PDA

View Full Version : Push email battery drain - Myth?




bbplayer5
Aug 15, 2008, 10:10 AM
Is it a myth that enabling push on your phone drains the battery? I have a low volume mobile me account on the phone, but was wondering if that is STILL draining the battery? I see people turning their push off for this reason... Any truth to this? I was under the assumption that push was to promote good battery life?



andyblila
Aug 15, 2008, 10:16 AM
I for one THINK, I'm not sure, THINK that it doesn't affect battery drain too much. I leave 3G on all day with Push enabled on two accounts and location services turned on. I have at least 3-4 hours of usage time every day as well. It is off of the charger from 6 AM until 11PM and I frequently have more than half a battery left every night. :D

bigmouth
Aug 15, 2008, 10:16 AM
Is it a myth that enabling push on your phone drains the battery? I have a low volume mobile me account on the phone, but was wondering if that is STILL draining the battery? I see people turning their push off for this reason... Any truth to this? I was under the assumption that push was to promote good battery life?
No, it's not a myth -- push drains battery. Some people get confused becuase push was originally designed to conserve power on the iPhone. But that is no longer the case -- push will cut your battery life by about 20%.

MadGoat
Aug 15, 2008, 10:18 AM
I keep 3g and push on , my battery hasn't suffered at all.

Compared to regulare pulls, I'm saving battery life.

bbplayer5
Aug 15, 2008, 10:20 AM
How about this... If im out and I get a new contact and put it in my phone. After that, I turn push ON for a minute to let it push my new contact to the cloud, then turn it back off. Will it work that way?

dizzy13
Aug 15, 2008, 10:22 AM
Well of course push will use more batter than manual (as long as you dont check it every 10 mins manually)

If you put fetch on and have it check ever 15 or 30 mins you will drain your battery faster than push. So if you want know about your emails without checking manually, push is the way to go. You get instant notification as well as saving battery by only getting messages when they come in and not checking the server every 15 mins

bbplayer5
Aug 15, 2008, 10:23 AM
Well of course push will use more batter than manual (as long as you dont check it every 10 mins manually)

If you put fetch on and have it check ever 15 or 30 mins you will drain your battery faster than push. So if you want know about your emails without checking manually, push is the way to go. You get instant notification as well as saving battery by only getting messages when they come in and not checking the server every 15 mins


Perfect, thats what I wanted to know :) I love push, and cant see myself turning it off!

TWLreal
Aug 15, 2008, 10:49 AM
To those saying push actually saves them battery life. This 16 pages thread would beg to differ:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=533087

People are getting longer battery life with push disabled.

wako
Aug 15, 2008, 11:14 AM
Some people get confused becuase push was originally designed to conserve power on the iPhone.



actually "push" was never designed specifically to conserve power for the iPhone. In fact when "push" there was no iPhone.

I think what you ment was the 2.0 software was designed with push, to conserve power on the iPhone. :p



On another note, Push DOES INDEED save battery life... FOR SOME. Before push, if you pulled your email manually, obviously push would use more power. But to those people who polled servers automatically every 15 minutes before push came out for the iPhone, IT DOES conserve battery, by A LOT.

GNice
Aug 15, 2008, 11:28 AM
It's not a myth. I can tell you absolutely without any doubt that it does have an effect. Is it huge? Well that depends if you use it in conjunction with Edge or 3G.

My BB Pearl only supports Edge...if I use my iPhone w/push over Edge the battery drain is very comparable to my BB. i.e. - not bad at all. It's more than if I turn it off, but really not a huge deal at all.

Now if I turn on 3G it drains a LOT faster.

So my conclusion is push in and of itself does effect battery life, but not in a major, major way...it's the technology you pair it with (Edge or 3G) that seems to have a much greater effect. At least in my case.

YMMV!

kdarling
Aug 15, 2008, 12:13 PM
I was under the assumption that push was to promote good battery life?

Push's PRIMARY purpose is to get information to you as quickly as possible.

Using less battery (than a constant Fetch) is a secondary consideration, and doesn't necessarily happen. A push could easily end up pinging the server just as often as a fetch does, because it must keep the network connection open.

