Related
I was almost 100% sold on the Polaris as my next device but battery life is very important to me. I currently have an HTC P3300 (well, O2 XDA Orbit) and with the increased battery capacity of the Polaris (1350mAh vs 1200mAh in my Orbit) plus the claimed better specs from HTC (GSM 7 hours talk/400 hours standby for the Touch Cruise vs 3.5-5 hours talk/150-200 hours standby for the P3300) I really hoped that HTC had dodged any battery life issues.
I just found this review however (http://www.mobile88.com/mobilegallery/phonereview.asp?phone=HTC_Touch_Cruise&pg=review&prodid=20785&cat=37) and it has me worried. The bit I'm worried about is right at the bottom of the page:
<Start of summary of review results>
The multimedia cycle tests in comparison to the results demonstrated by the original Touch and P3300 are given below:
Multimedia-cycle, video (AVI) Polaris=4:08 Artemis=5:20 Elf=5:38
Multimedia-cycle, audio (MP3) Polaris=13:49 Artemis=21:34 Elf=18:07
<End of summary>
You can see that for MP3 the Polaris is way worse than the Artemis (I'm assuming the numbers are <hours>:<minutes> of play time). With what I commented on in my first paragraph these results really suprise me.
Does anyone know the conditions/details of the video and audio multimedia-cycle tests above? I'm wondering if somehow the conditions for the Polaris test were less favourable than those for the Artemis. Maybe the MP3 decoder software was different between the Artemis and the Polaris and the latter was dramatically less efficient although I'm probably clutching at straws here. Any other thoughts, comments or real life results from owners?
- Julian
funny how the 2 wm6 devices have lower batt time then the wm5 device
would be intresting if a test with an aramis with wm6 was don
Rudegar said:
funny how the 2 wm6 devices have lower batt time then the wm5 device
would be intresting if a test with an aramis with wm6 was don
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a really interesting point. I was considering upgrading my device to WM6 using one of the cooked ROMs from this site, or the official O2 Orbit one, but I decided not to after seeing quite a few posts here by people who had done it and reported that the battery life on their devices went down a lot after upgrading to WM6 so I do wonder if that is the issue.
- Julian
I already ordered a second battery. I always do regardless of the device. One less thing to worry about
I am impressed with the battery capacity of the Polaris compared to my MIO A201. Running Tomtom without charging on the MIO A201 about 2 hours, with the Polaris 4 hours.
---Alex--- said:
I am impressed with the battery capacity of the Polaris compared to my MIO A201. Running Tomtom without charging on the MIO A201 about 2 hours, with the Polaris 4 hours.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What screen brightness is that set at? I'm assuming that the MP3 test results I quoted are with the screen blanked because if not then almost 24 hours on an Artemis with the screen on is pretty amazing.
If the tests do involve the screen being on (and surely they must with the video tests?) then I do wonder if the brightness settings were the same between the Artemis and Polaris tests.
If you look at some pictures further up in the review that I linked to in the first post of this thread then you can pretty clearly see that, I assume with both set to maximum brightness, the Polaris screen is noticeably brighter than the Artemis, so it isn't really fair on the Polaris to run any <screen on maximum> tests with both having the backlight set to full; it would be much fairer to adjust the Polaris backlight to give as close to possible the same brightness as the Artemis screen on full. Just maybe this accounts for some of the difference.
Thanks a lot Alex for the info on the TomTom results but I'd love to hear some real-life results of people playing music in a loop with the screen blanked and also discharge rates with the device just left at idle but with the auto-off and backlight-off disabled so that the screen stays alive. How much does the battery drain after 2 hours of sitting idle like this?
The reason I ask my questions is because the things that burn the most "activity hours" on my device are playing music with the screen blanked (hence my first request) and reading ebooks, for which my second requested test is probably a fairly reasonable approximation.
- Julian
They're comparing it to two devices with OMAP processors. Power savings is one of the reasons the OMAP was used before. It's either power or battery, rarely both unless the device is large. You could probably underclock to increase battery life.
