Here is just a quick question. How much different will lion be than snow leopard? Like will it require less power from the macbook while running and will it be more or less powerful/efficient as snow leopard?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What will OS X Lion be Like?
- Thread starter macnerd123
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
One would hope that it would be more efficient, but with all of the changes their making I wouldn't be surprised if the opposite were true. We just don't know yet.
now that we know even more about lion and it is just a month away, what does everyone think? Will it require more or less power than os x snow leopard?
I dunno what you mean by "power".
Power as in electrical current? No. Lion will not require more electrical current.
Power as in processing power? Meh. Lion includes a bit more graphical whiz-bang (mission control, launch pad, gestures etc...) than SL. But I've been running it on a 13" MBP with a 9400m with absolutely no problems. Anyone with a MBA with a 9400m or above should see little/no difference between Lion and SL.
Lion also does away with Rosetta, which requires more processing power to run PPC applications on Intel processors - so in that sense it'll require *less* power - as it just won't run PPC applications at all.
Power as in graphical power? Same as processor, imho.
Really???
I guess you do know what he means by power since you answered his question...like a hipster with a misplaced superiority complex.
Hopefully, like Windows, one would be able to disable the "superfluous" effects--as I don't care much for animations, transitions, etc..
Its ok he looks stupid to anyone with any type of electrical knowledge.
Also no one really knows but i think it will use more power.
Prediction: Smoother
Mac OS upgrades are the opposite of Windows OS upgrades. It gets better with each release. I think the Tiger might have broken that tradition partly because it introduced Spotlight so while it indexes your files on a slow Mac it was more noticeable. Leopard introduced Time Machine and that would be noticeable on a slow Mac.
None of the features in Lion added except maybe FileFault 2 (Optional) should slow it down.
Mac OS upgrades are the opposite of Windows OS upgrades. It gets better with each release. I think the Tiger might have broken that tradition partly because it introduced Spotlight so while it indexes your files on a slow Mac it was more noticeable. Leopard introduced Time Machine and that would be noticeable on a slow Mac.
None of the features in Lion added except maybe FileFault 2 (Optional) should slow it down.
Not meant to be sarcastic. Just trying to get clarification as to what you meant by power.
Actually, no. And since I only got snide response from you and the OP, I still am unsure what he means.
Power is such a nebulous term when we're talking here. I tried to figure out what he was asking by providing some surface answers based on my knowledge of the processors/software.
I'll admit I know little about electrical knowledge, but thanks for calling me stupid. Have you provided any contradictory facts using your expertise that would contribute to this discussion?
All I know is that the processors that Apple can potentially use in the Sandy Bridge MacBook Air use less TDP (using their integrated graphics card) for the most part than the current C2D+320M uses.
So armed with just that fact, I'd say that the new MBA should not draw more electricity. In my opinion, it will use the same 45W adapter.
Im using it now! ~Its weird!!!! If Im having trouble getting the hang of it, god knows how my mum and other simples will find it! Unusable????!!!!
While this comment was true for Vista, Windows 7 is a much better OS than the one that came before it...
Cant wait to try Lion
