Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st Oct 2013 14:01 UTC
Windows

Jeff Atwood:

I had a brief Twitter conversation with Anand Shimpi of Anandtech about this, and he was as perplexed as I was. Nobody could explain the technical basis for this vast difference in idle power management on the same hardware. None of the PC vendors he spoke to could justify it, or produce a Windows box that managed similar battery life to OS X. And that battery life gap is worse today - even when using Microsoft's own hardware, designed in Microsoft's labs, running Microsoft's latest operating system released this week. Microsoft can no longer hand wave this vast difference away based on vague references to "poorly optimized third party drivers".

The new Surface Pro 2 gets 6.6 hours of web browsing battery life. The MacBook Air 11", which has more or less the same hardware and battery, gets more than 11 hours.

I have a Surface RT - the first generation - and as such, I know why. Windows 8 might have Metro running on top of it hiding a lot of it, but Windows 8.x carries just as much baggage, cruft, and outdated shit with it as previous versions of Windows have. Windows 8/8.1 - and Metro in particular - simply suck. Slow, clunky, jarring, cumbersome, battery-sucking, restricted, and limited, with a crappy selection of rush-job, rarely updated applications. You know how resizing windows on Windows 7 or OS X is all nice and fluid? Why, then, is it a slow and jittery operation that brings Windows 8 Metro to its knees?

It's simple: just like battery life, it's a symptom of Microsoft's Windows team not having the balls to truly go for a clean break, as the Windows Phone team have done. And lo and behold, Windows Phone - even WP8, which runs on the same NT kernel - has none of the slowness and crappiness issues that continue to plague Windows 8 Metro (although WP has its own set of issues unrelated to these).

If you want a smooth, modern laptop today - get a MacBook. If you want a smooth and modern tablet, get the Nexus 7 or an iPad. Microsoft still has nothing to show for itself in these areas.

Permalink for comment 575124
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: You know what?
by drcouzelis on Mon 21st Oct 2013 18:08 UTC in reply to "You know what?"
drcouzelis
Member since:
2010-01-11

Some people might want a computer to run some software, you know, something other than webbrowser or Angry Birds. Some need 3D Max, some need VirtualDub, some need Pinnacle Studio, some need SONAR, some need Transcode, I need Unity 3D and Visual Studio, some people play games, etc. There's no other platform having all sort of professional tools running on it. Even for gaming there are 100x or 1000x more games available on Windows than on Os X. Sure, if you only use a webbrowser Os X is ok. But Linux might be even better in that regard.


You're right, people should use Windows if they want to run some software. For the past decade I've used nothing but Linux for work, hobbies, Masters degree work, and entertainment, but I don't do all those things by using software. Instead my computer runs on cookie dough.

I also use Linux professionaly every day at work, but since we need higher quality output our work computers run on unicorn poop. You know, for stability.

My mom, a much less technical user than me, asked me which computer she should buy. At first I was going to suggest a Macbook Air so that she'd be able to use it twice as long as a Windows laptop thanks to having twice as much battery life, but in the end I got her a Microsoft Surface Pro, because she might want to run Pinnacle Studio some day.

Reply Parent Score: 6