JwY said:
They're comparing it to two devices with OMAP processors. Power savings is one of the reasons the OMAP was used before. It's either power or battery, rarely both unless the device is large. You could probably underclock to increase battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You hit the nail right on the head. I have not bothereed to check the source so I do not know the purpsoe of the test. In any case if you want 3 days of music you would be better of with an iP.... If you want processing power then you look for a device that will not make you fall asleep just waiting for a page to refresh
JwY said:
They're comparing it to two devices with OMAP processors. Power savings is one of the reasons the OMAP was used before. It's either power or battery, rarely both unless the device is large. You could probably underclock to increase battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was expecting someone to say this and I'm afraid that my hunch, which I am willing to admit could be wrong, makes me disagree with this. There is some reasoning to justify my hunch and it goes as follows.
Make the following assumptions (all numbers chosen for ease of arithmetic rather than accuracy since I am just trying to demonstrate a principle rather than derive results):
1) Yes, the CPU in the Polaris is more powerful than the one in the Artemis and lets assume that the Polaris CPU (PCPU for short) is exactly twice as powerful as the Artemis CPU (ACPU for short). By twice as powerful I mean that in any given second the PCPU will process twice as many instructions as the ACPU.
2) I am assuming that both CPUs have some sort of speed stepping technology such that, when they are not under load, the power consumption drops significantly to a fairly trivial value and I will assume that for both CPUs the idle power consumption is equivalent.
3) Assume that at full load the PCPU has twice the power consumption of the ACPU.
4) Assume that it takes a 100,000,000 instructions to decode and play 1 second of music (i.e. 100MIPS = 100 million instructions per second) and that the ACPU can only just manage this so when playing music the ACPU is at 100% load for 100% of the time.
With the above assumptions my point now is that a more powerful CPU won't create a serious decline in battery life when playing music because the 100 million instructions required to be executed for 1 second of music is constant so a 100MIPS processor will need to run flat out constantly to play music whereas a 200MIPS processor will only need to be at 100% load for 0.5 seconds in any given second and for the rest of the time it can be speed stepped right down. With the idealised assumptions above there would actually be no impact whatsoever on power consumption for any arbitrary processor power (for processors that have at least sufficient power to keep up with the music stream).
A further piece of real life evidence is, if it is solely or even predominantly down to the processor, then why is the Elf managing 18:07 on the MP3 test compared to the Artemis 13:49 (and that I believe this is with a smaller battery than the Artemis, 1100mAh vs 1250mAh; info taken from the specs on the HTC web site)?
Maybe assumption (2) is wrong which does hurt my argument somewhat, or maybe there are software differences, in the MP3 player and/or in WM6 itself, that stops the PCPU dropping its power consumption down as much when it's not actively decoding, but that Elf vs Artemis test result difference still makes me wonder what else is going on.
Honestly, I'm really hoping this is just due to a badly run test on the Polaris (not same conditions as Artemis test) and that the result is an Anomaly.
- Julian
I've had the xda Stellar (tytn II), which is very very similar to the polaris, for the last week, and the battery is, I'm sorry to say, the worse I've ever come across.
For the first few days, I was using it heavily and managed 1.5 days. Figured this would increase as I used it less. Took it off charge 5 hours ago, made a 20 minute phone call, sent 3 text messages, and used the word processor for 30 minutes. 75% battery left.
I'm sending it back and waiting for the Orbit 2 to be released. Fingers crossed the keyboard has some strange battery draining feature.
sonesh said:
I've had the xda Stellar (tytn II), which is very very similar to the polaris, for the last week, and the battery is, I'm sorry to say, the worse I've ever come across.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Stellar only has an 1100mAh battery while the Polaris has 1350mAh. Sounds little but makkes a differece of 200 (yes, 200!) hours of StandBy time.
This means the Stellar specs say 250h whereas the Polais spec sheet says 450h.
sonesh said:
For the first few days, I was using it heavily and managed 1.5 days. Figured this would increase as I used it less. Took it off charge 5 hours ago, made a 20 minute phone call, sent 3 text messages, and used the word processor for 30 minutes. 75% battery left.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. That's very bad. I wonder if there's something wrong with your unit. According to the spec on the HTC web site you should be getting talk time of "Up to 264 minutes for UMTS - Up to 420 minutes for GSM". As far as I'm aware holding a call is by far the most battery-draining thing you can do on a device so if we count your 30 minutes of word processing as another 30 minutes of talk time we're probably grossly over-estimating but, on that assumption (and adding 5 minutes for the texts) that's only an equivalent of 55 minutes of talk time. Were you on 3G or GSM for all this? I suppose if it was 3G then maybe you could have expected the battery to be down to 79% but if it was GSM then the battery really shouldn't have been much below 87%.
