3 ms·

> I think the iphone does a lot more in the background than you might consider initially. I understand that. My point being that 25 year old tech, before the r

> I think the iphone does a lot more in the background than you might consider initially. I understand that. My point being that 25 year old tech, before the real miniatyrization of circuits and power efficiency mind you, has 7x charge time and yet we are impressed by a few additional hours. > Here is an experiment to try. Use your phone as you currently do, but turn on airplane mode when you aren't otherwise using the phone. Leave it on overnight too. Sure but to what benefit? I already addressed the tweaks i did do in a sibling comment. Putting the phone in airplane mode is no different than having a dead battery in terms of usability.

yazaddaruvala 2y ago
The difference is passive. Your phone is constantly pooling for both 4g, and 5g signal. Then using that to pool for notifications from apps. This is stuff your Nokia didn’t do at the same scale. At best some sms at a significantly reduced polling rate. My apps auto update in the background. Something my Nokia from 2007 didn’t do. So there are many passively provided features but by definition they are not obvious to you and as such harder to appreciate. If you have an iPhone: I use low power mode constantly. I have an automation to use it at 75% or less battery. I get roughly 2 days of battery life without any YouTube usage.
- pests 2y ago
  > At best some sms at a significantly reduced polling rate. SMS was piggybacked onto the control plane messaging. That is why the limit was 160 chars (only space available) and why texts can still work when the cell towers are overloaded.
threeseed 2y ago
> I understand that. My point being that 25 year old tech, before the real miniatyrization of circuits and power efficiency mind you, has 7x charge time and yet we are impressed by a few additional hours. Yes because those phones by comparison do nothing so it’s a meaningless comparison. It’s like arguing that we shouldn’t be impressed about EV range improvements because the bicycle exists.
- nicce 2y ago
  > Yes because those phones by comparison do nothing so it’s a meaningless comparison. We were able to call with them and send messages. On top of that I mostly use browser with my current phone on comparison, while not necessary.
  - threeseed 2y ago
    So most people make heavy use of applications like TikTok, Instagram, Facebook etc, take photos and videos, real time video calling, getting directions etc. All whilst on a colour, high-resolution screen orders of magnitude better than the Nokia phones. Acting like physics doesn’t exist and we should be able to get a month long battery life whilst doing all of the above is idiotic. No other way to describe it.
    - bdhcuidbebe 2y ago
      Well i use none of those apps, and I made a point about 25 years of technical progress, not heavy phone usage. I see it got you riled up for some reason, but I cannot see why.
furyofantares 2y ago
> Putting the phone in airplane mode is no different than having a dead battery in terms of usability. Well, it's about the same as using Nokia 3310.
- hackerman_fi 2y ago
  We are talking about phones right? Things that make calls

yazaddaruvala 2y ago

The difference is passive. Your phone is constantly pooling for both 4g, and 5g signal. Then using that to pool for notifications from apps. This is stuff your Nokia didn’t do at the same scale. At best some sms at a significantly reduced polling rate. My apps auto update in the background. Something my Nokia from 2007 didn’t do. So there are many passively provided features but by definition they are not obvious to you and as such harder to appreciate. If you have an iPhone: I use low power mode constantly. I have an automation to use it at 75% or less battery. I get roughly 2 days of battery life without any YouTube usage.

pests 2y ago
> At best some sms at a significantly reduced polling rate. SMS was piggybacked onto the control plane messaging. That is why the limit was 160 chars (only space available) and why texts can still work when the cell towers are overloaded.

threeseed 2y ago

> I understand that. My point being that 25 year old tech, before the real miniatyrization of circuits and power efficiency mind you, has 7x charge time and yet we are impressed by a few additional hours. Yes because those phones by comparison do nothing so it’s a meaningless comparison. It’s like arguing that we shouldn’t be impressed about EV range improvements because the bicycle exists.

nicce 2y ago
> Yes because those phones by comparison do nothing so it’s a meaningless comparison. We were able to call with them and send messages. On top of that I mostly use browser with my current phone on comparison, while not necessary.
- threeseed 2y ago
  So most people make heavy use of applications like TikTok, Instagram, Facebook etc, take photos and videos, real time video calling, getting directions etc. All whilst on a colour, high-resolution screen orders of magnitude better than the Nokia phones. Acting like physics doesn’t exist and we should be able to get a month long battery life whilst doing all of the above is idiotic. No other way to describe it.
  - bdhcuidbebe 2y ago
    Well i use none of those apps, and I made a point about 25 years of technical progress, not heavy phone usage. I see it got you riled up for some reason, but I cannot see why.

furyofantares 2y ago

> Putting the phone in airplane mode is no different than having a dead battery in terms of usability. Well, it's about the same as using Nokia 3310.

hackerman_fi 2y ago
We are talking about phones right? Things that make calls