For example, on a EDGE phone, it falls down if you get a phone call that interrupts the data connection. Mobile carriers can also have as low as a ten minute connection timeout somewhere in their system, forcing a ping more often.

Note: We cannot compare push on the Blackberry to IMAP or Exchange push. Push on a BB does not require pinging the server to keep a connection open.

bluenoise
Aug 15, 2008, 01:15 PM
I'm using Push as it seemed to have a rather negligible effect on my battery life. Other factors, such as 3G and Location services seem to have a bigger impact on battery life for me.

cellocello
Aug 15, 2008, 01:19 PM
Push's PRIMARY purpose is to get information to you as quickly as possible.

Using less battery (than a constant Fetch) is a secondary consideration, and doesn't necessarily happen. A push could easily end up pinging the server just as often as a fetch does, because it must keep the network connection open.

For example, on a EDGE phone, it falls down if you get a phone call that interrupts the data connection. Mobile carriers can also have as low as a ten minute connection timeout somewhere in their system, forcing a ping more often.

Note: We cannot compare push on the Blackberry to IMAP or Exchange push. Push on a BB does not require pinging the server to keep a connection open.

+1 on this post. This person knows of what they speak.

(also, I should point out, I have push on an email account and my battery is life routinely 5+ hour usage, 24+ hour standby, with plenty of battery bar left)

ubersalad
Aug 15, 2008, 01:25 PM
Someone else pointed this out earlier in a thread about blackberry and iphone.

Apparently iphone's push method is really a workaround, which the phone keeps the server connection alive by ping. Essentially it's the same as if you have the setting set as fetch at 5 second interval.

I am merely paraphrasing, but the above would explain why push drains battery.

cellocello
Aug 15, 2008, 01:26 PM
Someone else pointed this out earlier in a thread about blackberry and iphone.

Apparently iphone's push method is really a workaround, which the phone keeps the server connection alive by ping. Essentially it's the same as if you have the setting set as fetch at 5 second interval.

I am merely paraphrasing, but the above would explain why push drains battery.

There's no way this is right.

Push does not drain the battery like fetching every 5 minutes (let alone every 5 seconds).

ubersalad
Aug 15, 2008, 01:28 PM
There's no way this is right.

Push does not drain the battery like fetching every 5 minutes (let alone every 5 seconds).
Why don't you offer your explanation.

I'll do some digging for support.

cellocello
Aug 15, 2008, 01:31 PM
Why don't you offer your explanation.

I'll do some digging for support.

Well ... I mean from just use and real-world testing.

Have you tried setting your phone to fetch every 5 minutes, and then checked on it after sleeping for 8 hours? Is that the same as having push turned on and leaving it for 8 hours? On my phone it isn't.

(But, seeing as how some people on here need to restore their iPhones 13 times everyday .. I guess anything's possible)

ubersalad
Aug 15, 2008, 01:34 PM
Well ... I mean from just use and real-world testing.

Have you tried setting your phone to fetch every 5 minutes, and then checked on it after sleeping for 8 hours? Is that the same as having push turned on and leaving it for 8 hours? On my phone it isn't.

(But, seeing as how some people on here need to restore their iPhones 13 times everyday .. I guess anything's possible)
I guess you don't understand what I said. Fetch on iphone can only be set at 15 minute minimum. I am saying that "push" is essentially fetch without interval, and thus having it run in the background non-stop, it drains your battery. This explanation makes the most sense why push drains battery. Similar to why "location service" also drains the battery.

cellocello
Aug 15, 2008, 01:35 PM
I guess you don't understand what I said. Fetch on iphone can only be set at 15 minute minimum. I am saying that "push" is essentially fetch without interval, and thus having it run in the background non-stop, it drains your battery. This explanation makes the most sense why push drains battery. Similar to why "location service" also drains the battery.

Ok fine ... change my "5" to a "15"; my point remains.


EDIT - and no, Push is not fetch without interval. Think of Push more like SMS. SMSes get sent ("pushed") to your phone, your phone isn't asking ("fetching") the network every second to see if there's a text message waiting - the network "pushes" those to your phone.

ubersalad
Aug 15, 2008, 01:37 PM
Ok fine ... change my "5" to a "15"; my point remains.