Admittedly I think these talk time figures quoted by manufacturers are in very ideal conditions (i.e. very high signal strength from the mast) so what sort of reception area you were in when you made the call is an issue but I think that is probably counteracted by the fact that I probably vastly overestimated the power drain when word processing.
An interesting (free) utility is abcPowerMeter (http://www.acbpocketsoft.com/). It would be very interesting to compare the current consumption on the Artemis, the Polaris and the Tyan II.
If anyone is up for this then I suggest the state to test would be with the system sitting on the today screen, disable the auto-off but do allow the backlight to go off or manually disable it so that differing screen brightness isn't a factor. Also put the phone into flight mode so that all radios are off (to factor out any effects of different signal strengths) and then start abcPowerMeter and let it run for about 30 minutes during which time it should, in theory, settle to a pretty straight line showing the current drawn from the battery in this state.
I would most certainly do an Artemis (or rather O2 XDA Orbit) test but unfortunately the reason for my intense interest in all things Polaris is that my Orbit died on new year's eve (no, I didn't drop it or sit on it at a party!) so my device is totally dead.
- Julian
Could the Today plugins be making a difference? I'm thinking particularly the weather plugin. I've seen other discussions where people report battery life problems on various devices and one often-mentioned that people suggest to check is what Today plugins are running.
With the new devices now 3G, and 3G using a lot more power than 2/2.5G when active, I'm wondering if the weather plugin is causing 3G to be active and hurting power. How often does the weather plugin connect and can it be disabled? Not wanting to take the thread off topic but one thing I'd like to do if/when I get a Polaris is to disable the weather plugin on the Today screen, is this possible?
For my use, since I am concerned about battery life, I intend to keep my device in GSM mode and only switch to 3G when I want to connect to the internet and, when finished, I will immediately disable 3G again. I certainly don't want any plugins regularly polling the internet and turning stuff on without my permission.
- Julian
acbPowerMeter
I installed acbPowerMeter this afternoon, after noticing that my battery was draining extremely fast (~ 4 to 5 hours). The tool showed that the TC was using approx 320mA on average
I've been running the tool for some hours now, and after two hours the power consumption slowly lowered. I've been switching the screen off and on and have had the GSM radio on all the time. The avg value returned to ~20mA.
I'll keep an eye on power consumption, because now I don't trust the device anymore. I don't know what caused the huge change in power consumption in the first place.
Thanks for those test results Muyz. It's great to have some real data, but I'm sorry to hear that you're having battery problems too.
Regarding your results, did you start abcPowerMeter (APM for short) while your device was still plugged into the USB port? I noticed that when I had APM running when my device was charging then I got a very high mA reading (about 250mA on my 1200mAh O2 XDA Orbit) so I think the fact that there is charge current coming in confuses APM somewhat and, for the average, it could be that after you unplug it will take a while for the minutes or hours of false high readings to creep out of the statistics. I always made very sure that my device was fully unplugged before starting an APM session.
Regarding the 20mAh reading, that actually sounds very good to me. Unfortunately I'm recalling all this from memory because, as I said in an earlier post, my device is now totally dead, but I seem to remember about 29mA as as low as I saw. With the screen on the figure of 79mA sticks in my mind. As with you, these figures were all with GSM on. I had Bluetooth and WiFi disabled.
One thing that really suprised me with my tests was that, when I had a good GSM signal, I couldn't detect any difference in current drain between having GSM switched on or off (just registered to the network of course, not actually with a call active). The additional current drawn from having GSM on didn't even seem to be 1mA. The story is different in a no-signal area where the GSM keeps searching for a signal, that drained the battery really quickly.
- Julian
3G CONNECTION need more battery consumation(if you dont need disable), configure for normale use GSM, and the duration is guarantee...
New battery monitor tool
I've discovered a serious bug in the acbPowerMeter tool. The implementation of the tool does not use the proper types
This is why I've done a little programming myself last evening. The attachment to this tool contains a preliminary version of my own battery monitoring tool. It provides the correct battery readings for remaining power and current power consumption. One can adjust the polling frequency. I will complete the tool somewhere this or next week and put it on my website for download (freeware).
