4 ms·

Dear Manufacturers, if there's a newer tech allowing better battery efficiency, don't reduce battery capacity to maintain profit margins but instead please keep

by sigkill 13y ago

Dear Manufacturers, if there's a newer tech allowing better battery efficiency, don't reduce battery capacity to maintain profit margins but instead please keep the same capacity and bump up the price slightly. People will still buy them if your product has 12-18 hours battery life while the competition has a mere 4-6 hours. We really don't mind paying extra for longer worktime.

achughes 13y ago
Well battery life, at least as I've seen it on Macs keeps going up year after year so I'm pretty confident that trend will continue. Not sure about other manufacturers but only because I haven't kept up with them not a lack of confidence.
zdw 13y ago
I totally agree with this, but it's less about price, and more about weight and form factor - thinner and lighter are selling points. I'd settle for longer battery life in the same form factors we have now, but you know someone will try to sell us phones that have junk battery life and are 0.8mm thinner...
- fmstephe 13y ago
  I strongly agree with this sentiment. Battery life can change the way we use our devices. I own a chromebook and three standard laptops. We rarely use the other laptops, which have larger better screens, just because the chromebook is never plugged in (except for a nightly charge), whereas the laptops will fail before the evening is over without a power source. With respect to phones this goes doubly. I am tempted to revert back to my old B+W screened nokia just so I don't have to charge my fancy new phone every day.
  - tluyben2 13y ago
    Which Chromebook is that? The only ones I see have horrible battery life?
    - fmstephe 13y ago
      My chromebook is the first gen Samsung 5 550 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Series-550-3G-Chromebook/dp/B007ZZ194Y/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1369404253&sr=8-4&keywords=chromebook http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Series-550-3G-Chromebook/dp/... Had about 9 hours when I bought it. It has dropped down now but it is still my first truly mobile laptop. If I bought another chromebook now I would probably still prefer the old 5 550. Very good balance between battery life/power etc. I am running Ubuntu on mine now and it is easily the most lovely computer I've ever owned.
      - nvarsj 13y ago
        I felt the same way about my MBA when I first got it. 8 hours of battery life! And linux runs smoothly on it. As pretty as the chromebook is, I'm not sure I'd ever want something with such weak processing power. A used thinkpad X series with wxga+ is probably more suitable (and cheaper!). With a new battery, it will also get 6+ hours.
        fmstephe 13y ago
        Yeah, the weakness of the chromebook is an issue. So my uses are the following. Programming C and Go using vim Browsing the internet If I wanted to do things like program in Java with eclipse I would be miserable instead of enchanted. So it does need to fit your uses. The one thing I would say about the chromebook is that while I love using it, I do not love the device itself. It is cheap(ish) and plastic and mine is scratched and worn. If I owned a MBA I don't think I could use it so much as a spanner. Those MBAs are beautiful and I think this can limit their utility. Also, my Ubuntu partition has 8gig on it. This is tiny and if I used it for anything other than vimming on text files it would probably be a disaster.
      - tluyben2 13y ago
        That link is the first gen? Because when I search the US Amazon for the 5 550 it says 'up to 6 hours'; that must then be the 2nd gen?
  - sciurus 13y ago
    You're better off keeping the chromebook plugged in when possible; the battery loses capacity with each charge-discharge cycle.
    - fmstephe 13y ago
      That's true. But my life gets better every time I get to use my laptop without tripping over or fiddling some annoying cable. The chromebook just sort of fades away, a computer that is just available and portable and problem free (sort of)
tluyben2 13y ago
I would pay any amount of money for a high res, bright sun readable, 15 hour battery, i7 with 16 gb of memory. If that costs $5k I would pay it. Edit: thinking about it; 'any amount' here, for me, would be $7k max, but I would pay that for this configuration. That makes it such a shame you cannot really expand laptops besides some ruggedized ones. They would make a base version for $1k and allow extension up to $5-6k with all the trimmings.
- sigkill 13y ago
  I remember my old friend saying that he could use the 'hump' battery on his think pad and it'd give him around 14 hours. But that was a 14 incher. Honestly though, I think we've got enough power in todays laptops for even casual gaming over and above office work that first priority should be battery life and second should be screen resolution keeping all other equal.
