Next Generation iPhone Battery Only Marginally Higher Capacity

[krigsmakten]

I'm using a 4S at the moment - had a 4 and a 3GS previously - battery life is pathetically short on all devices. I have chargers everywhere in the house and in all our cars.

When my wife's Blackberry died, I popped her SIM card in my Treo 650 (a smartphone from almost 10 years ago) - it STILL has great battery life - and way better reception than either the Blackberry or any of the iPhones. That, folks, is SAD. WTF is Apple doing with all that R&D money?

I would GLADLY sacrifice some lack of design coolness for a user-swappable battery. For a firm headquartered in "green" California, it is INEXCUSABLE to design in Apple's current fashion - a user-replaceable battery is the right thing to do.

 

[topmounter]

Who needs more battery when you have a "Solar Panel Case" and "Hat Dock".

I've never had any battery issues with my iP4 though (unless I forget to stick on the charger for more than one night).

 

[speedyg256]

Exactly! lol. Yes and the iphone has siri with IOS5. Like I said in my earlier post. Just because the iPad has LTE doesn't mean the next iphone will just yet.

I agree

 

[nuckinfutz]

I agree

You do?

 

[wizard]

You guys haven't even seen the new iPhone yet!

I feel the same way while waiting with my iPhone 4. This "new iPhone" is not impressive.

Beyond that the whole point of iPhone and it's impression upon people is in the software. To that end you can't yet find better software running on a cell phone and iOS 6 just takes the lead farther away from the pack.

By the way I'm also an iPhone 4 owner and frankly don't feel the need to upgrade at the moment. If you look at iPhone as a tool, the need to upgrade only become compelling when the technology has advanced significantly to offer real advantages over the one you are currently using. If iPhone is in your possession to prop up your vanity then you have other issues to address. In all likely hood, if half the leaks are true, this coming iPhone will be ground breaking technology wise. If that doesn't impress you then just keep your current iPhone.

 

[dBeats]

Ok, just maybe, the screen and the phone itself is more power efficient? Colin Chapman made cars lighter, not engines more powerful. This was also to save weight on the fuel as he used smaller engines.

 

[JS82712]

Then take/send it to an Apple to get it checked instead of moaning about it here?

how do you know that I haven't?
I've gone through 3 replacements.
(what's next mr. fanboy,, are you gonna tell me that I'm not "using it right")

 

[zorinlynx]

To all those with iPhone battery life problems:

Are you running Skype? Skype is the number one cause of battery problems among friends and colleagues with iPhones.

It is a very badly designed application: Rather than register and use push notifications like most apps, it maintains continuous contact with the server, transmitting and receiving constantly and draining the battery.

When I tried using Skype, being signed in from the phone meant that my battery would be down to about 35% by the end of the workday with minimal use. With no Skype, my battery is only down to about 93% at the end of the workday if I hardly use the phone.

So check if you left your Skype signed in. Skype can be told to automatically sign out after X minutes of inactivity; it's in the settings.

 

[monkor]

Apple has historically made a big deal out of long battery life in its portable devices. I think, if the battery is going to remain relatively small, this must indicate that the device will be very efficient.

We are getting to the point with smartphones where higher specs - more cores, better GPUs, more vRAM, are starting to show minimal returns. The 4S is significantly more powerful than the 4 but, when the most popular apps are messaging services, skype, Tiny Wings and a bunch of note taking and organisational apps, the difference rarely shows up to the end user. Even when you do play high end games, does anyone feel that the graphics in games like Infinity Blade are poor? Does Real Racing 2 look ugly to you? The current hardware still has lots of potential - Real Racing 3 looks amazing and that will be running on the hardware currently in the 4S and 3rd Gen iPad. There's no need to ramp things up even more - after all, this is still a smartphone, not a home console or a laptop. People don't need quad core CPUs to read e-books, play Angry Birds and watch YouTube clips. But a slimmer device with good battery life? That's something that we can all appreciate.

I think Apple's new iPhone will eschew faster, bigger and more powerful and, instead, opt for slimmer, lighter and more efficient. If you're looking for an iPhone you can boast to your friends about and compare GeekBench scores, this isn't the phone for you. Wait, what am I thinking, people who boast about GeekBench scores don't have any friends!

If we assume the new iPhone will carry the smaller, 32nm A5 chip and will include the lower powered IGZO screen and the new generation LTE chipsets, then it's reasonable to think that the battery life on this device will be better than on the 4S while increasing performance a modest amount within a smaller, lighter product. Think about it this way, Apple refused to have LTE early on precisely because the battery life would be badly impacted. They made the same choice about 3G on the first iPhone. Do you really think that same company would go ahead and design a device with terrible battery life? That just doesn't make sense.

