4 ms·

In the end, I took this as a discussion of thermal energy dissipation as it pertains to mobile devices. In other words, battery life. My conclusion is that we

In the end, I took this as a discussion of thermal energy dissipation as it pertains to mobile devices. In other words, battery life. My conclusion is that we need to vastly improve the energy density of batteries (or consider using carbon-based energy sources to power mobile devices). Edit: Not sure why this is getting downvoted. The end of the article really does discuss mobile devices and energy dissipation - which I found to be the most critical part. Yes, the author ties it in together nicely with his anecdote of writing out code by hand. So in his day, you optimized for code length. Now, he advocates that we optimize for lower energy consumption. But I would instead, or in parallel, argue that mobile devices also simply have too little energy available to them.

wmf 17y ago
The batteries in your devices represent decades of R&D; scientists are spending entire careers looking for 5% improvements. Saying "just use better batteries" appears to trivialize that effort. Also, programmers (generally) aren't qualified to invent new battery chemistries, but they can make software use fewer cycles.
- carbocation 17y ago
  "Just use better batteries" does make it sound trivial, but those were not my words at all. Saying that we need to "vastly improve energy density" felt, to me, to be conceding that it would require vast effort. That is why I also offered an alternative - carbon-based fuels. They pack an extremely high energy density, but are volatile and would require very special approaches to make them safe and easy to refill. In other words, no matter which option one looks into, it will take a lot of work to improve on the state of the art. By no means did I intend to convey the message that I think otherwise.
- blasdel 17y ago
  Plus Apple has a tendency to capitalize on better battery technology by just using smaller+lighter batteries in later generations and preserving the same runtime. You do get a nice boost when buying a replacement battery for your 2-3 year-old device...
  - lutorm 17y ago
    I think you are not giving Apple enough credit. My 1st gen MBP had a runtime of 1.5h new, the current ones more like 6h.

wmf 17y ago

The batteries in your devices represent decades of R&D; scientists are spending entire careers looking for 5% improvements. Saying "just use better batteries" appears to trivialize that effort. Also, programmers (generally) aren't qualified to invent new battery chemistries, but they can make software use fewer cycles.

carbocation 17y ago
"Just use better batteries" does make it sound trivial, but those were not my words at all. Saying that we need to "vastly improve energy density" felt, to me, to be conceding that it would require vast effort. That is why I also offered an alternative - carbon-based fuels. They pack an extremely high energy density, but are volatile and would require very special approaches to make them safe and easy to refill. In other words, no matter which option one looks into, it will take a lot of work to improve on the state of the art. By no means did I intend to convey the message that I think otherwise.
blasdel 17y ago
Plus Apple has a tendency to capitalize on better battery technology by just using smaller+lighter batteries in later generations and preserving the same runtime. You do get a nice boost when buying a replacement battery for your 2-3 year-old device...
- lutorm 17y ago
  I think you are not giving Apple enough credit. My 1st gen MBP had a runtime of 1.5h new, the current ones more like 6h.