best laptop for fedora (or Linux, in general)

plight · #1 10th September 2012, 07:13 AM

Hi,

I'm currently on HP G32 running fedora 16. I haven't had a very satisfactory battery performance with fedora (I've only been using fedora) with all of my past hardware. E.g., my acer netbook runs around 4 hours on windows 7, but only around 2 hours on fedora. The fujitsu lifebook I had only runs less than an hour on fedora, but around 2 hours on winxp.

I don't know if there's a certain hardware that I should be looking for, that runs well with the linux drivers (I've read in some forums that I should avoid sandy bridge or optimus hardware).

Do you know of a laptop brand/spec that works well with linux? I have long commutes from home to work, and I sometimes like to spend a lazy afternoon on parks and cafe's and write code/stuff as they come to my mind before I forget.

cheers,
light

hadrons123 · #2 10th September 2012, 03:58 PM

There is no special brand which supports better than something other. Linux support currently depends on what components a system has.For eg. Centrino chipsets works out of the box on modern linux distros than any other chipsets compared to even other intel chipsets(non-centrino). Displays like macbook retina is not fully supported by linux yet. so it goes..

plight · #3 10th September 2012, 04:23 PM

thanks for your response. Do you have any reference regarding Centrino chipsets being better than any other chipsets, for linux?

hadrons123 · #4 10th September 2012, 04:34 PM

Its a fact known to everyone. Intel supports linux better than any other hardware manufacturer.
Even the not yet released intel haswell architecture has support in current mainline kernel.
I have some dated info, which may not be relevant.
http://linux.die.net/Mobile-Guide/mo...-centrino.html

BBQdave · #5 10th September 2012, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plight

Do you have any reference regarding Centrino chipsets being better than any other chipsets, for linux?

I have a Toshiba C655 (intel i3 with intel graphics). Fedora 16 Xfce works great out of the box with this notebook. It was advertised to have 5 hours use on battery power. What actually occurs is a little over 3 hours. If I am just checking email (light use), I do get close to 5 hours on battery power. If I am heavily using multiple applications, then 3 hours on battery power.

Interestingly enough, the tech guy at the store (where I purchased the notebook) thought that Linux was better for battery life than Windows. He felt that the Windows OS was more resource hungry than Linux. Not sure if that is true (have not tested). But on casual observation of my Wife's notebook (identical to mine) with Windows 7, I do average longer battery life (F16 Xfce better on battery life than Windows 7).

My observation: Use of applications (heavy or light use of OS) determines battery life. And I would suggest (if you can) to test hardware with a live Linux CD before purchase. I was able to use a live F16 Xfce CD to test out my notebook before purchase - was able to check out hardware support and battery use.

plight · #6 10th September 2012, 04:52 PM

I do run vim mostly, (on gnome desktop), with the radios turned off. although I have the brightness at near full blast, I'm not running anything else. While I agree that battery usage highly depends on the applications currently running (which directly affects how busy the processor and memory usage is), I am already past that observation. I'm wondering if there's still a driver incompatibility/support issue at play, where a device is using up more power than it should because its not yet fully supported.

BBQdave · #7 10th September 2012, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plight

I'm wondering if there's still a driver incompatibility/support issue at play, where a device is using up more power than it should because its not yet fully supported.

Possibly.

But while I am hammering away with desktop and web publishing applications - GIMP, Scribus, (F16 Xfce) and my Wife is working with accounting applications, Microsoft Office (Windows 7); I am still getting longer battery life. And both of us usually have a browser going with multiple tabs open while we work.

Again, a very informal observation. But I would offer that Linux with intel hardware is as good or better than Windows and intel hardware. So if Linux offers the computing experience you seek, I would not sweat the battery seen

Bazu135 · #8 10th September 2012, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBQdave

I have a Toshiba C655 (intel i3 with intel graphics). Fedora 16 Xfce works great out of the box with this notebook. It was advertised to have 5 hours use on battery power. What actually occurs is a little over 3 hours. If I am just checking email (light use), I do get close to 5 hours on battery power. If I am heavily using multiple applications, then 3 hours on battery power.

