Exactly why I will not be buying another iPhone after my last 5 iPhones.. Sad..
Please don't.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone 6 May See Only Modest Battery Capacity Boost as Apple Pursues Ultra-Slim Designs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Please don't.
The Apple store I referenced is no longer busy. There was a time you had to breathe up and down instead of in and out. The store was busy. No longer an issue. You could roll a bowling ball in there and not incur a liability.
Well said. They could do it if they wanted to, but they really are hung up on the thin form factor for the iPhone and either there isn't enough room for a bigger battery or the tech isn't just there yet to allow great battery life with a very thin phone. Whatever the reason, it is a conscientious decision to do so. Apple feels the battery life is good enough in the iPhone, where in the iPad and Macbooks, they made sure it was the best.
If they are strong arming customers to buy things, that probably explains why they aren't busy now.
It appears that many people misunderstand the situation with the batteries. It is in Apple interest to keep the battery as small as possible because this minimizes iPhone Bill Of Materials and thus maximizes Apple profits. It is the same thing as not having NFC or sticking with USB 2.0 in Macs for a year longer than everybody else. One would expect better understanding on this forum.
The poor numbers with talk/tethering is most likely due to the cellular chipset/antenna. not so much the screen
Unlike the A7 CPU, which has been engineered by apple for supreme power efficiency, or IOS which also has a lot of efficiencies built in. The cellular chipset/antennna is more of an "off the shelf" component that most likely is very similar (or even the same) to the one in the Galaxy S5 (or any other smartphone). And being similar/same it uses similar/same amounts of electricity to run., This is where the Iphone's 45% smaller battery shows.
This is due to the fact that apple doesn't have any "special" efficiencies built into these components ( Again, because these are "off the shelf")
Where does this claim about A7/iOS efficiencies come from? As we all know A7/iOS7 combination (iPhone 5S) brought us worse battery life than the previous generation of hardware/software (iPhone 5) had.
Look who's talking Mr I_Can't_Write_more_than_one_sentence
And if you are wondering who that is.
It is >>>you<<<
( because you can't write more than one sentence )
Even if processor uses less power...
Even if the processor and OS use less power, we want more battery life. The iPhone 5s still has much, much less battery life than most of us would like. We should be charging our phones every few days, not every day or twice a day.
Apple, we don't care about making them any thinner. Unless you have some secret information about a coming pocket size trend that we don't know about, stop obsessing about it being thinner. It's actually getting kinda hard to hold them when they're that thin anyway. Triple or quadruple the battery life before making them any thinner.
Even if the processor and OS use less power, we want more battery life. The iPhone 5s still has much, much less battery life than most of us would like. We should be charging our phones every few days, not every day or twice a day.
Apple, we don't care about making them any thinner. Unless you have some secret information about a coming pocket size trend that we don't know about, stop obsessing about it being thinner. It's actually getting kinda hard to hold them when they're that thin anyway. Triple or quadruple the battery life before making them any thinner.
Apple already does this quite well (well in theory anyway, I had an iPhone 5 and could never get any longer than 4.5 hrs even on wifi), the problem is they've taken this as an opportunity to shave the battery to paltry sizes.
That said, if this report is true, this generation is getting a nice sized bump with more efficient processors that should make it get pretty good battery life.
http://www.extremetech.com/computin...mes-more-powerful-recharges-1000-times-faster
Looks like wall hugging will soon be a thing of the past! Let's just hope that apple doesn't choose to make the battery 30x smaller and stick us with crappy battery life.
Looks like wall hugging will soon be a thing of the past! Let's just hope that apple doesn't choose to make the battery 30x smaller and stick us with crappy battery life.
I don't doubt your examples, but they are anecdotal. Your personal experience (n=1) is extremely inconclusive. And being able to find other people that share your complaint (i.e. this thread) is also extremely inconclusive.
The fact is that every manufacturing process has fallout. Some of it gets captured during inspection, but there is no inspection process on earth that captures 100% of defective product. In the (rare) case of 100% inspection, it is widely accepted that your inspection remains only 80% effective.