#MissingThePoint

Slimmer and lighter has absolutely nothing to do with being "more efficient." They're literally two different topics that are relatively unrelated.

You want more efficient? How about being able to efficiently manage power so that my phone can stay on for over a day? And I'd like more efficient speeds (like 4G LTE) without sacrificing battery life. I know that's a lot to ask (it's not), but don't tell me that a thinner phone is better than either of those. I fail to see a purpose for having a thinner phone at all, quite frankly. Apple opted out of 4G LTE for the 4S and that battery life still sucks, so I fail to see where the worthwhile tradeoff took place. Not to mention the Droid RAZR Maxx absolutely pummeling the 4S in terms of battery life and thinness. If they figured out a way to do it, and Apple procures only a marginally better battery this time around, people have a right to be upset. If you think Apple has revolutionized the 4G LTE chipsets, you're just wrong. It's still a battery hog, and that tiny battery being forced to power an even bigger Retina Display to boot has the potential to be disastrous.

And if you think that quad core processors have nothing to do with battery saving, then you literally don't know what you're talking about. While the results vary and experts agree and disagree on the implementation of quad core chips and their ability to save battery, the results aren't minimal at all. Quad core processors are more efficient, and can deliver an overall better experience when the OS is optimized to utilize them properly. So when you're playing Angry Birds or whatever fun games people play nowadays, your phone works even LESS than it did, saving you more battery. If you want efficiency, you should laud speed improvements that can slice load times in half.

I've got plenty of friends, and I'll still run benchmarks on a phone, donk. It's called following up on company claims and ensuring that what I've paid for is worth the price I'm paying for it. If the performance sucks, then why the hell would I buy the phone when there are viable options out there with better battery life, bigger screens, faster processors and yes, thinner bodies? Those same "losers" who run those scores actually protect you and plenty of other blind, ill-informed, zombie-like consumers from getting duped out of your money. You should be thanking them, not bashing them.

I do work on my phone all day, and I'm constantly on the move, so why wouldn't I want better battery life? Because let me tell you, sending off lots of emails and writing articles throughout the day with the screen on constantly kills the battery. And it's frustrating having to carry around a connector just in case the phone dies. Who wants to do that?

The company DID design a phone with terrible battery life, and it's the 4S. And plenty of other phones do it too, but to think Apple is exempt from the rule is stupid.

 

[wizard]

"Apple's Tim Cook has said that the reason that Apple hadn't used LTE in iPhones is due to the "design compromises" required to build such a device."

The design compromises include antenna design. They tried the racetrack antenna (4-4S) which was a valiant attempt and proved no better than banding at the bottom and top of the device as originally envisioned way back in 2004-7.

In the context of Tim's statements and others from Apple it is clear that they where talking about the power used by LTE chips and nothing else. I'm not sure where you get the idea that the antenna on the iPhone is a compromise as it has been shown again and again to perform really well.

The LTE chips will be "barely acceptable" in terms of battery usage and will need to be used sparingly. The iPhone 5 battery life under all but LTE will be about the same.

You have no idea here and are simply grasping at something to complain about. The reality is iPhone, all computers for that matter, are a sum of their parts. In that regard there is significant potential to actually lower power draw of some of those parts.

The design compromise is not intended to be battery life. It is antenna design and thickness. They overcame thickness as a limit by making the phone taller and thus about the same volume.

Rocketman

Believe your propaganda if you want but Apples comments have been very clear here, they where and still reference the power profiles of the LTE chips of the time.

 

[coltman75]

Note to Apple designers: it's thin enough. If you can make the phone guts any thinner, then make the battery bigger to keep it the same overall size of the 4S. I have heard no complaints that any of the iPhones are too thick -- ever, really.

I, on the other hand, would prefer to have a thinner phone.

 

[chrmjenkins]

It seems the reason for the jump to 3.8V from 3.7V is a battery chemistry change:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4910/motorola-droid-bionic-review-dual-core-with-4g-lte/2

Update: A source reached out to us and let us know that the Motorola Bionic's 3.8 V battery is in fact using a new alternative high voltage chemistry, and is not simply an overcharged Lithium Ion battery. This same battery will be used in the just-announced Motorola Atrix 2 as well. Note that the battery name includes an H (eg HW4X) to denote the use of these high voltage battery chemistries. This new chemistry also has similar cycle life as existing 3.7 V nominal batteries, and has been in the works for several years.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Beyond that the whole point of iPhone and it's impression upon people is in the software. To that end you can't yet find better software running on a cell phone and iOS 6 just takes the lead farther away from the pack.

By the way I'm also an iPhone 4 owner and frankly don't feel the need to upgrade at the moment. If you look at iPhone as a tool, the need to upgrade only become compelling when the technology has advanced significantly to offer real advantages over the one you are currently using. If iPhone is in your possession to prop up your vanity then you have other issues to address. In all likely hood, if half the leaks are true, this coming iPhone will be ground breaking technology wise. If that doesn't impress you then just keep your current iPhone.

