Your favorite Apple, iPhone, iPad, iOS, Jailbreak, and Cydia site.
iPhone Newsforums, a part of the
Apple's rated 6-hour battery life on the 2010 MacBook Airs can only be achieved without Flash, according to a couple of new tests. Ars Technica found that installing Flash cut...
11-05-2010, 12:00 PM #1
Flash Halves New MacBook Air Battery Life: Tests
Apple's rated 6-hour battery life on the 2010 MacBook Airs can only be achieved without Flash, according to a couple of new tests. Ars Technica found that installing Flash cut battery life to 4 hours on an 11-inch Air, while Anandtech's tests showed battery life cut in half on the 13-inch model. Apple claims that they do not install Flash on new MacBook Airs because they think "the best way for users to always have the most up to date and secure version" is to download it from Adobe.
In his review of the 11-inch MacBook Air, Chris Foresman of Ars Technica was able to get only four hours of battery life doing normal web surfing. After he removed Flash, Foresman got six hours and two minutes out of the Air, browsing to the same sites. He concluded that the Flash ads on most of those sites was draining the 4500mAh six-battery array, observing that the CPU was "running far more than seemed necessary" when sites had Flash content.
Anand Shimpi and Vivek Gowri at Anandtech did some different tests, but found similar results using Flash. Doing light web browsing, document creation and music playback on the 13-inch MacBook Air, they were able to get over eleven hours out of its larger 6500mAh battery pack. The 11-inch model got 7 hour battery life in this "glorified typewriter" test. However, when browsing pages with one to four Flash ads, the 13-inch Air's battery life was cut by more than 50% in comparison to browsing sites with no Flash and iTunes playing music.
Apple has made no secret of its disdain for Flash. Steve Jobs, in a closed session, reportedly referred to Flash as "buggy," and called Adobe "lazy." In an open letter, Jobs claimed that the problems with battery life were due to the fact that Flash must be decoded in software, rather than in hardware like Apple's preferred H.264 standard. So an Apple spokesman may have been disingenuous when he told Engadget the company is "happy to continue to support Flash on the Mac." You can have it, he seems to be saying, but don't expect your Mac to run well or have much battery life.
11-05-2010, 12:06 PM #2
This only confirms how "hungry" the flash is. And dont blame apple... adobe develops it. And dont blame apple for being closed system etc., other soft by other companies is being developed ok for Mac OS.
But reduce battery life in half?! Omg... I wonder if there is something more into it other that the flash is a power hungry software.PRAETORIANNI NONNUMQUAM IN PROELIO NUMQUAM IN BELLO SUPERANTUR
11-05-2010, 12:08 PM #3
11-05-2010, 12:22 PM #4
Haha wow! That's a drastic change. I really hope Flash goes by the wayside it's an inferior technology.
The Following User Says Thank You to zoso10 For This Useful Post:
11-05-2010, 12:28 PM #5
this is good info to know but i dont hardly ever run my laptop on just the battery anyway its usually plugged into the wall anyway
11-05-2010, 12:47 PM #6
11-05-2010, 12:50 PM #7
That's a poor graphic. The 309 rating should be less than half the length of the other bar.I write Mac only tutorials for the iPhone and own every model. My iPhones run on the following SIMs/networks: AT&T, GoPhone, H2O, O2, SimpleMobile, T-Mobile and Verizon.
11-05-2010, 01:04 PM #8
The Following User Says Thank You to Zokunei For This Useful Post:
11-05-2010, 01:45 PM #9
- Join Date
- May 2008
- Dirty Jersey
- Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
just removed it off of my mbp. fully charged and idle gives the first operation time estimate over 6 hours ive seen in many months.
11-05-2010, 01:52 PM #10
It's not purely Flashes fault. Also lazy coding on the flash ads makes them use unneededly amount of CPU cycles. In the near future probably those bad skilled coders will just move to the HTML 5, and continue to produce unnecessary heavy content.
Also this test is not fair, because you don't see as much "content" on the screen. Of course an empty hole is lighter to render than some moving animation. To make the test fair, he should have surfed on the websites where the flash content would have had replaced with some HTML 5-content (does new Youtube UI do this?)
Couple years from now and we will have and kinds of flashy animated HTML 5 ads on our favorite websites, which will be draining our batteries.
11-05-2010, 01:54 PM #11
so if im understanding correctly, this could be an issue with all macs?
11-05-2010, 02:05 PM #12
It's sucks the life out of windows notebooks as well. Flash is power hungry no matter what machine it's on
11-05-2010, 02:10 PM #13
671 minutes? really? that = a little over 11 hours. I wonder how they figured that.....
11-05-2010, 03:01 PM #14
This is interesting ill have to do some testing on my new 13inch mbp when it gets here.
11-05-2010, 03:08 PM #15
I dont understand if flash was suppose to be the variable in the test why was safari also changed 1 window vs 3 windows seems like that could have a major impact on this test just saying.Yeah, you'll be the coolest person in the room when you pull one out and show it around, but that gets old fast when three other people have them and one person somehow has one that glows in the dark.
John C. Dvorak
The American columnist and broadcaster in article 'Rethinking the iPhone' in PC Magazine.
11-05-2010, 03:13 PM #16
And did you know that a laptop turned on is draining the battery more than when its turned off.
Seriously stop with the flash bs and start doing some real test like html5 vs flash and not some test that are just saying we don't need flash etc...
11-05-2010, 03:36 PM #17
11-05-2010, 03:45 PM #18
Imagine what it's does to smartphones battery
11-05-2010, 04:07 PM #19
Flash sucks CPU bad. I play a flash game on facebook that puts up to a 30% load on my quad-core Core i7 920 desktop running Win7 Pro. It pegs my old athlon laptop running XP. Crazy.
11-05-2010, 04:12 PM #20
Flash is garbage. Accept it and move on, those with half a brain have.
The way flash encodes and decodes inside the browser is 15 year old technology. It fundamentally hasn't change in all that time. "And now it's time for something completely different".
If you run a windows machine you are the lucky ones as it has always been adobes policy to optimise flash for windows and screw the rest. As a linux user we've been treated like dogs by adobe so has osx users. They don't deserve any respect.
FYI Youtube vid using flash, cpu 33-35%. Same vid html5, cpu 11-14%. You tell me Einstein.
Last edited by Tyronal; 11-05-2010 at 04:18 PM.