hr 55min. as opposed to 3hr 45min. with Vista Basic) I'm going to see if I can tweak the system to get better battery time. The good news is that Ubuntu boots up MUCH quicker than Vista Basic, which is really more important to me right now.
 
If you REALLY want to upgrade battery life on your laptop, go with a solid state hard drive...

They're faster, cooler, more shock resistant, and use less power because they have no moving parts. :P

I don't know how different the power saving options are between the operating systems. I think those are going to make the biggest difference in energy usage between the two operating systems though.
 
Grindspine said:
If you REALLY want to upgrade battery life on your laptop, go with a solid state hard drive...

They're faster, cooler, more shock resistant, and use less power because they have no moving parts. :P
Click to expand...

I'm definitely planning on it. But right now, when I do get one, it's going to go on my everyday desktop PC. Eventually I'll get one for all my machines. Right now with Linux on my laptop, once everything is cached in RAM, it's superfast!
 
Starrynite said:
Okay the recent tech reports said that SSD harddroves lose data faster than regural disk drives. Why would get a solid state one?
Click to expand...

They're definitely not as reliable as traditional HD's at the moment, but I also don't save anything important on an OS HD. I always have more than one HD on my PC's. I have one main HD that only houses my OS and Apps. Then my second HD is where I store my important files (this will consist of a traditional drive). I then have an external drive that has my second HD backed up.

So mainly, for me, an SSD is to have the speediest OS as possible. Plus, it won't be a while until I get one. I can definitely afford it, but if prices are still dropping, I might as well wait.
 
Starrynite said:
I think the only solution is to get the Asus laptop that offers 8 to 9.5 hour battery life. It's only 299
Click to expand...

I already have the 1000HE for when I need an ultraportable, but there are times where I need to be portable and require more cpu power. Which is why I have the Lenovo. It contains a Core 2 Duo 2.1 GHz.
 
Starrynite said:
Okay the recent tech reports said that SSD harddroves lose data faster than regural disk drives. Why would get a solid state one?
Click to expand...

I think that SSDs at the moment give higher performance with lower power consumption (therefore less heat/noise as well) than a traditional spinning platter style drive. They are also more shock resistant, thus, I think, better for highly mobile laptops.

For desktops I still would go with a traidtional disk drive. Traditional drives are more cost effective (storage space per dollar). Plus, desk tops don't benefit from having a shock resistant drive as much as laptops do.

That's just my $0.02 anyhow...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top