4 comments

[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 27.4 ms ] thread
This doesn't say how much less power. Is it significant? iOS also doesn't have a VM but that doesn't make it easier on the battery vs Android, so why would that be the reason for Ubuntu? Perhaps Ubuntu just doesn't have a lot of services running in the background currently?
Not sure why you were downvoted, this really is a useless submission.
While true, that's like saying i++ is more efficient than i = i + 1 in an application that makes several SQL queries per run.

You can micro optimize areas of code for better CPU (and thus battery) efficiency, but the largest use of power in a phone is the cellular radio, WiFi, bluetooth, screen, digitizer, and other bits of hardware. The CPU makes a difference, but most likely not in a noticeable way

So someone asks if Ubuntu Touch consumes less power, and another person replies basically "Maybe, nobody knows yet."

How is this Hacker News worthy?