Why battery life sucks

[viipottaja]

@BBJ,

Does/will Meego suffer from the same problems as Android etc?

Originally Posted by bbj

In contrast Android (or more accurately Java) fails quite miserably on this front. To perform animation on say Android, you have to have a thread of execution that goes round a loop as fast as it can, permenantly, all the time, regardless of processor speed. You poll the timer every loop to determine enough time has passed you then do some work. As bad as you can get for battery life. Want to partion anything, launch another thread + let it burn as many cycles as it can.... etc.

Utter crap.

Most(All?) J2ME midlets can listen for a suspend/backgrounding event. It's up to the programmer to honor these events, otherwise (yes) the code will continue to execute. It's called multitasking.

[davidmaxwaterma]

we always get the blame.there are many (debatably) good reasons why we don't optimize as much as possible for battery life, many are the result of compromise.

How about blaming battery developers who have promised new advances and delivered next to nothing? Longer lasting batteries would solve the problem once and for all. All we get is small incremental improvements that are eaily eaten up. Where are the fuel cells/etc? An innovation in battery tech is needed...

[ving]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I do not agree with all of what was written. It seemed to be based more on rant than complete facts. One big problem is that battery technology has not kept pace with the newer devices. I have to give a hats off to Apple for pursuing better technology. The fact that they can squeeze almost 10 hours out of a 17 inch MacBook Pro battery as well as over 10 - 12 hours on an iPad are testaments that some companies are serious about battery life.

wow, I barely get one hour from my Acer laptop but I have a problem with my laptop battery and windows 7. :(

I don't get it. How hard can it be. I'm currently running around with a N6220 Classic
Ok, it only has a 2,2" screen, and no Wifi, but I'm using 2 to 3Gb of 3G data each month (a lot of tethering).
The battery isn't large (900 mAh) and I still get around by only charging it every 2-3 days. How is this possible.
Are thos big (touch-)screens really that hungry?

[nudger]

This is all very well but irrespective of the power requirements of various apps and OS's, doesn't a higher capacity battery mean a longer life?

I mean, why does my N97 Mini have a 1200mAh battery when the slimmer E51 and E71 have 1500mAh? Why couldn't the newer touch screen phones have these batteries in?

I know that they can hammer the battery harder and might still need charging every night but it's surely better to have the larger capacity??

I just don't get why Nokia or any other manufacturer makes a positive decision to put a smaller battery in. I mean, it's not like they haven't got the 1500 mAh on their parts list is it?

The problem with battery technology, is because the inherent danger of explosion.
Newer tech battery must pass through test in order to ensure the safety of it's user.

And because Nokia make slimmer phone, this means the battery power will be reduce in order to make the battery smaller but with the same battery technology.

For those that need a phone that will last "in the field" so to speak, just got back from a holiday in rural France where the signal was constantly being lost on my 3G-always-on phone (won't name names as negativity on forums is boring) which despite little use still required a daily charge.

On the other hand, my wife's E72 lasted 8 days without charging!

Truly remarkable, and clearly the result of (1) a good battery and (2) small screen without touch input.

Even my old 6230 could only do a week!

I completely agree to the fact that these devices does not offer better battery life. This is what I detest about the use of devices.