- 03-30-2007, 04:27 AM #51
- 03-30-2007, 05:17 AM #52
- 03-30-2007, 05:22 AM #53
- 03-30-2007, 10:53 AM #54
You did not take any initiative to copy good quotes as well.
Quotes like: The Mac sucks.
You went out of your way to skip the good ones.
You are insinuating that Compaq was ahead of Apple in selecting this battery technology. This is not true. Again, this is because the battery was not available then. An after market product that was released this year for a 6 year old device doesn't mean that the Ipaq came out with it first.
- 03-30-2007, 11:32 AM #55
I can't complain.
Written by JM from Burnaby
February 13, 2007
I have had a 12-inch PowerBook for a little over 18 months, and now anytime I unplug my laptop from the outlet it turns off. I honestly feel ripped off because the problem began around 1 month after my 12 month warranty.
(4 of 15 people found this review useful)
Poor apple product
Written by JH from Charlottesville
March 2, 2007
Report this as inappropriate >
I've had my 12' powerbook for over three years. It has been through 474 load cycles, and it is just now getting down below half it's original capacity.
Its not unreasonable to have to spend 150 bucks every couple of years to maintain a tool that I ... Read more >use every day.
(I suspect this is meant to be good, but going to half capacity after 500 recharge cycles is not meant to be good)
(7 of 15 people found this review useful)
I can't complain.
Written by JM from Burnaby
February 13, 2007
Report this as inappropriate >
I had my powerbook for about a year ann then the battery life went down 30mins and then around 6 months later it went down to 1 min. so if it is not pluged in is computer truns off right in the middidle of what you are doing. then one time my powerbo... Read more >ok came unpluged and i did not notice because the powercord comes out to easy and my computer truned off and when i powered it back up it had locked up andi went to the mac store they told me tht they only way to fix it was to re-load mac OX ten. but because my hard drive was locked up we could not save the ANY!!!!! of the DATA. because of this i lost many photographic pojects that were in progress. all of music gone!!!!!!!!!!!!!! this battery is a major problem. i just hope the new models don't have this same problem. the powerbook is great but the battery in hinestight makes that it not worth buying, because i have lost stuff i can't buy back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(10 of 31 people found this review useful)
this battery sucks
Written by CB from San Francisco
February 11, 2007
Great features of an iPAQ
Other than the differences described above, the 3100 is identical to the color-screen iPAQ introduced over a year ago.
It has the same fast 206 MHz StrongARM processor.
Same high-capacity Lithium Polymer rechargeable battery for 15 hours of continuous use (or a week or two of normal use) between charges.
Same size (but listed as slightly lighter than the color-screen version).
Same operating system (Windows CE 3.0).
Same set of built-in applications from Microsoft (MS Pocket Office, Pocket Outlook and more (see "Spec Sheet" and sidebar).
Same set of built-in software from Compaq.
It accepts the same set of accessories, including the Expansion Packs to add storage memory and hardware features.
Lithium Polymer batteries started appearing in consumer electronics around 1996 and can be found in some of the later models of iPaq , for example the replacement iPaq battery for the iPaq 5500 and the iPaq HW6500. However the 3100, 3600, 3700, 3800 and 3900 iPaq battery is also a Lithium Polymer battery.
Poor Archie. Most of what you 'know' is wrong. That's so sad. :cry:
- 03-30-2007, 12:12 PM #56
- 03-30-2007, 12:20 PM #57
- 03-30-2007, 02:09 PM #58
- 03-30-2007, 02:22 PM #59
Glad i didn't have any battery concerns..lol
I think the main thing to consider for me may just be the carrier. I'm tied up with Sprint with a data usb modem (inlaw lives in rural area and this is his only option for high speed internet that looked good) plus 2 other phones.
If it was coming to sprint, i'd buy one for the wife, just to have another toy to play with. I'll let cingular users work the bugs out with this one.
- 04-04-2007, 11:32 AM #61
- 04-10-2007, 08:42 PM #62
- 04-13-2007, 10:51 AM #63
I can't believe that people still fail to grasp the engineering feat that Apple has accomplished here in regards to power management and engineering.
Let's consider the iPhone's size. The iPhone is literally half the size of a Treo (11mm thickness compared to 23mm thickness). Even smaller when compared to the older models.