Any company worth its salt is constantly implementing process controls and improvements to ensure at least 95% confidence in production yields. I work in the medical device industry where we require 99% confidence, and we know Apple has money to burn so we could probably use the 99% figure but let's stick with 95%.
So Apple is poised to sell nearly 200 million iPhones in fiscal 2014, but let's use 100 million for some easy napkin math. As such, we can safely assume, and likely at minimum, the following:
0.20 * (100,000,000 * .05) = 1 Million Defective iPhones/year
This is a baseline expectation, and it's someone's job to manage it (probably many someones). That's a million people every YEAR that are going to have some reason to complain about their iPhone. It is for this reason that your anecdotal experience means nothing. It's a drop in the bucket. And this is why, for a whole year, you can walk into any Apple Store and get a brand new replacement phone on the spot for almost any performance complaint.
It's actually incredibly impressive how they handle customer facing manufacturing defects. And yet people end up with defective gear and just sit on it, complaining in forums across the internets...
Anyway, as I said, I don't doubt your examples; it's just that you had previously stated your examples as if they represented indisputable facts about all iPhones. So, y'know, that was just kinda weird.
No, it's really not clear at all. Or can you point to a proper "real world battery" study to support your claims? Android forums don't count. And nevermind that numerous android manufacturers have been proven to cheat on various specification tests.
The honest truth is that folks with iPhones just use their phones more; there is a ton of evidence on this thanks to the huge discrepancy in market share vs. actual usage. And if you use it more, it's going to run out of battery more often.
Thank you for the valuable insight. Given that (newly discovered) fact, you would think they could also lower the BOM by using an A6 CPU instead of the A8, a 640x480 screen and stick with 3G instead of 4G. All of those parts are cheaper than the more expensive parts that Apple has chosen to use instead. So your advice would be that Apple should never have chosen these more expensive parts?
OR.... could it be that in order to market a product against competition, capitalism demands that companies give users the best value they can for a buck?
DUH.
God I hope you were being sarcastic but I just saw no trace of a smirk in your post.
Agreed -- and this is supported by the benchmarks that show the iPhone 5/5C (and to a lesser extent the 5S) near the top of battery life despite going up against phones with 2600 mah batteries and up.
However, I hope Apple is carefully considering that iPhone users are more likely to be power users. Although the 5S has battery life on par with many Android flagships, it's not good enough for a device that we occasionally have to rely upon extensively without having an opportunity to recharge in between.
Personally, I had been really hopeful that Apple would be able to take the opportunity to deliver unmatched battery life in the iPhone 6 by increasing capacity ~50% and decreasing power consumption in the move to the 20nm TSMC process.
Consumers love thin mobile devices, but studies have shown that the average iPhone user (and not just power users) is much more concerned with battery life than the phone being too thick. If Apple were willing to offer it, I think a lot of us would happily pay an extra $100 for a slightly thicker version of the iPhone 6 with a larger battery. Motorola did this a few years ago with the Droid Razr Maxx. Unfortunately, I can't see Apple ever doing this.
On the plus side, if the 6 is only 6.1mm thick, then the battery case makers will have plenty of room to make a monster battery pack while still leaving the phone with case as thin as most Android flagships are bare.
I think everyone should stop focusing on "battery size" instead of "battery life". They two means different thing. Increasing "battery life" is not provided merely by "battery size". A good engineering of both hardware and software components can achieve that too. But now you may ask. 'why not increasing battery size as well as good engineering so we can have double, triple, better battery life?' Well I also have someone asking, 'why not increasing battery life while still making the phone thinner?' I suppose the answer is 'balance'.
Of course you can have a little of both when you're moving down a process node, but IMO (and I suspect this is the majority opinion among iPhone users) there was hardly a pressing need to go even thinner, and a much greater need to significantly increase the battery life.
Hopefully Apple will be able to push power consumption down a lot further than expected so that the phone will sip power. But if that's the case, I wouldn't expect A8 to be a major performance improvement over A7, except on the GPU side (which will be at least partially offset by needing to push a higher resolution display).