EDIT - and no, Push is not fetch without interval. Think of Push more like SMS. SMSes get sent ("pushed") to your phone, your phone isn't asking ("fetching") the network every second to see if there's a text message waiting - the network "pushes" those to your phone.
What point? Are you comparing leaving the phone on fetch at 15 minute interval and having push on?

Running fetch every 15 minutes as oppose to having push run in the background non-stop is not the same, how do they compare?

Edit as well: I am merely copying someone else' thought, which makes sense to me. That's why I said iPhone push is a "workaround", not a true push. If it is indeed a true push, there's no reason why it drains the battery if it's a true push.

cellocello
Aug 15, 2008, 01:39 PM
What point? Are you comparing leaving the phone on fetch at 15 minute interval and having push on?

Running fetch every 15 minutes as oppose to having push run in the background non-stop is not the same, how do they compare?

Dude ... how can you say that Push drains the battery as much as setting fetch to 15 minutes?

Just, for your own sake, do a little test over the weekend - and YOU tell US what your findings are.

andreab35
Aug 15, 2008, 01:39 PM
Personally, I haven't seen a difference in my battery life when I have 3 mail accounts to push.

However, I wonder since it runs all the time, would push affect the iPhone's performance?

cellocello
Aug 15, 2008, 01:40 PM
Edit as well: I am merely copying someone else' thought, which makes sense to me. That's why I said iPhone push is a "workaround", not a true push. If it is indeed a true push, there's no reason why it drains the battery if it's a true push.

Right, exactly -- push barely drains the battery. We agree!

ubersalad
Aug 15, 2008, 01:42 PM
Right, exactly -- push barely drains the battery. We agree!
Buddy, again, you are not arguing with me, I am paraphrasing. I know push drains battery, it is tested and proven.

This is a phone dude, settle down...

I will refer you the original poster who has said that push is really a long fetch:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=536002

cellocello
Aug 15, 2008, 01:48 PM
Buddy, again, you are not arguing with me, I am paraphrasing. I know push drains battery, it is tested and proven.

This is a phone dude, settle down...

I will refer you the original poster who has said that push is really a long fetch:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=536002

haha, settle down? Man I'm just trying to tell ya the guy you're paraphrasing may be wrong. No all caps or flames from me, homes. :cool:

But still ... do a full day with Push/off and Fetch/15. Then do a full day of Push/On and Fetch/Off. Maybe you'll see what I've seen .....

cgray24
Aug 15, 2008, 01:49 PM
I was having serious power problems lately barely getting in a days worth before having to rechange and thats with very modest actual usage.

So I decided to start daily testing of best performance. Starting with everything off and slowly adding services each day and judging the difference. Turns out having wifi off all the time saved me hours of battery life. I ended up with Push turned back on (one an exchange account) and fetch (for the other three email accounts) to every 15 mins and am very happy with the battery life now. Probaly could go two days before recharging now.



Just annoying turning on wifi when i get home everyday, wish there was a shortcut.

Hutch1
Aug 15, 2008, 01:52 PM
How about this... If im out and I get a new contact and put it in my phone. After that, I turn push ON for a minute to let it push my new contact to the cloud, then turn it back off. Will it work that way?

Yes bet what your actually doing is Fetch manully so why not just set it that way.

ubersalad
Aug 15, 2008, 01:59 PM
haha, settle down? Man I'm just trying to tell ya the guy you're paraphrasing may be wrong. No all caps or flames from me, homes. :cool:

But still ... do a full day with Push/off and Fetch/15. Then do a full day of Push/On and Fetch/Off. Maybe you'll see what I've seen .....
You are pretty serious about this that's all, the whole thing about "I am absolutely right, you are absolutely wrong".

Anyhow, I have tested it obviously, and I agree push does drain the battery. Perhaps you receive only a few emails a day, whereas I get hundreds of emails.

cellocello
Aug 15, 2008, 02:01 PM
You are pretty serious about this that's all, the whole thing about "I am absolutely right, you are absolutely wrong".