Muyz said:
I've discovered a serious bug in the acbPowerMeter tool. The implementation of the tool does not use the proper types
This is why I've done a little programming myself last evening. The attachment to this tool contains a preliminary version of my own battery monitoring tool. It provides the correct battery readings for remaining power and current power consumption. One can adjust the polling frequency. I will complete the tool somewhere this or next week and put it on my website for download (freeware).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi Muyz,
Not wanting to jinx this, but I'm cautiously optimistic that I just un-bricked my O2 XDA Orbit (Artemis) so, as long as it doesn't go bad on me again I might now be in a position to contribute Artemis (or re-branded Artemis) data for comparison.
In preperation for the tests I'm really interested in what are the problems you found with abcPowerMeter. You say above that it "does not use the proper types". What do you mean by this? As a (fairly old) computer scientist this immediately makes me think of types as in a typed computer language (e.g. it's declaring something as int instead of long or short instead of bool). Is this what you mean? Please excuse my ignorance, I know theory but have never been anywhere near any Windows, let alone Windows Mobile, programming environments; if you do mean language types then how did you detect this without the source code (or did you find that somehow or disassemble)?
If you don't mean variable typing then what do you mean?
In any event, many thanks for the work Muyz.
I un-bricked my device by re-flashing (twice) the official O2 WM6 ROM so when (assuming my device stays stable) I start running current consumption tests then I think it's probably quite good that I upgraded my device to WM6 because that removes one variable (is the current drain a WM5 -> WM6 issue?) so we can at least compare Artemis to Polaris on a fairly like-for-like basis regarding the OS version.
I'm really glad I started this thread, I think there's been some really interesting and useful discussion here and I certainly wasn't expecting to have people jumping in and posting fixed versions of the current-monitoring software, that was a really nice surprise (but I'm still really looking forward to hearing exactly what the issue was).
- Julian
Battery life in cooked ROMs - weather plugin
Hi guys,
in some cooked ROMs there seems to be a bug in the radio rom or simply in general. I've read several posts where people had the gsm units in their Artemis on full power most of the time causing the device to lose power very fast. This happened only with cooked ROMs, not with official versions. They noticed that when they had their phone close to speakers which caused the buzzing noise that you usually get when there is an incoming call or short message.
The other thing that consumes power is the weather plugin, but only when you have the auto-update activated! I disabled it and never had problems.
I think I'll buy this device anyways, haven't read any serious reasons not to buy it.
Thanks for your response, and I hope your device works properly now.
About the type issue: acdPowerMeter (obviously) uses the Windows API to retrieve battery information. It receives the information through a structure that contains signed integers. It seems as if acbPowerSoft managed to introduce a typing error by using unsigned integers instead of signed integers. The effect is that for negative values (e.g. when current is drawn from the battery), acbPowerMeter shows extremely large values. I discovered what is the most likely reason for this mistake: Microsoft shows an example on their website on how to retrieve battery status information. Their example shows the error clearly: the C# class use unsigned integers, whereas the native structure contains signed integers as you can see here. So I guess acbPocketSoft copied some code without checking the result
I do not have a clue on what caused the extreme battery drain I encountered a few days ago. I have not seen it since. Soon, my tool will include a warning mechanism. I first added a few other small things, such as battery temperature, as you can see in the new attachment
(Yes, I know, it contains a small glitch on exiting the application, but that will be fixed asap)
2G vs. 3G
2G Advantage:
• way better battery life
3G Advantage:
• faster data connection
This is a subjective question> Is it worth it at the expense of increased battery consumption?
I have an HTC Diamond with a small 900 mAh battery. So for me, I mostly put mine into 2G and switch to 3G when I use my data connection.
Question: is 2G = 3G when it comes to voice quality? (I can't tell the difference)
...and are there any other 3G advantages that I have missed?
Technically 3G is used for voice as well, but whether you're on GPRS/EDGE/3G I don't think there's a noticeable difference. As for if 3G is worth it? Without question. I'm a huuuuge fan of Android, and I'm dying to get a phone that works with AT&T 3G... Obviously I was greatly disappointed when the Agora Pro was delayed. The G1 seems like the perfect phone for me in every way (except maybe build quality), GPS, WiFi, capacitive screen... But I refuse to buy any phone that doesn't give me 3G, EDGE is painful when you're used to HSPA.
