PDA

View Full Version : What will OS X Lion be Like?




macnerd123
Dec 10, 2010, 09:45 PM
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?



EricNau
Dec 10, 2010, 09:48 PM
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.

Wild-Bill
Dec 10, 2010, 10:54 PM
Buggy........

Until 10.7.2 or so comes out.

On the bright side, I am SURE Safari will seem snappier! :p

poobear
Dec 11, 2010, 04:24 AM
http://www.apple.com/macosx/lion/ That's all we know. No more no less.

ufkdo
Dec 11, 2010, 07:11 AM
I hope it will require less system resources and will be more efficient.

macnerd123
Jun 14, 2011, 10:48 AM
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?

fyrefly
Jun 14, 2011, 11:28 AM
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.

macnerd123
Jun 15, 2011, 08:23 AM
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.

I could have used that answer without all of the sarcasm and literalness

darngooddesign
Jun 15, 2011, 08:55 AM
I dunno what you mean by "power"...

Really???

I guess you do know what he means by power since you answered his question...like a hipster with a misplaced superiority complex.

defected07
Jun 15, 2011, 11:18 AM
Hopefully, like Windows, one would be able to disable the "superfluous" effects--as I don't care much for animations, transitions, etc..

keypox
Jun 15, 2011, 11:41 AM
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.

I could have used that answer without all of the sarcasm and literalness

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.

TC25
Jun 15, 2011, 11:46 AM
I could have used that answer without all of the sarcasm and literalness

Ask the same question a third time. Perhaps you will get an answer you like.

BornAgainMac
Jun 15, 2011, 11:56 AM
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.

fyrefly
Jun 15, 2011, 05:36 PM
I could have used that answer without all of the sarcasm and literalness

Not meant to be sarcastic. Just trying to get clarification as to what you meant by power.

I guess you do know what he means by power since you answered his question...like a hipster with a misplaced superiority complex.

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.


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.

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.

darrellishere
Jun 16, 2011, 06:23 AM
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????!!!!

darrellishere
Jun 16, 2011, 06:24 AM
scrolling is all backwards WTF

FrancoisC
Jun 16, 2011, 06:37 AM
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.


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 :)