I'm gladly moving up from a iP4. I'll take the .5 inch screen increase and faster hardware. I'll take thinner as well, as long as I've got equal battery life of my iP4.

In the end I realize that my enjoyment of the phone is going to be in software and how fluid and annoyance free it is and thankfully iOS 6 takes a step forward here.

I realize that others may have their own motivations for what they want in the phone but we'll see how the reception is world wide to gain understanding about how the next iPhone is perceived across the world.

 

[Gdgtguru]

I'm using a 4S at the moment - had a 4 and a 3GS previously - battery life is pathetically short on all devices. I have chargers everywhere in the house and in all our cars.

When my wife's Blackberry died, I popped her SIM card in my Treo 650 (a smartphone from almost 10 years ago) - it STILL has great battery life - and way better reception than either the Blackberry or any of the iPhones. That, folks, is SAD. WTF is Apple doing with all that R&D money?

I would GLADLY sacrifice some lack of design coolness for a user-swappable battery. For a firm headquartered in "green" California, it is INEXCUSABLE to design in Apple's current fashion - a user-replaceable battery is the right thing to do.

And how does that Treo 650 compare to a modern iPhone in terms of CPU, Graphics, Screen, Radios, and overall capability? That's like getting upset that your dad's Timex gets better battery life than a Garmin GPS watch.

 

[orangebluedevil]

1) Do the Gobi 28nm chips combine LTE and voice? (thus using less space and not requiring a smaller battery to fit an extra chip for LTE).
2) Do we know that these chips will be in the iphone 5? The story says that Qualcomm is "poised to release the chips" which sounds like they aren't yet available to Apple or anyone else.
Thanks

1) Yes, research Gobi MRM9615 chips
2) These chips well be ready for Q3 was per their roadmap. We won't know unti the day they are released, but they are the only current chip with 28nm, LTE, and voice. So ya, this is the chip.

 

[BvizioN]

how do you know that I haven't?
I've gone through 3 replacements.
(what's next mr. fanboy,, are you gonna tell me that I'm not "using it right")

3 replacments??? Gee!!!

Some people are just unlucky unfortunately

I have owned so many Apple products since 2004, and not even once had any problem that would have resulted on the product replaced.

 

[Geckotek]

#MissingThePoint

Slimmer and lighter has absolutely nothing to do with being "more efficient." They're literally two different topics that are relatively unrelated.

No, I think you missed the point. He's saying if Apple was able to make it slimmer and lighter, then the must have ALSO been able to make it more efficient. Apple wouldn't just slim it down at the sacrifice of battery life. Heck, look at the new iPad, they even made it thicker.

Have a little faith people. Stop whining about something you don't know about yet. Stop ASSUMING that battery life will be bad until we at least have more information.

 

[1=1?]

Man they really aren't leaving much to the imagination/announcement. Leakiest iphone yet.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Man they really aren't leaving much to the imagination/announcement. Leakiest iphone yet.

Just the case.

We have no idea what SoC is going to be used. If it has NFC or anything else special. We're missing half the phone.

 

[JUiCEJamie]

isnt the iPad battery 40% bigger? thats why its also heavier

I'm not so sure. My point being is that Apple fit lots more battery life in a device the same size.
So this new battery for the new iPhone has got to pack a secret punch somehow.

 

[clibinarius]

I know exactly what the component manufacturing sub-group of Samsung are contracted to produce for Apple. The Samsung parent company decided to iClone.
Sammy's innovation is a phone that has perfume... LG....pffft

I thought it was a bunch of standards that are FRAND. My mistake. Apple's innovations-let's be realistic here-they're all on the software side. A phone would work without Apple. But not without Nortel, Motorolla, Samsung, Sony, Nokia, etc.; I can't think of anything Apple actually has brought to the phone the would be up for FRAND.

Don't get me wrong, I like my phone. But let's be honest here. Apple makes no parts, and they didn't create the phone. They brought it all together. Apple's innovation was selling the phone in a very usable manner in a patented way. That's innovation, yes. But I'm sorry, I don't see the big picture-what exactly has Apple innovated aside from popularizing the touch screen and minimalist design and concentrating on the user experience (Which is awfully important).

Samsung's patents make that stuff work, as do their technology.

 

[wizard]

Not one thing you say here is based on fact!

#MissingThePoint

Slimmer and lighter has absolutely nothing to do with being "more efficient." They're literally two different topics that are relatively unrelated.

You can't make a device thinner and lighter with out more efficient use of that space. This should be obvious.