"• can make/receive a call/txt while connected to the Internet (never miss a call)"
thats not a 3g thing thats a cell-phone operator equipment thing
i never lost a call because of grps
thats the real reason that grps was invented to replace
old cell-phone data traffic where you had to call the isp to get
Internet
I don't think it's the right question to ask.
besides the fact that it's individual, 3G and 2G are completely different.
2G provides the regular services which you don't need anything more for.
3G provides services which 2G does not and you will use only if you need them.
so the question is "what do you need?"
I have a polaris on 2G ALL the time... unless I want to connect to the internet.
(just a for instance)
btw, 3G is WAY "less healthy"
for instance, in israel, 2G broadcasts make your phone cast 0.042mW/kb
3G makes it cast 0.43mW/kb. it's like swimming in an ocean of endless EM waves.
that's of course, for an average phone, for full signal
nir36 said:
I don't think it's the right question to ask.
besides the fact that it's individual, 3G and 2G are completely different.
2G provides the regular services which you don't need anything more for.
3G provides services which 2G does not and you will use only if you need them.
so the question is "what do you need?"
I have a polaris on 2G ALL the time... unless you want to connect to the internet.
(just a for instance)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah well, 3G is a data transfer speed. If you're not using data, there's no reason to have 3G.
Ok, then should the question be.........
E vs. 3G.....regarding call quality & battery consumption
Is there a difference?
or
What radio mode will consume the least amount of battery, Edge or 3G?
Edge consumes a lot less battery than 3G.
Call quality is the same....
Ok, so I will stick with Edge as my basis and switch when I need to use my data connection.
you don't need Edge either for calls. call quality doesn't change from 2G to Edge to 3G to 10G. voice is sampled in 44kHz at best. let's say 22kHz. 22kHz is nothing compared to what 2G can transfer. even if you use Shannon's formula you still get a very high value for 2G data transfer. Edge isn't better than 2G unless you want faster data transfer rate... edge can transfer up to 237kbps per 4 time slots. you need no more than 48kbps.
btw.. just as a general remark. human speech moves between... 20hz to about 3khz. 22khz/48khz is required to transfer music through your phone.
nir36 said:
voice is sampled in 44kHz at best.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both 2(.5/.75)G and 3G uses GSM encoding (with a very low sampling frequency); that is, the audio quality is exactly the same with the two.
galaxys said:
Edge consumes a lot less battery than 3G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is particularly true when actively transferring data, and (to a much lesser degree) when just using the phone. I've measured huge (~50%) differences on contemporary handsets - see my dedicated articles if interested.
nir36 said:
3G is WAY "less healthy"
for instance, in israel, 2G broadcasts make your phone cast 0.042mW/kb
3G makes it cast 0.43mW/kb. it's like swimming in an ocean of endless EM waves.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have any links on this? This is quite big a difference and I'd say, at least under "normal" circumstances, the difference shouldn't be that big.
As CDMA is somewhat more battery-friendly than TDMA (it can transfer the same info using less power), the difference is mostly because of the difference between the carrier (850/900 MHz vs. 1700+ MHz; the higher the freuency, the more power you require to traverse the same distance with the same SNR). That is, with a GSM operator operating at much higher frequencies than 900 MHz, there shouldn't be much difference.
(And, of course, a lot of other factors should also be considered: does the operator use the same radio turn to put all their aerials on etc. If, for some reason, you have a far better 3G SNR than GSM SNR, then, your handheld should use much lower transfer power.)
This is a matter of choices
Each one of us will pick a phone (and a band and a carrier) based on our own needs
In my personal usage, I need FAST INTERNET, so I chose 3G (HSDPA)
I also chose the Xperia X1 because it has a BIG battery
Now I have 3G SPEED and 1.5 days battery life with heavy usage
Menneisyys said:
Both 2(.5/.75)G and 3G uses GSM encoding (with a very low sampling frequency); that is, the audio quality is exactly the same with the two.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's great to hear. Well to conserve power, my choice will be to disable 3G using Communication Manager. When I do this, the 3G icon in the task bar switches to E.
Will switch to 3G only when I need to use the internet.
