Q: Lion - Horrible MacBook Pro Battery Life

@cheungfucious, The information is great, however,  the question (and sorry if this sounds rude),  "So what?" comes to mind.  Did the battery last 1:42?  2:00?  0:15?  Did the PRAM reset have any benefit at all?

This thread is full of information but very rare does anyone complete an element in the thread with any conclusions.  I don't see how Apple will take any of this seriously if we do not continue to eliminate possibilities and focus the cause of this problem.

PS no contact from Apple to me since the call from an engineer based on earlier entries to this thread.  ;-( Not even a follup up or thankyou for the information!  What great customer service! 

In response to your question, I'm still on my SECOND charge so I don't know the outcome which is why I said I'd check back in later, yeesh! I'm not taking offense to your comment, but I'm merely just posting like everyone else in this thread ...

I did follow the advice of a fellow poster, and noticed progress on one small front.

On System Preferences/Energy Saver/, I'd noticed that "Wake for Internet Access" was checked "on", probably by default. I unchecked this option - and noticed my battery lasted a few percent longer, sleeping or plugged in. Those bothered by battery depletion while sleeping may want to uncheck the "Wake for Internet Access" option.

milwaukee_bronze:

I wouldn't take Apple's lack of feedback to heart. It's apparently an internal rule not to respond after asking for certain feedback. A number of users here have experienced the same thing. I understand Apple's situation, but a response like "thanks alot for your response - we're working on it" would do a long way to dispel users' irritation.

milwaukee_bronze wrote:

 

 

This thread is full of information but very rare does anyone complete an element in the thread with any conclusions.  [b]I don't see how Apple will take any of this seriously if we do not continue to eliminate possibilities and focus the cause of this problem.[/b]

 

I disagree here. I am the customer, I have a problem, so, let the manufacturer solve it. When my stomach aches, I go to the doctor and tell him my simptoms, It's his job to run tests and put a diagnostics. I do not tell him 'Doctor, based on the tests that I ran myself, I think I have cancer, please operate me!'

If I have to run tests, eliminate posibilities and focus on the cause, then I want a refund! This is not my job!

So far, I am really disapointed with my MBP, especially when Apple advertises 'up to 7 hours of wireless browsing' and I am not getting even half of that!

Have you tried diagnosing the problem?

milwaukee_bronze wrote:

 

PS no contact from Apple to me since the call from an engineer based on earlier entries to this thread.  ;-( Not even a follup up or thankyou for the information!  What great customer service! 

Fudge! You're right! Tim Cook in person should give you a brand new iPhone 4gs for what you've done!

Loerincz wrote:

 

milwaukee_bronze wrote:

 

 

This thread is full of information but very rare does anyone complete an element in the thread with any conclusions.  [b]I don't see how Apple will take any of this seriously if we do not continue to eliminate possibilities and focus the cause of this problem.[/b]

 

I disagree here. I am the customer, I have a problem, so, let the manufacturer solve it. When my stomach aches, I go to the doctor and tell him my simptoms, It's his job to run tests and put a diagnostics. I do not tell him 'Doctor, based on the tests that I ran myself, I think I have cancer, please operate me!'

 

If I have to run tests, eliminate posibilities and focus on the cause, then I want a refund! This is not my job!

 

So far, I am really disapointed with my MBP, especially when Apple advertises 'up to 7 hours of wireless browsing' and I am not getting even half of that!

Up to 7 hours means exactly what it says, up to but not more than 7 hours, certainly not exactly 7 hours.

Csound1 wrote:

 

Up to 7 hours means exactly what it says, up to but not more than 7 hours, certainly not exactly 7 hours.

So why would they say 7, and not say, 70, or even 3? It's an estimate based on a lot of testing. It's not like they tested 1000 MacBooks and 999 of them got 3 hours, and one somehow got 7, so they listed 7. Your machine should get close to the listed figure. If it doesn't, there is something wrong. If my car is listed as 22 MPG, I expect to get pretty close to that amount. Yes, my driving style affects it, but if I was getting 11 MPG, I would suspect something very wrong with the car. Apple spends a lot of time worrying about battery life, and I think they want you to get close to 7 hours. People are getting half the performance because of an OS upgrade. Apple should address it (and I believe they will.)

Jon Baumgartner wrote:

 

Csound1 wrote:

 

Up to 7 hours means exactly what it says, up to but not more than 7 hours, certainly not exactly 7 hours.

So why would they say 7, and not say, 70, or even 3? It's an estimate based on a lot of testing. It's not like they tested 1000 MacBooks and 999 of them got 3 hours, and one somehow got 7, so they listed 7. Your machine should get close to the listed figure. If it doesn't, there is something wrong. If my car is listed as 22 MPG, I expect to get pretty close to that amount. Yes, my driving style affects it, but if I was getting 11 MPG, I would suspect something very wrong with the car. Apple spends a lot of time worrying about battery life, and I think they want you to get close to 7 hours. People are getting half the performance because of an OS upgrade. Apple should address it (and I believe they will.)

Why wouldn't 'they' say 70, you really need to ask that? it can't go 70, regardless of useage but it can go 7 under the right circumstances.

Csound1 wrote:

Why wouldn't 'they' say 70, you really need to ask that? it can't go 70, regardless of useage but it can go 7 under the right circumstances.

Dude, are you just bored or do you really not get the point? Simple fact is that most people's battery life is twice shorter than with SL. Simple as that. On my Macbook Pro the circumstanes under wich I could get 7 hours of uptime would be - "Macbook off mode" Now go away.

Csound1 wrote:

 

Why wouldn't 'they' say 70, you really need to ask that? it can't go 70, regardless of useage but it can go 7 under the right circumstances.

That was a rhetorical question. It's largely irrelevant, anyway. Apple has a machine that used to get much better battery performance. Now it doesn't. You can hide behind your definition of expected battery life, but they didn't change the number of hours the MacBook is supposed to get when Lion came out. The website doesn't say "up to 7 hours with OS X 10.6 and below, 3.5 hours with OS X 10.7."

Whatever you want to think is fine, I have 43 Lion machines in the field, none of them have any battery issues, diagnosing your problem would be the most help but you are not asking for help, bye

Csound1 wrote:

 

Whatever you want to think is fine, I have 43 Lion machines in the field, none of them have any battery issues, diagnosing your problem would be the most help but you are not asking for help, bye

Sure.

Me too. I own a flying a cow. Have you ever seen one?

Csound1 wrote:

 

Whatever you want to think is fine, I have 43 Lion machines in the field, none of them have any battery issues, diagnosing your problem would be the most help but you are not asking for help, bye

I don't see how this can be true because I have experience with around 30 Macbook Pro's and ALL of them have poorer battery performance than under SL.

I made 1 good Lion image and deployed it to all the machines, they are identical (software) and behave identically.