iPod touch Battery life improvement in 32 gb iPod Touch?

[OCDMacGeek]

According to Macworld, the 32 gb iPod Touch has better battery life. They found that:

"Apple has found a way to squeeze more life out of a battery charge. With the 1.1.1 iPod touch software my iPod touch played music continuously for just under 17 hours—five hours short of Apple’s claim of 22 hours of continuous audio play. My new 32GB iPod touch, running software version 1.1.3, played for 26 hours and 36 minutes—four and a half hours longer than Apple’s estimate."

http://www.macworld.com/article/132034/2008/02/32gbipodtouch.html

Has anyone else experienced this? Does it improve video playback time?

Now that I live outside of AT&T coverage, I might be willing to trade my 8gb iPhone for a 32 gb iPod Touch. But -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- I think the iPhone actually gets better battery life than the iPod Touch?

 

[mrweirdo]

I see one major flaw with that logic as they were comparing 1.1.3 on the 32gb to older firmware on the smaller touch (1.1.1). They should have compared them both tuning 1.1.3 with the software update to be accurate and up to date with what currently ships from apple. For reality I doubt there's any noticeble difference and if there were I would suspect the 32gb might get slightly less battery life due to a bigger memory chip or more chips for the increased capacity.

About your iPhone I would think that the iPod would actualy get beter battery life as it doesn't have the extra cellular circuits in it and runing all the time. You also have the advantage of not having to use that oddly shaped headphone port that sometimes doesn't work well with certain headphones, etc but then again the iPhone has the added benifit of Bluetooth.

 

[OCDMacGeek]

I was advised that if I took the SIM card out, there would be no power wasted from the phone components. However, I don't think that is actually the case. I haven't been getting great battery life even with the SIM card out of my iPhone. Therefore, you might be right that I would really get better battery life with the Touch.

Without the phone, I'm not sure if I will have any use for bluetooth. Therefore, the Touch might really be the better way to go. Now I'm only scared about reports of bad screens.

 

[BrownManUPS]

Without the phone, I'm not sure if I will have any use for bluetooth. Therefore, the Touch might really be the better way to go. Now I'm only scared about reports of bad screens.

You will notice they are slightly dimmer, and you may get 1 or 2 dead pixels. But these aren't going to stop you once you have 22 hours of battery life, and amazing music capability.

 

[wizard]

I was advised that if I took the SIM card out, there would be no power wasted from the phone components. However, I don't think that is actually the case. I haven't been getting great battery life even with the SIM card out of my iPhone. Therefore, you might be right that I would really get better battery life with the Touch.

Without the phone, I'm not sure if I will have any use for bluetooth. Therefore, the Touch might really be the better way to go. Now I'm only scared about reports of bad screens.

If you are looking for good battery life put the Iphone in Airplane mode. That should shut off all the RF circuits.

Now I haven't done so my self so please get back to us. In theory the iPhone should get very good lifetimes if RF is off for the simple reason that it has a better battery than the Touch. Again though test it out for us.

Dave

 

[wizard]

"Apple has found a way to squeeze more life out of a battery charge. With the 1.1.1 iPod touch software my iPod touch played music continuously for just under 17 hours—five hours short of Apple’s claim of 22 hours of continuous audio play. My new 32GB iPod touch, running software version 1.1.3, played for 26 hours and 36 minutes—four and a half hours longer than Apple’s estimate."

There is a very good possibility that the NAND Flash chip has been switched over to Samsungs latest Flash technology. This could explain the battery lifetime gains. However it could be BS too.

Look at it this way there are to many variable in the equation. Mac World didn't really do any extensive testing, nor testing to remove the variables. As has been noted the OS revisions are significant. Also one has to realize that batteries can vary significantly and the lithium power sources have been improving at like 9% a year. The extra run time the writer alluded to might very well be real on all 16 GB samples but it says nothing of the other machines in the current family.

Dave

 

[shigzeo]

i got 20 hours with my ipod touch and that was with a little wireless work as well. i think that apple have done a wonderful job estimating battery times. my ipon nano 3g gets over 30 hours (just barely over 30 hours on full charge)

 

[Drew830]

Has there been any new discoveries since this last post that prove the battery findings with the 1.1.3 firmware upgrade to be true?