Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Ubuntu Now Runs Well On The MacBook Air, Beats OS X In Graphics

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newwen View Post
    I'm afraid this performance comes at the expense of reduced battery life.
    This says nothing until some real tests show this and by how much if true. But since gaming performance (albeit on the tested titles nobody plays) is often double what it is on the mac, I still bet performance per watt during gaming is better on linux.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    457

    Default

    Dear Phoronix,

    OS X Engineers don't care about these benchmarks. They never have. Having OpenGL 4.1 and OpenCL 1.2 optimized throughout their entire OS is what they care about.

    Linux can get its pants soiled about these meaningless benchmarks, while having crippled accelerated desktops raving about OpenGL 2.1 future compliance with OpenGL 3.1 in the near future all it wants.

    One would think having a fully acceleratd DE whether GNOME or KDE, etc., at OpenGL 3.3, never mind 4.x would be a far greater goal than these pointless benchmarks.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    221

    Default lol?

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    Dear Phoronix,

    OS X Engineers don't care about these benchmarks. They never have. Having OpenGL 4.1 and OpenCL 1.2 optimized throughout their entire OS is what they care about.

    Linux can get its pants soiled about these meaningless benchmarks, while having crippled accelerated desktops raving about OpenGL 2.1 future compliance with OpenGL 3.1 in the near future all it wants.

    One would think having a fully acceleratd DE whether GNOME or KDE, etc., at OpenGL 3.3, never mind 4.x would be a far greater goal than these pointless benchmarks.
    this article is what i expect, mac osx drivers are stable but have horrible performance in games.. opengl 4 is being out this year for intel, probaly 4.1.


    pointless benchmarks? for gaming? what the point you have a better api if almost nothing runs opengl 4.xx and have this garbage fps? same hardware worst performance .. no more no less

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    Unless Mac OS is a lot dumber than we expect, or, if Michael ran all of the tests with the AC unplugged, then I highly doubt your statement is true. It isn't difficult to set up an OS to down-clock everything when running on batt and run at full speed when on AC.
    Mavericks, Apples latest version of Mac OS is very different in the way it conserves battery charge. Unless you do a lot of testing it would be hard to say how all of the new energy saving features impact battery life and by association graphical performance.

    That being said Apple has never had tweaky high performance drivers for their GPUS. They are biased to correctness and accuracy in their drivers.
    I find it really hard to believe that Mac would always attempt to save battery life even when plugged in, though the test results are suspiciously bad.
    Without a system to play with I can't say for sure what is going on here. I fairly certain though that if you ran these systems side by side, that is a Mavericks machine and a Ubuntu machine, that the machine running Mavericks would last much longer. Let's face it Linux isn't a low power platform yet.

    Honestly it would be interesting to see if Michael could run a few tests to confirm my theory. Maybe run his benchmarking program until the battery dies a few times.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    OSX always has way better battery life than windows or linux on the same machine - at least on apple's machines. I don't think they are just downclocking the hardware, i assume they are doing fancy stuff in, for example, the mobo driver and taking advantage of the fact that they can write drivers just for their own hardware rather than trying to get something generic which runs everywhere.
    To really give a good feel for what Mavericks can do for the user you would need a benchmark suite that effectively mimics a user doing normal user tasks.

    As far as Linux and battery life that is always in flux as the OS and GUIs develop but I would have to say you are right, for Apples target audience Mavericks does way better battery life wise. Windows just plain sucks so no sense in bringing that up.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    8

    Exclamation Serious bug/regression

    We are two days from release now, and there is a serious bug/regression still affecting the upcoming Ubuntu 14.04: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...t/+bug/1295439

    Due to this bug it's impossible to import a saved ovpn configuration file.
    It's possible to run this file from the command line though.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    south east
    Posts
    342

    Default

    It's different alright,

    12/13 hrs on Mountain Lion and now 6-8 hrs on Mavericks. Hit the Mac forums and be amazed.

    Also, you can clear the various caches CMD/OPT P etc and it still poos on battery life.

    Great thing about Mac is you can revert back to an old OS.

    Bad thing about IPHone is you can't.

    RIP Jobs

    Quote Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post
    Mavericks, Apples latest version of Mac OS is very different in the way it conserves battery charge. Unless you do a lot of testing it would be hard to say how all of the new energy saving features impact battery life and by association graphical performance.

    That being said Apple has never had tweaky high performance drivers for their GPUS. They are biased to correctness and accuracy in their drivers.


    Without a system to play with I can't say for sure what is going on here. I fairly certain though that if you ran these systems side by side, that is a Mavericks machine and a Ubuntu machine, that the machine running Mavericks would last much longer. Let's face it Linux isn't a low power platform yet.

    Honestly it would be interesting to see if Michael could run a few tests to confirm my theory. Maybe run his benchmarking program until the battery dies a few times.

  8. #18

    Default Sound

    And what about the notorius lack-of-sound problems (headphone and/or speakers) with this version of Ubuntu on Mac?? Still there?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squirrl View Post
    It's different alright,

    12/13 hrs on Mountain Lion and now 6-8 hrs on Mavericks. Hit the Mac forums and be amazed.

    Also, you can clear the various caches CMD/OPT P etc and it still poos on battery life.

    Great thing about Mac is you can revert back to an old OS.

    Bad thing about IPHone is you can't.

    RIP Jobs
    I get 12/13 hours in mavericks on my 2013 MBA, there's something wrong on your end if you are getting 6-8.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1

    Default Hibernation and brightness

    Thanks for a great review.

    Has the bug with setting brightness after hibernation somehow been resolved in 14.04?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •