Why are Atom-based Hackintoshes seeing battery life changes in 10.5.7?

Chauncey Dupree
|
May 14, 2009
|
Share

Sure, it could be nothing, and probably is.  But what if all of these drastic changes we are seeing in Intel Atom-based Hackintoshes on 10.5.7 mean something about upcoming Apple hardware?  Some points to consider:

  • 10.5.1 - 10.5.6 there were little to no changes in Hackintoshes beyond what was stated in the update
  • 10.5.7 updates bricked many Hackintoshes (it even gave a lot of real Macs some issues)
  • For those able to update without issue, some MSI users are reporting that battey life has been improved drastically
  • If some new Mac kit is released next month at WWDC, it will likely be running 10.5.7.

Why would battery management improve so much on these MSI Netbooks on the 10.5.7 update?  Is there some Atom Mobo software optimizations?  Perhaps the hardware matches up with some Apple Stuff on the way?

Apple's own Macs aren't seeing similar battery benefits.

Comments (20)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | May 14, 2009 - 2:54pm

Perhaps the hardware matches up with some Apple Stuff on the way?

Apple's own Macs aren't seeing similar battery benefits.

Clearly this means two things:

1. ATOM-based Netbook from Apple by WWDC.
2. Snow Leopard DELAYED by 3 months or more...

---

Apple IS going to release a NetBook that uses ATOM, and soon. After all, Leopard is now ready in terms of efficiently using NetBook hardware. And we all know that Apple feels that they have to talk about battery life when talking about a netbok.

SADLY, Apple put these changes into Leopard. That means Snow Leopard won't be ready for the release of this new NetBook. If the timing were to be close, they'd just announce the netbook and delay retail sales. Apple wouldn't futz with Leopard's treatment of netbook battery life unless they HAD to.

Apple would almost certainly make use of the new, much more efficient Snow Leopard on the new Netbook if the timing were right. Apple has almost always shipped the newest OS with the newest hardware (big exception: OS9 --> OS X transition).

Instead, Apple had to optimize Leopard for the new Netbook line, because of lengthly Snow Leopard delays.

NoComment (not verified) | May 15, 2009 - 3:02am

partially disagree. the fact that leopard includes some improvements for battery life on atom chips ist NOT an indicator that snow leopard will be delayed. snow leopard is not such a major change from the kernel perspective especially when it comes to chipset support and energy management, thus incorporating the changes into snow leopard might be quite easy. i furthermore believe that the changes in leopard actually came from snow leopard. apple will ship the netbook/table/whatever with snow leopard, that's for sure for me.

T (not verified) | May 14, 2009 - 3:31pm

how is SL "delayed"? We've not had a firm date for completion -it's always been looking to be a bit after WWDC, and the WWDC announcement made that clear. We've got enough on - The developers need a window of opportunity to get more acquainted with 10.6 anyhow, as it's going to bring in new concepts for a start.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | May 14, 2009 - 5:08pm

SL will be release in October.

9to5Mac Loop1 (not verified) | May 14, 2009 - 5:13pm

SL will be release in October.

9to5Mac Loop1 (not verified) | May 14, 2009 - 5:15pm

Sorry for triple comment but 9to5mac layout for iPhone is crappy.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | May 14, 2009 - 5:29pm

It's good to repeat things a few times. Like my old Aunt Ellen would always say things two or three times just to make sure we got it right.

9to5Mac Loop1 (not verified) | May 15, 2009 - 3:19am

Interesting point of view! :) thanks.

doadoobie (not verified) | May 14, 2009 - 7:58pm

Or as my Ethiopian lady friend & favorite bartender says

"I heard you twice the first time"

Dave (not verified) | May 14, 2009 - 8:30pm

That is an Apple engineer probably had run time issues with his Hackintosh and fixed a bug. That is a positive way to look at it. The other way to look at it is that it is another bug that just happens to look like an improvement.

That might not be as far fetched as it seems as some reports tend to indicate that there is indeed something different going on with battery monitoring in 10.5.7.

I still can't see Apple going the Atom route for either Mac or iPhone OS based products. With PA onboard, iPhone based devices are likely to stay ARM. Unless Apple can get dual core Atoms from Intel I can't see much interest in Atom from Apple. At least for computing platforms. So I'm reluctant to believe this means anything at all.