Anyhow, I have tested it obviously, and I agree push does drain the battery. Perhaps you receive only a few emails a day, whereas I get hundreds of emails.

::shrug::

Guess so.

VTMac
Aug 15, 2008, 02:19 PM
There is no one size fits all answer to whether "push" or "pull" will save battery. Let's start with an explanation of how ActiveSync and Mobileme "push" actually work.

Both make a call to the server essentially saying "I'm ready for mail for this person". But instead of returning immediately, the server just keeps the connection open. The client (iPhone) and server are both just waiting in the state until one of 2 things happen. Either the server gets mail and completes the response to the client by delivering mail, or the server times out. When the server times out, it responds to the client saying "didn't get any mail, ask again." The client will then immediately initiate a new request and the process repeats itself. This is how it works. If you don't believe it, I direct you to msdn.microsoft.com to check out all the technical details on implementing Exchange Active Sync clients.

So "push" is actually a form of pull on the iPhone (and any Exchange Active Sync based phone for that matter.)

Now, to the question of battery life. If you get lots of mail in a day, let's say on average about 1 email every 5 minutes for a total of (12 mails/hr * 12 hours), that means your doing the equivalent of a "pull" every 5 minutes or about 144 pulls in a 12 hour period. This obviously is much more activity than pulling mail every 15 minutes. Accordingly battery life will be worse in this scenario with push mail. Now if you recieved the exact same number of mails, but the mails all came in at once and were delivered in 1 request, the hit on battery life would be much lower.

In general though, using a less frequent pull interval (say 1 hour) will result in better battery life than push, regardless of the rate and amount of mail recieved. This is because generally the server timeouts are configured for something on the order of 10-30 minutes for this type of "push".

Now if you only get 10-20 emails a day and you are comparing "push" to pull every 15 minutes, you'll likely not seem a significant difference in battery life.

So why doesn't "push" actually have the server contact the phone directly. In a word - patents. RIM (Blackberry) have patents on that mode of "real" push. Hence their push is the best/most efficient solution on the market.

spartanrob
Aug 15, 2008, 02:22 PM
Here is my experience.
with firmware 2.0:
I have Exchange Push set up for work and a Gmail account.
Push on and Fetch set to 1 hour, my usage and standby time were exactly the same and i would get 6 hours at most with moderate use

With Push off and fetch set to 15 minutes my batter lasts for days and my usage/standby times are dramatically different.

Ever since i updated to 2.01 and Jailbroke my phone, i can turn push on and my usage/standby times are much different but the battery is not as good as with push off. But, much better than before the update. I'm going to run the same test next week now that i'm jailbroken on 2.01.

so for me, on firmware 2.0, push was absolutely a problem (btw, 3g or EDGE, it didn't make a difference, i'm on 3g 90% of the time)

cellocello
Aug 15, 2008, 02:26 PM
There is no one size fits all answer to whether "push" or "pull" will save battery. Let's start with an explanation of how ActiveSync and Mobileme "push" actually work.

Both make a call to the server essentially saying "I'm ready for mail for this person". But instead of returning immediately, the server just keeps the connection open. The client (iPhone) and server are both just waiting in the state until one of 2 things happen. Either the server gets mail and completes the response to the client by delivering mail, or the server times out. When the server times out, it responds to the client saying "didn't get any mail, ask again." The client will then immediately initiate a new request and the process repeats itself. This is how it works. If you don't believe it, I direct you to msdn.microsoft.com to check out all the technical details on implementing Exchange Active Sync clients.

So "push" is actually a form of pull on the iPhone (and any Exchange Active Sync based phone for that matter.)

Now, to the question of battery life. If you get lots of mail in a day, let's say on average about 1 email every 5 minutes for a total of (12 mails/hr * 12 hours), that means your doing the equivalent of a "pull" every 5 minutes or about 144 pulls in a 12 hour period. This obviously is much more activity than pulling mail every 15 minutes. Accordingly battery life will be worse in this scenario with push mail. Now if you recieved the exact same number of mails, but the mails all came in at once and were delivered in 1 request, the hit on battery life would be much lower.