You want more efficient? How about being able to efficiently manage power so that my phone can stay on for over a day? And I'd like more efficient speeds (like 4G LTE) without sacrificing battery life. I know that's a lot to ask (it's not), but don't tell me that a thinner phone is better than either of those.

It is a lot to ask if volume production of sub 32 micron devices is a problem. Apple can't snap it's fingers and wish hardware into existence.

I fail to see a purpose for having a thinner phone at all, quite frankly.

A larger screen might be a factor there don't you think? If the screen gets bigger you have to manage volume and weight some how.

Apple opted out of 4G LTE for the 4S and that battery life still sucks, so I fail to see where the worthwhile tradeoff took place. Not to mention the Droid RAZR Maxx absolutely pummeling the 4S in terms of battery life and thinness. If they figured out a way to do it, and Apple procures only a marginally better battery this time around, people have a right to be upset.

The battery is only part of the equation.

If you think Apple has revolutionized the 4G LTE chipsets, you're just wrong. It's still a battery hog, and that tiny battery being forced to power an even bigger Retina Display to boot has the potential to be disastrous.

Fear mongering will get you no where.

And if you think that quad core processors have nothing to do with battery saving, then you literally don't know what you're talking about.

Nope, you don't know what you are talking about. Process shrinks save power, the number of cores is a more interesting discussion but more cores can lead to much higher power usage.

While the results vary and experts agree and disagree on the implementation of quad core chips and their ability to save battery, the results aren't minimal at all. Quad core processors are more efficient, and can deliver an overall better experience when the OS is optimized to utilize them properly.

Baloney!

So when you're playing Angry Birds or whatever fun games people play nowadays, your phone works even LESS than it did, saving you more battery. If you want efficiency, you should laud speed improvements that can slice load times in half.

Speed improvements in a cell phone are only worthwhile if they can be had without an impact to battery life.

I've got plenty of friends, and I'll still run benchmarks on a phone, donk. It's called following up on company claims and ensuring that what I've paid for is worth the price I'm paying for it. If the performance sucks, then why the hell would I buy the phone when there are viable options out there with better battery life, bigger screens, faster processors and yes, thinner bodies? Those same "losers" who run those scores actually protect you and plenty of other blind, ill-informed, zombie-like consumers from getting duped out of your money. You should be thanking them, not bashing them.

Because those factors you site aren't all that important.

I do work on my phone all day, and I'm constantly on the move, so why wouldn't I want better battery life? Because let me tell you, sending off lots of emails and writing articles throughout the day with the screen on constantly kills the battery.

Then you are using the wrong device! For the most part phones aren't designed to be on all day to play games. beyond that get serious here who writes articles on a cell phone?

And it's frustrating having to carry around a connector just in case the phone dies. Who wants to do that?

You don't carry them around, you leave one at work, one in the auto, one or more at home. In any event I have to say your whining here is absurd, the battery life of other phones of the same generation isn't that much different. The coming iPhone is a complete unknown at this point and as such it is extremely foolish to make assumptions about its battery performance or any other detail for that matter.

The company DID design a phone with terrible battery life, and it's the 4S. And plenty of other phones do it too, but to think Apple is exempt from the rule is stupid.

Apple isn't exempt from any rule, however your point of view is worthless. If battery lifetime of the 4S was as bad as you imply there would be more complaints.

 

[Ieo]

The battery is a very big concern of mine....If the phone doesn't last me an entire day comfortably, what's the damn point? Competitors are doing it....I don't care if the iPhone is a few mm thinner if it dies on me before I head home from work.

 

[AdonisSMU]

well, thats the deal breaker. Was on board for the longer screen and smaller parts only if there was a huge battery inside. Will evaluate other options now.

What? That's crazy! How is a rumor a deal breaker?

 

[wizard]

Yes you are guessing.

The next iPhone won't be getting an A6, it will be getting an underclocked A5X,

The phrase "underclocked A5X" is garbage. ARM processors have always had the ability to operate over a range of frequencies. Designers often select clock rates for different reasons but managing power usage is a common one. In the case of the iPhone the chip isn't under clocked it is rather running at the design frequency.

much like what Apple did with the 4S and 4. In which case, there will be no CPU upgrade in the next iPhone, only a speed bump for the integrated GPU.

You are grasping here, no body knows what the clock rate of the next iPhone will be. Depending upon the scale of the process shrink they could come close to doubling clock and still save a bit on power. This is speculation of course because we don't know what process node the A5X might come on in an iPhone.

My bet is on the one after this, that is the one which will have a true quad-core CPU and possibly 8-core GPU. But I'm just guessing.

So tell me, why would anyone want 8 cores in an iPhone? An iPad maybe but how much of an advantage would that be in an iPhone? Not much really. I see Apple going in a different direction with its transistor budgets in the future. That includes even higher integration pulling more, even all of the IP in the iPhone, onto the SoC.