  - tluyben2 13y ago
    I use my laptop for building apps and games (2d games, no fancy smancy 3d stuff); gcc + xcode + eclipse (or intellij for that matter) are burning a hole in my i7 (2010 mbp with 8gb and i7). Often (I live in the mountains) I have no or bad internet, so that whole 'cloud compiling' thing won't work for me. That's why performance matters for me and all performing laptops have almost no battery life :) My mbp, during ios debugging sessions, cries for power in less than 2 hours. That's horrible. My core 2 duo 2008 with new battery makes 3.5 hours, but is too slow for a lot of work and to be honest; 3.5 hours is way too little for any serious programming session. I'm trying to get my consumption pattern down while programming by using more scripting languages (like Lua) so I don't have to compile, can do repl/live coding which seems to be nicer for battery than compiling the whole shebang. If any devs have ideas how to make this more efficient. If I would be able to work more efficiently (which I now have been using Lua), I can buy an ARM laptop / hybrid like the Transformer prime and do most of my work on that, only going to a higher performance machine for asset (sound/gfx) creation. I wrote a game solely on the openpandora using lua; it was actually quite a nice experience despite the tiny screen. And that thing actually does over 10 hours with one charge.
dragontamer 13y ago
If you get an "old style" laptop, like the Lenovo T-series, you get the same 60Wh battery as you always have, fully updated to the latest tech. Laptop makers always have had old style laptops available. You're welcome to buy them any time. ---------- Another issue though, is that ULV chips kinda suck compared to a typical Laptop M chip. Your 35W laptop chip in the bulkier Lenovo T430s is significantly faster than say... a Surface Pro (using a ULV chip). Either way, there are laptops out there in every configuration. Small&light battery with ULV processor (Surface Pro), Big battery with ULV processor (Samsung Series 7 Ultra Touch), Big Battery with Standard Mobile Processor (Lenovo T430s). If you don't like small and light, then pick up a bigger model. They exist, and they've been selling. If you want 10+ hours of battery life on tiny batteries, Intel even sells Clovertrail Atoms. All of which are lighter than an iPad and offer over 10 hours of battery life.
- zokier 13y ago
  I don't think you can get any laptop with <20W CPU and decent sized battery (~60Wh). And no, ULV chips do not suck, quite the contrary they are awesome. They combine "good enough" performance (something that ARM or Atoms can not claim) with that yummy low power consumption. But the problem is that OEMs are stuffing all those nice chips to "crappy" ultrabook bodies. I'd be mostly happy with an ultrabook with just another layer of batteries ducktaped on the bottom.
  - dragontamer 13y ago
    Samsung Series 7 Ultra Touch, I said it in my previous post. 57Wh battery with a ULV processor. Its heavier than other models because it uses a full sized 57Wh battery. It also uses a dGPU because it has enough power for it. ------------- BTW: The ULV models are all ~30% to ~40% slower than an equivalent M model... and also cost more. 35W laptops can hold their turbo longer and offer better performance. If you're willing to sacrifice that performance for longer battery life, go on ahead. I understand thats what most people want now-a-days however. So... yeah.
  - tluyben2 13y ago
    Indeed; could your parent poster maybe point out a bulky laptop with ULV chips? I don't mind bulkier if I get more battery life and higher resolution. Still the modern laptop maker idea is to cram maximal performance fitting the body; if you have a modern bulky laptop, it'll most likely have a gaming GPU and/or raid and/or huge screen on board and empty your battery faster than anything light.
rjzzleep 13y ago
i've been holding off my laptop purchase until i got more than 8 hours of battery life. currently the best option i can think of is the x230 series, but the screen is soso. I have expectations for haswell, and hopefully i can buy a new laptop then. But I'm not really holding my breath considering the mixed messasges we've been getting. I currently have a 480gb ssd and 8gb ram in my ultraportable. the fact that a lot of the ultrabooks have 4gb onboard, and no means to upgrade the harddrive bothers me.

by sigkill 13y ago

achughes 13y ago

Well battery life, at least as I've seen it on Macs keeps going up year after year so I'm pretty confident that trend will continue. Not sure about other manufacturers but only because I haven't kept up with them not a lack of confidence.

zdw 13y ago

I totally agree with this, but it's less about price, and more about weight and form factor - thinner and lighter are selling points. I'd settle for longer battery life in the same form factors we have now, but you know someone will try to sell us phones that have junk battery life and are 0.8mm thinner...