Dave

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | May 14, 2009 - 9:35pm

The improved battery life is not exclusive to these non-Apple netbooks. I have a 2.53Ghz Unibody MBP and since installing 10.5.7, my battery life has gone from around 3 hours to around 4 hours, while still using the same applications and doing the same things. I don't know how big the improvement is for the Atom-based machines, but to me an hour is a pretty dramatic increase. This is likely a pretty broad software optimization.

Daniel (not verified) | May 14, 2009 - 11:10pm

I refuse to believe that Apple would put Atom into their new gadgets when they have PA Semi and there is the ARM Cortex thing... Atom is a piece of x86 s**t and I don't believe they are SO MUCH into allowing Windows on their machines. What other reason there is for using Atom?

ulfoaf | May 15, 2009 - 7:05am

I would expect an ARM based product from them also. Heck, that is why they bought PA Semi.

Don't know enough to guess whether optimizing power for a Core 2 Duo would bleed on down and be effective on an Atom based system.

That said, a little Atom based netbook running Linux is pretty sweet ... I couldn't wait for Apple's and bought a Sylvania Meso g.  Networks flawlessly with my Macs and is able to print to their printers, including a wireless IP printer, with no real setup. Not bad for $250.  I would have LOVED an Apple netbook, but a 24" iMac is also in the schedule for this year, and I just bought a unibody MB in Dec (EXCELLENT product).  I'm expecting the netbook to be around $700-800 ... maybe more if it does things the current laptops do not. For the moment, my needs of internet surfing on the couch are met. ;>)  The MB is pretty much the missus's.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | May 15, 2009 - 4:58am

Let's remind ourselves a little. All Apple value products have been great failures. The original eMac and the Mac Mini are both prime examples. That's why Apple should've learnt and stay away from the budget market, since it likes to include all the os, iLife cost into the sale of mac. It just won't do for budget buyers who tend to know little about computer and only care about purhasibg price. Much like those depicted in the Microsoft ads. They will regret when software bills arrive unless they are in china or sth

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | May 15, 2009 - 6:11am

Apple, along with a lot of it's user base, doesn't understand that not everyone wants, or has a need for, iLife and a lot of the other bundled software. I don't think anyone is going to be "cutting film" on their 9" netbook running OSX.

Attk | May 15, 2009 - 5:47pm

 On the contrary, most new (or noob?) Mac users didn't even know that anything like iLife even existed before they got their Mac!  They might not have bought the machine for iLife, but they tend to really enjoy it once they realize all the cool things they're able to do using it.  (At least that's what a lot of switchers have told me.)

 

But, you're absolutely right...  I wouldn't ever try to edit video or produce audio on a netbook.  I can see the smoke rolling off the processor now... : ) 

Daniel (not verified) | May 15, 2009 - 6:54am

How exactly was Mini a failure? :)

I've just bought one, an old G4. Don't know of better home iTunes and file server for that price. Yeah, you can get various kinds of boxes for $200 that do this... but never a full blown computer with regular operating system and FireWire for ext. disks that you can take and make a machine for internet browsing/iTunes/iWork out of it whenever you need or want...

Sure, the current mini's price is not very attractive (and I'm living in Czech republic, where Mac prices are exorbitant...). But getting an oldish Mini these days can be an extremly good bargain when you have a place for it...

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | May 15, 2009 - 9:35am

I bought a 2002-vintage eMac. It was about $1100 at the time, and I got a good 7+ years out of it. The kids grew up with it between the years of 4 and 11. It took a lot of kid-abuse, but it kept on humming and continues to be a viable machine to this day.

So was the eMac a poor value?

I also went through 2 PC desktops at the same time over a period of 6 years. They were painful to maintain, and they both failed (motherboard on one, unsolved memory errors on the other). A babysiter managed to get one infected with spyware (despite the latest, frequently-updated Norton and Spybot and the latest security patches). I did an OS re-install at least twice.

I ended up replacing the PC with a Mini and I haven't looked back.

Value? Clearly the value was with the Mac. There is no doubt in my mind.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | May 15, 2009 - 3:23pm

Used eMacs are still a good value. I believe they were still sold after the flat screen imac came out? Made them look a bit dated :>)

I have a G3 iMac that still runs fine, but doesn't handled modern browsers well.

Hackintosh user (not verified) | May 15, 2009 - 11:21am

10.5.7 hiccups on Dual processor Atom boards - the ones with hyperthreading that appear as 4 processors. The only current workaround is to boot with one CPU disabled or to disable hyperthreading...

So I'm not so sure about advanced Atom support.