Want this question answered?
Protostar!
The similarities of high-end low-mass stars include their ability to fuse hydrogen and helium at the same time, very short lifetimes, and being incredibly luminous.
mass
The maximum mass of a star is the mass at which it would collapse to form a black hole, irregardless of the stage in its life cycle. It is thought that the centers of the galaxies did this.
None at all/ The life cycle of a star is based on it's initial mass, not where it was formed.
Protostar!
A high-mass star will use up its fuel faster than a low-mass one. Depending on the amount of mass that remains at the end of its life, it may convert to a neutron star, or to a black hole.
The more the mass the shorter their life cycle (the more quickly they use their fuel)
its mass
high mass has shortest life (stars right?)
The similarities of high-end low-mass stars include their ability to fuse hydrogen and helium at the same time, very short lifetimes, and being incredibly luminous.
mass
The more massive a star is, the less its life time.
A star's "life cycle" depends mostly on its initial mass; everything is determined by mass. Small, low-mass stars may shine essentially forever, while very large high-mass stars may grow old and go supernova in only a few dozen million years.
In that case, the temperature is hot enough to create all known natural elements.
Low mass
The major difference is that a low-mass star lives much longer. The reason for this is that a high-mass star gets hotter, is much brighter, and uses up its fuel much faster. The difference can be quite dramatic, with some stars being millions of times brighter than others. Also, assuming the star doesn't acquire additional mass, a low-mass star will end up as a white dwarf, while more massive stars will end up as a neutron star, or in the case of the most massive stars, a black hole.