In general though, using a less frequent pull interval (say 1 hour) will result in better battery life than push, regardless of the rate and amount of mail recieved. This is because generally the server timeouts are configured for something on the order of 10-30 minutes for this type of "push".

Now if you only get 10-20 emails a day and you are comparing "push" to pull every 15 minutes, you'll likely not seem a significant difference in battery life.

So why doesn't "push" actually have the server contact the phone directly. In a word - patents. RIM (Blackberry) have patents on that mode of "real" push. Hence their push is the best/most efficient solution on the market.

That's a great post .. I wish I could "digg" it up or something.

So how is this new stuff coming in September going to work? IM (MSN, etc.) conversations won't be very "real-time" if Apple isn't allowed to push messages out to the phone in real-time. Any thoughts?

VTMac
Aug 15, 2008, 02:58 PM
That's a great post .. I wish I could "digg" it up or something.

So how is this new stuff coming in September going to work? IM (MSN, etc.) conversations won't be very "real-time" if Apple isn't allowed to push messages out to the phone in real-time. Any thoughts?

The new notification service from Apple will only be utilized while the application in question is not running. (ie. not the foreground application). So in the case of an IM client, while you are actively using the IM client, the notification service will not be used. But when your using another application, say the iPod, one of the last things the IM client will do is ask the apple notification service to notify it when there are messages. Every application needing background notifications will do the same. The advantage of this approach over true background apps is that instead of having N applications making and receiving requests, they can all ride on the same "long pull" (as described above). This is much more efficient then each application making their own calls. But that is the key point. It is more efficient than apps each making their own calls, but it is not more efficient than NO background notifications. So yes, this will definitely reduce battery life. It will just reduce it less than if the apps had all been running in the background.

Now the downside is that it's really a "near-time" notification system. It will be fine (my guess is less than 5 sec) for things like IM clients. But lets say you had a stock application that was going to capture real time stock data and perform some sort of analysis. This isn't going to work with this notification system. Anything that truly requires "real-time" background notification (less then .5 sec) isn't going to be covered adequately by this system.

My guess is the there will be much rejoicing when the notification system goes live (because it will work) followed by much pissing & moaning when people realize this is yet another battery drain. While email does not "have" to be instant. Instant Message kinda does. So turning it "off" isn't an option to save battery as with email. So I suspect their will be even greater pressure on battery life.

I'd buy stock in 3rd party iPhone chargers ... lol.

cellocello
Aug 15, 2008, 03:07 PM
So, the notification system will use the same faux-push that's currently in use? And it'll try to batch things together?

Man, multiple IM convo's could become a giant drain if that's the case...

kdarling
Aug 15, 2008, 05:14 PM
Whether or not Push uses up a lot of battery, depends to a great extent upon the network path, some links of which I'll show below. (I've left out NATs, proxies, caches, etc.)

phone <-> Tower <-> Switching Centers <-> Internet <-> Firewall <-> Server

Exchange and IMAP Push depend on EVERY link in the path keeping the connection open.

To open the path, the phone pings the server. Among other things related to IP connections and SSL, this gives the server the phone's IP address, necessary for a reply.

If EVERY link in the path kept the connection open FOREVER, then Push would only have to ping the server once... then wait as long as it takes for a notification (server reply).

But in real life (at least for now), some link in the chain will (to conserve resources) drop its piece of the connection. Some might wait thirty minutes before dropping. But more often, one will give up in ten minutes or even less.

So whatever the shortest time is before a link in the network path stops working, is how often the phone must ping the server to keep the Push reply connection open.

Depending on where you are, and what you're connecting to, that could indeed be 20-30 minutes, and you'll get good battery life, obviously better than 15 minute Fetches.

For other locations, that could be 5-10 minutes, and you'll get horrible battery life on Push.

This is why different people get different results at different places.

alFR
Aug 15, 2008, 05:31 PM
If anyone wants to know a bit more about how the push system works (in fairly easy-to-understand terms) there's a series of articles here (http://littlesandpit.blogspot.com/search/label/Direct%20Push%20Guide?max-results=100).