Interestingly enough, the tech guy at the store (where I purchased the notebook) thought that Linux was better for battery life than Windows. He felt that the Windows OS was more resource hungry than Linux. Not sure if that is true (have not tested). But on casual observation of my Wife's notebook (identical to mine) with Windows 7, I do average longer battery life (F16 Xfce better on battery life than Windows 7).

My observation: Use of applications (heavy or light use of OS) determines battery life. And I would suggest (if you can) to test hardware with a live Linux CD before purchase. I was able to use a live F16 Xfce CD to test out my notebook before purchase - was able to check out hardware support and battery use.

I've found the same - my Samsung NF210 netbook gets 5-7hrs' battery life using Win7 Starter Edition, while with similar usage I'd expect 6-9hrs' life from its Fedora 14 install (I dual-boot since it saw me through uni and not all of their recommended software was Linux-friendly). A friend of mine who had an Acer Aspire One (IIRC) found the same when I recommended Linux to him - his went from a 5hr lifespan to 7hrs. I don't know if F16 is notably more power-hungry than F14, but I wouldn't expect Xfce to be worse than Gnome2 (though Gnome3/Gnome Shell and KDE might be a different story?)

plight · #9 10th September 2012, 05:25 PM

yeah, I'm on gnome3, but you know I tried running on runlevel 3 just for the kicks (as I've said, I'm mostly a vi/vim user) and timed my battery life. Almost the same, just close to 1 hour. This HP G32 runs close to 3 hours on win7. I'll dig deeper when I find some time, and report back.

nonamedotc · #10 10th September 2012, 09:49 PM

I have now had two lenovo thinkpads (T series). Both of them work out of the box with linux. No issues till date. In one of my thinkpads, even my nvidia graphics card (with rpmfusion nvidia driver) has not had any issues till date.

I have also had a toshiba satellite before - same thing - it worked out of the box. Of course, it helped that none of these had things like broadcom wireless chipsets, for example.

csillva · #11 11th September 2012, 09:42 AM

Buy a laptop from Lenovo or Acer that has Intel insides and has been on the market for about a year ormore.

Sent from my Optimus 2X using Tapatalk 2

stevea · #12 11th September 2012, 10:46 AM

I can't really say what AMD Linux laptop support is like at the moment. I'd be interested in anyones first-hand comments.

I've used a lot of IBM and later Lenovo laptops. I have almost 2 years in on my T510. I cant really downgrade Lenovo against competitors. They have among the best BIOS. Released some of the first laptop UEFIs and have a lot of models with a chinese-menu(sic) of features. OTOH I feel the Lenovo design and build quality are lower than the old IBMs. Still well above HP, Acer.

My selection is based on a portable workstation with 'reasonable' battery life, so your needs may dictate other options. I want a hi-res screen (which today means 1080p) and a non-glare screen (which very few offer). I demand a good KB, and tho' I think the T510 KB is inferior to my old T42, it is still better than most.

I would certainly examine the Asus, Samsung and even Sony offerings in addition to Lenovo.

This is a great notebook review site,but since its UK you may need to cross-reference model numbers.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Noteboo...News.48.0.html
*IF* you examine their reviews be sure to look at the screen quality measurements, the hi-load temperatures and the battery life. Too many slim/sleek laptops are way too hot ! Bad design w/ insufficient cooling.

mswal2846 · #13 11th September 2012, 12:54 PM

I, too, have been running some form of Linux (Fedora then Ubuntu then back to Fedora) for about 10 years now all on IBM then Lenovo Thinkpads. Most quite successfully. Over this time, Linux has gotten quite good at the battery life. I'm currently on a Lenovo X220 running Fedora 17 and get 5-6 hours of battery life with a 9cell battery, connected to wifi, screen on full blast, etc. There are, though, still apps that will run that will consume battery. At the office we have a Dell printer (sucks) and there's an app that runs when I print to this printer that I have to kill or it will consumer anywheree from 1-2 hours of that battery time. So you have to monitor closely YOUR environment (via monitor app) to see what's running and what's consuming cycles.