Now, what would you imagine the overall space would be that the battery occupies in the new iPhone. Considering the entire size of the phone and the components involved:
8GB of RAM
A huge 320 by 480 multi-touch screen
Quad-band (MHz: 850, 900, 1800, 1900) radio
Multitude of circuit boards
What kind of room can they possibly have left for a phone. Based on the size of the iPhone, a person would have to imagine that half of it would be dedicated solely to the battery to get 5 hours from it.
Yet, this is impossible. Look at the list of stuff they have shoved in there (in addition to the bits of electronics I know nothing of that are required for such a device).
My point is that the battery is quite small and to engineer the ability to allow the user to swap batteries in and out would impact the resulting size to a much greater degree than if for example Palm were to make this same change given the Treos existing size.
Do you get it? The iPhone's battery would lose a greater overall percentage of its mass to engineer an iPhone design that would allow for a swappable battery because the space to hold the battery is so small to begin with. The iPhone would end up with 2-3 hours of battery life.
I am glad Apple chose to engineer a built in (non-swapable) battery.
Besides; the whole idea of making these "smartphones" like a Treo or a Blackberry or the iPhone is to give the advantage of convergence. I will be able to just grab my iPhone and go - not worrying about also unplugging that extra battery pack and carrying that around with me too.
- 04-13-2007, 11:07 AM #64
Remember how you went off on your rant about how "wrong, wrong, wrong" I was in saying Apple was ahead of the curve in battery technologies and you claimed Compaq actually used a particular bettery technology before Apple.
Well, look at what a friend of mine sent me. A friend who apparently reads TreoCentral.
So in reading this document, you will discover that the Battery that came with the Compaq iPaqs (like the 3100 you mention) actually required a switch - located on the battery itself - that would turn the battery on and off. The battery would need this switch moved to the on position when installing and then moved to the off position when removed. It was also recommended that it be moved to the off position if not being used for a week or more.
The battery you mention also only held up to 80% of capacity (assuming the battery's separate on and off switch was used when required - which requires removing the battery from the case design) after a mere 300 charge cycles.
Then they project from this that the battery, if used 1 hour a day, would last 3 years. This is deplorable performance.
If this iPaq with the Polymer Lithium battery shuts down due to low battery power, the device still has to be rebooted. Additionally, if this iPaq with the Polymer Lithium battery shuts down due to low battery power, you have a mere 36 hours to charge before you loose everything. That is paltry.
So to address this battery's actual life I also must say: paltry and utterly incomparable to what Apple uses.
In referencing the charts in this document, you will find that with the audio disabled and the screen brightness turned down to medium and no wireless technologies being powered, it says the device will get 3:30-4:00 hours.
Now I ask you surur, how can you say this is the same kind (or anywhere even approaching being near the same kind) of battery as what Apple uses in their devices.
I'd also like to thank the other few people that wrote to me with your words of understanding.
- 04-13-2007, 11:08 AM #65
Archie, you are posting on a Treo website and you have the chutzpah to say that you are glad Apple chose to engineer a built in (non-swappable) battery. Let me be the first to tell you that you are alone in that opinion. The Treo 600 drove everyone NUTS with its non-swappable battery.
- 04-13-2007, 11:55 AM #66
Look at the reality of the type devices we are talking about here - smart phones (please, just assume for the sake of argument the iPhone can be called a smart phone). How often do we replace our devices - really - as the "power user" sect of the overall population, how often? About every product cycle. Simple. It's unlikely that, even in a worst case scenario, the iPhone's battery will last less than a year with avereage charge/discharge cycles. You'll know within the 30 day trial period whether or not the device has adequate battery life for your particular needs. If it doesn't, take it back. If the battery is substandard to the point of a short product life, well, we'll all be getting new ones when they start dropping like flies. Probably "improved" ones. Sign me up...
I've had two Treo 600s, three Treo 650s (still have one of each), I'm on my second 8125 (need to replace it due to a few intolerable glitches) - I have NEVER ONCE had to replace my battery or carry a spare. I have a car charger for those rare occurances when the battery doesn't outlast me - and that's with BT on 90% of the time and WiFi on probably 30% of the time. The fact that the iPhone doesn't have a battery cover is an absolute NON-ISSUE for me and it will not be an issue for 95% of all consumers who are contemplating one. The iPod is a good measuring stick for this prediction.
As far as this being a Treo forum; THIS is actually the iPhone forum on a Treo related website. It says so clearly on the header. It's not called the BASH THE iPhone FORUM. That being said, it's also not called the SPECULATE WILDLY ABOUT THE iPhone AND TAKE ALL STATEMENTS AS FACT FORUM.