Perfect ! Thanks for helping me with this everyone
Menneisyys said:
Do you have any links on this? This is quite big a difference and I'd say, at least under "normal" circumstances, the difference shouldn't be that big.
As CDMA is somewhat more battery-friendly than TDMA (it can transfer the same info using less power), the difference is mostly because of the difference between the carrier (850/900 MHz vs. 1700+ MHz; the higher the freuency, the more power you require to traverse the same distance with the same SNR). That is, with a GSM operator operating at much higher frequencies than 900 MHz, there shouldn't be much difference.
(And, of course, a lot of other factors should also be considered: does the operator use the same radio turn to put all their aerials on etc. If, for some reason, you have a far better 3G SNR than GSM SNR, then, your handheld should use much lower transfer power.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
first of all, let me correct my mistake. it's not 0.43 for 3G it's 0.23mW/kb. but that's still VERY high.
I'll try to look it up as i got this info from a friend who worked in orange. but this obviously depends on many factors other than your device. the more relays you have spread around your area, the less power your phone needs to retrieve a normal signal. they're not ALL arranged according to the hexagon method... or the Threeway method.
I'm talking about average power. the closer you are to the relay, the less power you need, but your brain is fried from the relay itself so you can't really run away from it.
FORTUNATELY, power dissipates by 1/r^2 so if you're about 60-70cm away from your phone the effect will be extremely minimal.
"Yeah well, 3G is a data transfer speed. If you're not using data, there's no reason to have 3G."
here we can also use it for video calls directly to another phone number as in not real internet
but nobody use it i think
maybe the problem is that females will spend ½hour freshning up before answering their phones jk
video calls are only different by requiring faster data transfer and much higher signal to noise ratio.. which 3G provides. again, it's not a consideratoin whether to use 3G or not. only if you need to use a video call should you switch to 3G
2G vs 3G......What about (Edge vs 3G)
Wow, some good feedback has been generated here.
Phone use:
• 3G.......is NOT worth it here unless you are video calling
Data Connection:
• 3G.......is worth it here (way faster) even though battery consumption increases nicely
Before concluding with the above, would like to clear up what Edge is:
EDGE can be considered a 3G radio technology and is part of ITU's 3G definition,[1] but is most frequently referred to as 2.75G
Based on the definition here, does anyone believe that using Edge is best when using the phone for the sake of decreasing battery consumption? I believe it should be. Any thoughts?
Actually, EDGE can't be considered as 3G techwise.. and it doesn't have the same data transfer rate as 3G provided by an HSDPA connection.
this is from wikipedia
High-Speed Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) is a 3G (third generation) mobile telephony communications protocol in the High-Speed Packet Access (HSPA) family, which allows networks based on Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) to have higher data transfer speeds and capacity. Current HSDPA deployments support down-link speeds of 1.8, 3.6, 7.2 and 14.4 Mbit/s. Further speed increases are available with HSPA+, which provides speeds of up to 42 Mbit/s downlink.[1]
EDGE only gets to 430kbps AT BEST. the AT BEST part NEVER comes
it's true that EDGE consumes less battery
and it's true that 3G is much faster
but it's also true that this all depends on your needs.
Orange Israel doesn't support EDGE. if they did i would be using it all the time instead of 3G when i need an internet connection.. since i don't need 1.8Mbps..
eventually, i believe there's no debate about what to use.
2G is the best way to go when you do everything but using the internet and video calls.
and then choosing between EDGE and 3G(HSDPA, UMTS.. or whatever you wanna call it) depends on how fast you want your internet connection to be while considering that EDGE consumes MUCH MUCH less battery power.
btw, if you asked me, i woldn't think twice whether you should have a 3G phone or not. having 3G support on your phone nowadays costs nothing more than having a reulgar 2G phone.. so having the option whether to use 3G or not is obviously better than not having it.
band27 said:
EDGE can be considered a 3G radio technology and is part of ITU's 3G definition,[1] but is most frequently referred to as 2.75G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
tehcnically, EDGE (which is a plain TDMA technology, as is GSM) in no way can be compared to 3G technologies, which are all CDMA.
Okay, needless to say, operating systems like iOS and Android are improving plus the new processors heading to dual core. However, battery technology is way behind I think. What improvements are needed in this field to get a smartphone working for a week on one charge (not realistic but ideal)?
Fuel cells?
New alloys?
