> > which means the 2.0 components are less battery draining. apple simply
> > starts with a "base line" for battery usage. then uses the battery that
> > matches that goal. so it's good the battery is smaller because that
> > means the electronics are better this year, than last.
>
> That's good logic... ...and my coffee beans must be 33% tastier this year,
> since they come in a 12oz bag instead of 1lb. bag like before...
since when do beans become twice as tasty, half the price every 18
months?
At 11 Jul 2008 12:34:38 -0600 Oxford wrote:
> "Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
>
> > > which means the 2.0 components are less battery draining. apple simply
> > > starts with a "base line" for battery usage. then uses the battery
that
> > > matches that goal. so it's good the battery is smaller because that
> > > means the electronics are better this year, than last.
> >
> > That's good logic... ...and my coffee beans must be 33% tastier this
year,
> > since they come in a 12oz bag instead of 1lb. bag like before...
>
> since when do beans become twice as tasty, half the price every 18
> months?
What's "half the price?" Apples gives up on their revenue sharing ideas,
allowing AT&T to subsidize it the same $250-300 they subsidize every other
high-end phone and this is supposed to be a massive price cut?
iPhone I buyer should be steaming mad that Apple "stole" the two-year
contract subsidy any other phone would've entitled them to, in the form of
a long-term revenue-sharing commission!
But, all is back to normal now- in just one short year, after Apple was
going to "change the wireless business forever," the "evil cellular
companies" are back in the driver's seat, Apple's commission concept is dead,
at-home activation is but a memory, and Apple will soon get back in line
with Nokia, Motorola, LG, Samsung, etc. building devices to carrier
specifications.
Give it another year, and "iTunes activation" will likely be history
altogether, after AT&T gets tired of having a list of special
considerations and procedures for one company's products.
> your mixed metaphor doesn't hold up.
It was supposed to sound as ridiculous as your battery diatribe.
Obviously, many design desions are made for many reasons, but Apple
wouldn't shrink the batery because it lasts as long in the new model as the
old one did in the old- besides, as you've linked, Walt Mossberg already
told us battery life is less in the new model.
Obviously, form factor was the consideration- the new phone was designed to
be roughly the same size as the old, and I suspect the new battery was all
they could fit in.
The poor engineers apparently didn't even have enough room left to squeeze
in voice dialing! ;-)
Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote in
news:apony-E83EDD.10501511072008@news.qwest.net:
> Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
>> ifixit.com reports the NEW battery is SMALLER than the old battery!
>> The old battery was 1.4AH and the new battery is 1.1AH....a
>> significant decline.
>
> which means the 2.0 components are less battery draining. apple simply
> starts with a "base line" for battery usage. then uses the battery
> that matches that goal. so it's good the battery is smaller because
> that means the electronics are better this year, than last.
>
I suppose by now, hours later, you've read the many reports of much reduced
battery runtimes from realtime testing.....using the same battery tests
used on the first model.
The old phone ran much longer than this puppy....so I'll ignore the other
digs below this thread.
> > which means the 2.0 components are less battery draining. apple simply
> > starts with a "base line" for battery usage. then uses the battery
> > that matches that goal. so it's good the battery is smaller because
> > that means the electronics are better this year, than last.
>
> I suppose by now, hours later, you've read the many reports of much reduced
> battery runtimes from realtime testing.....using the same battery tests
> used on the first model.
>
> The old phone ran much longer than this puppy....so I'll ignore the other
> digs below this thread.
turn off 3G and it will be exactly the same... what SJ said about the
poor performance of 3G is true, so it's better to go with pure WiFI and
do an end run around the old monopoly of cell phone companies... they
are dead anyway, so let's all grow up and kill them faster...
bad battery life is a CONDITION of a non-competitive market...
apple is simply waiting for them to die off, thus WiFi / WiMax is the
answer "long term"... and Apple is just positioning themselves for the
"great fall" of AT&T and Verizon, etc...
learn how the computer industry works, it's FAR more efficient than the
cell industry. we all laugh at how poorly cell companies are run each
and every minute...
In article <Xns9AD868892A490noonehomecom@208.49.80.253>, Larry
<noone@home.com> wrote:
> ifixit.com reports the NEW battery is SMALLER than the old battery! The
> old battery was 1.4AH and the new battery is 1.1AH....a significant
> decline.
and the power consumption of the device has declined even further, so
it's a net win. only with 3g is run time impacted; if both devices are
in 2g mode, the new one lasts longer.
iTunes apps store is open for buisness
Linear Mode