If the potential for battery issues and lack of a removable one is that disturbing to you, clearly this is not a device that YOU should consider. That doesn't make it a faulty design or anything less than what it is - a device that a large customer base will upgrade every year or so when the newer version is released. I'll go out on a limb here and predict that it'll well exceed all your worst case scenarios and actually be usable...
- 04-13-2007, 12:02 PM #67
Again, Archie, I am starting to worry about you. Debating you is like you coming to a gun fight with a knife..... Even I may be moved to send you a PM of pity :cry:
- 04-13-2007, 12:43 PM #68
- 04-13-2007, 01:43 PM #69
Seriously, speculation is all there is, because no one has seen/heard/looked at an iPhone yet. It's all you do, it's all I do, it's all everyone does right now. If you're gonna criticize, be fair about it.
I will reitierate, you assuming that the iPhone battery will last all day is VERY optimistic of you. I have a hard time believing that I will be able to watch video's, listen to music, surf the web, read and send emails, and make phone calls ALL DAY in one charge cycle every day. Of course there are days that I hardly use my phone, but there are also plenty of days where I use it a lot.
BELIEVE IT WHEN I SEE IT, to make a long story short...
- 04-13-2007, 03:49 PM #70
The hardware of the iPhone? It's the least Apple could have done to enter the high-end cell phone market and expect to be competitive. And I can all but guarantee that their hardware will be out-innovated within maybe 3-6 months, probably less.
And that would have happened regardless if Apple released the iPhone since (gasp) the trend has been to make smartphones thinner and lighter than last year while adding more technology.
The battery thing was a choice they made and it'll be interesting to see how people react to it. But it is not a remarkable feat of engineering. It was simply a choice. I pointed out in another thread how the Helio Ocean (while much thicker due to the dual slider) gets 5.1 hours of talk time and 15 hours of music playback, will be out before the iPhone and has much more technology in it.
- 04-13-2007, 04:19 PM #71
You fail to grasp the extent to which Apple has gone in designing (AND innovating) the iPhone. I have a few more for you.
• Zirconia body to allow for superior radio reception with the antenna enclosed — also giving it a durable shell.
No one has thought to do this and the fact that Apple has and you choose to ignore it reveals much.
• Visual expansion technologies. The OS can expand an area of the touch screen display proximate the location of the touch. This includes any portion of the graphical information like windows, fields, text, dialog boxes, menus, icons, buttons, cursors, UI controls, etc.
So say for example, when your finger is placed over a particular window, field, dialog box, menu, icon, button, tool bar, user interface element, scroll bar, scroll wheel, slider bar, dial, control box, or footnote (all of which have been listed in Apple patents), all of the element or only part of it, as appropriate, is expanded so that they can be easily used by your finger. I have spoken before of this ability in editing text for example; holding your finger over the portion of text you wish to edit to get a blow up/expansion bubble to precisely place the cursor to backspace or insert text or whatever.
I have seen all of these aspects in action and can tell you that there is no speculation in their inclusion of the iPhone.
I mention these additions not because I feel it necessary to prop the iPhone but more so to see how you will discount them as you have with other things that I mention like Apple's use of proximity detection, WHICH, no one else has thought to do.
I am really quite amused by your failure to acknowledge Apple's accomplishments with your sarcastic tones.
- 04-13-2007, 04:32 PM #72
Archie, as always jumping to conclusions. Just because Apple has a patent for the radiotransparent material does not mean they used it. Your awe and faith in Apple is really endearing. Do you pray to them regularly?
Radio reception is solved problem. How about Apple work on upping the specs of the device, e.g. a flash, auto-focus camera, GPS, 3G, you know, the things that matter to people who spend $600 on a phone. I notice this device, which is smaller and only 4mm thicker, has all this and a higher resolution screen, removable storage and removable battery to boot.
- 04-13-2007, 04:49 PM #73
Moore's Law would lead most people to believe Apple's design is at best evolutionary (given the 2 years newer status it has over the Moto Q design or the 6 year advantage over the seemingly unchanging Treo design) - if not a step backwards. Where's the GPS? Where's the removable storage? Were they even trying to be anything more than "pretty?"
- 04-13-2007, 04:55 PM #74
- 04-13-2007, 05:03 PM #75