Before, I simply removed my battery when plugged in all day and significantly extended my battery life. If I needed it, it was mostly charged. It would of course dissipate over time so if I had any plans of using my laptop in an actual mobile fashion or wanted to move my laptop from one long term power source to the next, I'd pop it in, make the move and pop it back out. I of course lost the UPS feature having a laptop with a battery pack also served but I could assess when I thought my power source was/wasn't stable and pop the battery in under those conditions (not very often).

Most people I know use laptops as portable workstations. If you frequently operate in situations where you desire battery alone then the OS charge management works quite well. I don't and most people I know don't. In today's world, mos the use cases I operate under those conditions are better served by my smartphone.

Also, true power off guarantees nobody is remotely activating eavesdropping on your device.

C:\Programs\SP107705\BIOSConfigUtility64.exe /setvalue:"Battery Health Manager","Maximize my battery health"

C:\Programs\SP107705\BIOSConfigUtility64.exe /setvalue:"Battery Health Manager","Let HP manage my battery charging"

    sudo tlp setcharge $start_precent $stop_percent BAT0

I've had my Lenovo carbon x1 for a few years set to 80% max charge and its battery life is still good.

Battery stats report 480 charging cycles, capacity has dropped only 8 percent from rated.

If you charge to 50% and keep it there, it basically last years.

If you use your notebook primarily on AC, battery is charged and kept on “storage” until you unplug from AC. Over the years, this is equivalent to a battery stored on a box.

So, time stored on a box with 50% is better than 80%, which is also better than 100%.

But. If your notebook is used primarily unplugged from AC, that 100% is better than 80%, because you’ll have fewer deeper discharges.

Deep discharges is what form dentrites. Dentrities is what kill lithium batteries.

I'm not sure what you mean, by default most laptops will charge to 100% and keep trickle charging it to that level consistently while on AC.

Setting a charge max of 40% would be ideal, but there is point where you want to maintain some level of runtime when removed from AC, so 80% is a reasonable compromise.

Its the same with batteries, you keep them at 100% constantly they will wear out. Its just a limitation of the technology.

Some devices now try and use "machine learning" to determine max charge, for example iphones will maintain a medium charge throughout the night then do a final top up charge to reach 100% just before you wake up.

Yes, of course. That's not the issue, though.

> Some devices now try and use "machine learning" to determine max charge, for example iphones will maintain a medium charge throughout the night then do a final top up charge to reach 100% just before you wake up.

That's different and even opposite from advertising X max charge and only delivering 80% of X as the max charge. What I referred to is a bait and switch, where the manufacturer advertises one thing but provides another. Your example justification, however, is not a bait and switch but aligns the technical MVPs and marketing promises.

The situation is similar to purchasing a fridge that only operates at 80%. All food spoils more quickly, but the fridge lasts longer. If that had been disclosed, instead of the opposite implication from the marketing, then consumers would have almsot certainly made different purchasing decisions. That is why these sorts of things are generally illegal.

In your car example, if a car is advertised with 400 HP but never goes above 320 HP, that's called false advertising. Sure, the engine can get to 400 HP tested on a bench, but that's not why the car was purchased.

Consumers can either accept this and pay for a new battery every few years, or if they want they can limit to 80% and get way longer life battery life if they can live with the reduced runtime.

I'm not aware of any vendors claiming x capacity battery with mandatory limiting charging to 80% of x, rather its an option you have the choice to explicitly enable.

Yeah, I was astounded when I recently found out about the "modern standby" idiocy. I've almost always used Mac laptops, but I just assumed that at some point in the last 20 years the PC world would figure out reliable sleep. And it seems like they mostly did, and then Microsoft broke it for no good reason?

My phone (a oneplus 6) can be on standby for nearly a week. That windows laptops attempt at this mode drains the battery by the end of a workday is just pathetic. Instant resume should be available with no practical compromises.

Just as a data point, my 2019 mac sleeps perfectly for multiple days, no problem.

https://www.keyghost.com/qido/

Don't think that MacOS spares you about that either. Update notifications are equally distracting.

You're right but if I recall correctly notifications do not steal the focus.

"It's OK when we do it"

While commuting back and forth to work those are definitely asleep in a bag/briefcase.

Macs used to be really customiseable, and they haven't got around to ripping all of that out yet.

System Preferences > Keyboard > Modifier Keys

You can control how the various keys behave.

Not sure if it supports all the features you need, but it exists.

https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/vs/mac/

Much better off using Rider (also works nicely on Linux).

Microsoft has never been good at naming things. They made that mess of Windows naming at multiple points and they are still making a mess with the Xbox brand.

Do Microsoft Surface devices have this problem (the heat/fans spinning/high battery drain while sleeping, I mean)? If not, then Microsoft has no need to be embarrassed; it’s the rest of the PC laptop industry that should be embarrassed for not shipping hardware that does the right thing when the OS asks it to.

(Though, I mean, the rest of the PC industry should already be embarrassed, for still shipping new PCs in 2021 that don’t have Thunderbolt/USB4 ports, and desktop PCs that don’t even have a single USB-C port.)

There’s also the fact that Microsoft is (perhaps by accident of fate) “building for the future”; a lot of Windows 11’s assumptions in particular make sense given hardware and CPU steppings in mind that should have shipped a year ago, but which are caught in the COVID logistical conga-line and so won’t be seen for another year. That includes e.g. Intel CPUs with ARM-like big/LITTLE designs.

It's not a 50/50 responsibility split, but it's definitely not 100% on hardware.

Visual Studio Code does. Is that the same?

Even has native M1 support.

It is pretty good though. It's enjoying a big surge in popularity lately and seems to deserve it.

If you want to make Windows apps, it just doesn't support that scenario.

It is! What do you mean? :)

For all the people downvoting. He is the equivalent of people making "screenshots" with their mobile phone instead of using printscrn. I bet you are complaining about your own users all the time and here you defend someone who can't even be bothered to look at the options he has. smh