Macbook Pro Battery

[Jonesy44]

I've read a few threads of people complaining about the MBP battery health issues. This is more of a query, and in need of some advice.

I've calibrated the battery using Apple's method and according to coconutBattery the battery health is 94%, considering I'm only on 8 loadcycles, is this something to worry about? It has fluctuated between 94% and 95% and seems to be fairly stable now but it's still a bit irritating since the mac is under a week old (although the screenshot says 5)! screenshot.. http://i55.tinypic.com/a1jnrd.png. It was brought to my attention because a friend of mine is on 229 loadcycles and the battery health is showing 97% (2009 MBP), see here... http://i51.tinypic.com/10xf1vd.png

The second problem, is also battery related I'm afraid to say.. Unplugged and at 100% charge, I let the time calculation settle, it told me 1:41 without any applications open.. I even rebooted just to test, it went up to 2:10 but surely something's wrong here? Is it worth reporting to Apple?

I haven't just paid £1,000 for a brick have I?

Thanks

 

[miles01110]

If you head read a few more threads, you would have had these (common) questions answered.

Your first issue is normal.

Your second issue is because time remaining means basically nothing, as it is based on current usage. It can fluctuate wildly depending on how much power your machine requires at that moment.

 

[Jonesy44]

If you head read a few more threads, you would have had these (common) questions answered.

Your first issue is normal.

Your second issue is because time remaining means basically nothing, as it is based on current usage. It can fluctuate wildly depending on how much power your machine requires at that moment.

Yeah, they're pretty common, I know, sorry! Just looking for some personal confirmation really! I read GGJstudios post on the calibrating tips and answers to some of the questions. It just worries me that an old machine manages to sustain 97% where as mine is struggling 94% at present.

It seemed to stay stationary at around the 2 hour mark. Although I've noticed it shooting up and holding 11 hours before now quite comfortable. Are there any background processes I am unaware of that I may have been running?

Thanks for the fast reply

 

[Den Deze]

I bought my MBP13" in June 2010.
Within the last 3 weeks, my battery life went from 94% to 89%
Don't know if i need to worry about that.
I just performed a calibration, hope it helps

 

[kuctonkucton201]

I bought my MBP13" in June 2010.
Within the last 3 weeks, my battery life went from 94% to 89%
Don't know if i need to worry about that.
I just performed a calibration, hope it helps

it is not necessary for u to worry about that.

 

[GGJstudios]

I read GGJstudios post on the calibrating tips and answers to some of the questions. It just worries me that an old machine manages to sustain 97% where as mine is struggling 94% at present.

If you read that post, you would know that it is normal for your health to fluctuate both up and down over time. It's normal.

For others who might visit this thread, the post being discussed is this one:

Apple Notebook Battery FAQ

 

[Jonesy44]

If you read that post, you would know that it is normal for your health to fluctuate both up and down over time. It's normal.

For others who might visit this thread, the post being discussed is this one:

Apple Notebook Battery FAQ

Yes

As far as the battery being used up quickly I managed to find the solution, hopefully this may help a few people.

If you have Tuxera NTFS installed, you may not have noticed it consumes about 60% CPU usage in quick blips, so it doesn't obviously appear in the activity monitor, I uninstalled it then was shown by a friend a little workaround in snow leopard that makes NTFS volumes read/write.

Here's the post I followed. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/785376/

 

[GGJstudios]

Yes

As far as the battery being used up quickly I managed to find the solution, hopefully this may help a few people.

If you have Tuxera NTFS installed, you may not have noticed it consumes about 60% CPU usage in quick blips, so it doesn't obviously appear in the activity monitor, I uninstalled it then was shown by a friend a little workaround in snow leopard that makes NTFS volumes read/write.

Here's the post I followed. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/785376/

NTFS (Windows NT File System)

• Read/Write NTFS from native Windows.
• Read only NTFS from native Mac OS X
• To Read/Write/Format NTFS from Leopard or Snow Leopard: Install MacFUSE and NTFS-3G. You can install both with NTFS-3G for Mac OS X.
• To Read/Write/Format NTFS from Snow Leopard: Guide: Enable native NTFS Read/Write in Snow Leopard
  [*](Be aware that some are of the opinion that enabling native NTFS in SL is unstable/unreliable, and favor the MacFuse/NTFS-3G method for Snow Leopard)
• Maximum volume size: 256TB

 

[Jonesy44]

NTFS (Windows NT File System)

• Read/Write NTFS from native Windows.
• Read only NTFS from native Mac OS X
• To Read/Write/Format NTFS from Leopard or Snow Leopard: Install MacFUSE and NTFS-3G. You can install both with NTFS-3G for Mac OS X.
• To Read/Write/Format NTFS from Snow Leopard: Guide: Enable native NTFS Read/Write in Snow Leopard
  [*](Be aware that some are of the opinion that enabling native NTFS in SL is unstable/unreliable, and favor the MacFuse/NTFS-3G method for Snow Leopard)
• Maximum volume size: 256TB

Yeah, whatsup with that? As far as ive found so far the native r/w seems fine! But what do I know?

 

[GGJstudios]

Yeah, whatsup with that? As far as ive found so far the native r/w seems fine! But what do I know?

As it says at the top of that guide:
"This is experimental, and known to be unstable, use at your own risk."
Read the latter half of that thread and you'll see all the problems people have experienced using that method.

 

[Jonesy44]

As it says at the top of that guide:
"This is experimental, and known to be unstable, use at your own risk."
Read the latter half of that thread and you'll see all the problems people have experienced using that method.

Sorry, I don't think I made myself particularly clear. People say "it's unstable" obviously something has to change for it to become unstable instead of stable. As far as I have gathered both my Windows (bootcamp) and External HDD seem to be working fine using the UUID method. Guess I'm just lucky.

Although it's needless to say there's something wrong with it or it really would be native.