What would work to help our battery technology which is falling behind?
Battery technology is far behind but it has been for over 100 years. For electric cars Toyota claims to have a new battery with 2-3x the power density of current batteries. Although for general purpose I believe Lithium Phosphate is still the current state of the art technology.
Fuel Cells are neat technology but not yet that practical just like 10year miniature nuclear cells.
The biggest problems in my opinion are
1. phone size (everything is getting so thin or small in general) leaving less room for a battery
2. screen size (huge touchscreen = big power draw), and other things too that impact battery life.
3. things that run in the background keeping the phone cpu in something other than its lowest power state
4. screen brightness. Seems trivial but can make a big difference and I think all phones should have ambient light sensors are change automatically.
5. internet connectivity. It goes along with #3 in that it wakes the cpu, but also the current wireless chipsets don't seem all that energy efficient. Using any connectivity cellular, wifi, or bluetooth really eats the battery. Many report turning off wifi, bluetooth, and using 2g when possible significantly improve battery life.
Personally I have the biggest battery I could get for my phone and my laptop too. My 17" laptop runs 4.5 hrs at lowest brightness and 3 hrs at the brightest setting. Most phones aren't much different.
Sorry long rant...... does that break down your question correctly?
landoftheeskimos said:
Battery technology is far behind but it has been for over 100 years. For electric cars Toyota claims to have a new battery with 2-3x the power density of current batteries. Although for general purpose I believe Lithium Phosphate is still the current state of the art technology.
Fuel Cells are neat technology but not yet that practical just like 10year miniature nuclear cells.
The biggest problems in my opinion are
1. phone size (everything is getting so thin or small in general) leaving less room for a battery
2. screen size (huge touchscreen = big power draw), and other things too that impact battery life.
3. things that run in the background keeping the phone cpu in something other than its lowest power state
4. screen brightness. Seems trivial but can make a big difference and I think all phones should have ambient light sensors are change automatically.
5. internet connectivity. It goes along with #3 in that it wakes the cpu, but also the current wireless chipsets don't seem all that energy efficient. Using any connectivity cellular, wifi, or bluetooth really eats the battery. Many report turning off wifi, bluetooth, and using 2g when possible significantly improve battery life.
Personally I have the biggest battery I could get for my phone and my laptop too. My 17" laptop runs 4.5 hrs at lowest brightness and 3 hrs at the brightest setting. Most phones aren't much different.
Sorry long rant...... does that break down your question correctly?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It sure does for me thanks
nova display and amoled plus is good for battery
li-po is more efficient than li-ion
dual core is more efficient about 40% than single core (in ginger bread)
Have you heard the rumour that the cell phone had better not be used when there is only one bar of power left because the radiation in such a circumstance may be about 1000 times the intensity of that in normal circumstances. Do you believe that?
As a matter of fact, the radiation intensity of cell phones that usually mentioned by people means the transmit power. It has nothing to do with the dump energy, while it has something to do with the signal intensity of the cell phone. The signal intensity of the cell phone is controlled by base stations which receive signals from cell phones constantly. If the signal of a cell phone is too weak to maintain communication, the base station will issue instructions to intensify the radiation of the cell phone. If the signal of a cell phone is so strong that it may cause mutual interference of cell phones, the base station will issue instructions to reduce the radiation of the cell phone. Therefore, the weaker the signal of the cell phone is, the more intense the radiation is. Maybe the creator of the rumour mixed up “one bar of battery power” and “one bar of signal”.
View attachment 2289879
Can the radiation reach 1000 times the intensity of that in normal circumstances when there is only one bar of signal left? The answer is yes. Maybe the situation of each cell phone is not the same as others, but it doesn’t affect the conclusion.
Can the 1000-time radiation do harm to our health? The qualified cell phones comply with the industrial standard even though they are used when their radiation is the most intense. In addition, a recent epidemiological investigation shows that there is no relation between cancers and the usage of cell phones.
If you are still afraid of being harmed by the radiation, you can keep away from your phone if the signal is weak.
I need a tablet or phabet (screen <6") to geolocalize many points on the road and bring data back to my pc?
I need a precision less than 10 meters and a very fast connection time, so I would look for a device with GPS + GLONASS.
I would also need good autonomy at a price not too high (possibly less than 200 €).
Can anyone give me some suggestions?