Translation: Next year's iPhones will be thinner yet, with same battery life.
But they can't yet make the camera any thinner?
Plus, given recent history (iPhone 7, 8, X) they haven't got any thinner, and instead battery life has increased.
Translation: Next year's iPhones will be thinner yet, with same battery life.
Maybe my reading comprehension is a bit off tonight, but don't those first two paragraphs contradict each other?
"...10 percent more battery power if Apple and LG Chem are able to deploy a one-cell design for the device's L-shaped battery, as opposed to the two-cell battery used in the iPhone X..."
"...the more space efficient two-cell design would allow Apple to boost battery capacity from 2716 mAh in the iPhone X to somewhere between 2900 and 3000 mAh for next year's 5.8-inch iPhone"
Weird. I have a 6+, a 6s+, and a 7 on my desk right now. The 6+ is the thinnest of the three.Translation: Next year's iPhones will be thinner yet, with same battery life.
Neither. It’s serendipity.Consumer Reports rags on iPhones X's battery life:
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/12/05/iphone-x-consumer-reports-ranking-below-iphone-8/
Ming-Chi Kuo suddenly claims the next one will be better; coincidence or damage control?
Precisely why the deafening chorus of “iPhone X+” has already been heard from the Foxconn assembly factories on the shores of Lake Mendota all the way over to Cupertino. It won’t be long now. 11 months and counting before we all get the iPhone X we really wanted.The essence of this article is that Apple would be listening to customer complaints (via its chinese sensor testicle Ming) which would be astonishingly good news.
So happy hiking to the hardliners here: keep up the good work.
We're Steve's longer arm !
There is SO much wrong with this article.
1.) Not 10% more powerful. It would be 10% more energy.
2.) Apple can already make non rectangular batteries. They advertised it well with the 'terraced battery'.
3.) Apple does not need LG to do squat. They get most of their cells from revolving smaller Chinese suppliers.
The issue isn't a technological one. It's cost. Non-rectangular cells mean that the electrodes cannot be 'wound'. This requires stacking electrodes which produces a lot more waste and requires a lot more automation.
what are you talking about? so how the essential phone exist then?
Life is full of tradeoffs. Just use a flip phone and you'll get your weeks of battery life.I wish phone batteries would last for days or even weeks instead of a few hours. I even bring a battery pack with me with the amount of times I have to charge my phone per day.
#Batteries4LastLonger
I know, right?BREAKING NEWS! Better battery on newer version!
I bet they come with a faster processor too.
Doesn't have anything to do with thickness....Translation: Next year's iPhones will be thinner yet, with same battery life.
There is SO much wrong with this article.
1.) Not 10% more powerful. It would be 10% more energy.
2.) Apple can already make non rectangular batteries. They advertised it well with the 'terraced battery'.
3.) Apple does not need LG to do squat. They get most of their cells from revolving smaller Chinese suppliers.
The issue isn't a technological one. It's cost. Non-rectangular cells mean that the electrodes cannot be 'wound'. This requires stacking electrodes which produces a lot more waste and requires a lot more automation.
Consumer Reports rags on iPhones X's battery life:
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/12/05/iphone-x-consumer-reports-ranking-below-iphone-8/
Ming-Chi Kuo suddenly claims the next one will be better; coincidence or damage control?
Just curious, why do you come to MacRumors if you’re not interested in rumors about new developments? Sure, the phones improve every year and we don’t need to read detailed speculation/leaks about every little thing, but that’s why a site like this exists. For those who are interested.BREAKING NEWS! Better battery on newer version!
I bet they come with a faster processor too.