fmstephe 13y ago
I strongly agree with this sentiment. Battery life can change the way we use our devices. I own a chromebook and three standard laptops. We rarely use the other laptops, which have larger better screens, just because the chromebook is never plugged in (except for a nightly charge), whereas the laptops will fail before the evening is over without a power source. With respect to phones this goes doubly. I am tempted to revert back to my old B+W screened nokia just so I don't have to charge my fancy new phone every day.
- tluyben2 13y ago
  Which Chromebook is that? The only ones I see have horrible battery life?
  - fmstephe 13y ago
    My chromebook is the first gen Samsung 5 550 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Series-550-3G-Chromebook/dp/B007ZZ194Y/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1369404253&sr=8-4&keywords=chromebook http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Series-550-3G-Chromebook/dp/... Had about 9 hours when I bought it. It has dropped down now but it is still my first truly mobile laptop. If I bought another chromebook now I would probably still prefer the old 5 550. Very good balance between battery life/power etc. I am running Ubuntu on mine now and it is easily the most lovely computer I've ever owned.
    - nvarsj 13y ago
      I felt the same way about my MBA when I first got it. 8 hours of battery life! And linux runs smoothly on it. As pretty as the chromebook is, I'm not sure I'd ever want something with such weak processing power. A used thinkpad X series with wxga+ is probably more suitable (and cheaper!). With a new battery, it will also get 6+ hours.
      - fmstephe 13y ago
        Yeah, the weakness of the chromebook is an issue. So my uses are the following. Programming C and Go using vim Browsing the internet If I wanted to do things like program in Java with eclipse I would be miserable instead of enchanted. So it does need to fit your uses. The one thing I would say about the chromebook is that while I love using it, I do not love the device itself. It is cheap(ish) and plastic and mine is scratched and worn. If I owned a MBA I don't think I could use it so much as a spanner. Those MBAs are beautiful and I think this can limit their utility. Also, my Ubuntu partition has 8gig on it. This is tiny and if I used it for anything other than vimming on text files it would probably be a disaster.
    - tluyben2 13y ago
      That link is the first gen? Because when I search the US Amazon for the 5 550 it says 'up to 6 hours'; that must then be the 2nd gen?
- sciurus 13y ago
  You're better off keeping the chromebook plugged in when possible; the battery loses capacity with each charge-discharge cycle.
  - fmstephe 13y ago
    That's true. But my life gets better every time I get to use my laptop without tripping over or fiddling some annoying cable. The chromebook just sort of fades away, a computer that is just available and portable and problem free (sort of)

tluyben2 13y ago

I would pay any amount of money for a high res, bright sun readable, 15 hour battery, i7 with 16 gb of memory. If that costs $5k I would pay it. Edit: thinking about it; 'any amount' here, for me, would be $7k max, but I would pay that for this configuration. That makes it such a shame you cannot really expand laptops besides some ruggedized ones. They would make a base version for $1k and allow extension up to $5-6k with all the trimmings.

sigkill 13y ago
I remember my old friend saying that he could use the 'hump' battery on his think pad and it'd give him around 14 hours. But that was a 14 incher. Honestly though, I think we've got enough power in todays laptops for even casual gaming over and above office work that first priority should be battery life and second should be screen resolution keeping all other equal.
- tluyben2 13y ago
  I use my laptop for building apps and games (2d games, no fancy smancy 3d stuff); gcc + xcode + eclipse (or intellij for that matter) are burning a hole in my i7 (2010 mbp with 8gb and i7). Often (I live in the mountains) I have no or bad internet, so that whole 'cloud compiling' thing won't work for me. That's why performance matters for me and all performing laptops have almost no battery life :) My mbp, during ios debugging sessions, cries for power in less than 2 hours. That's horrible. My core 2 duo 2008 with new battery makes 3.5 hours, but is too slow for a lot of work and to be honest; 3.5 hours is way too little for any serious programming session. I'm trying to get my consumption pattern down while programming by using more scripting languages (like Lua) so I don't have to compile, can do repl/live coding which seems to be nicer for battery than compiling the whole shebang. If any devs have ideas how to make this more efficient. If I would be able to work more efficiently (which I now have been using Lua), I can buy an ARM laptop / hybrid like the Transformer prime and do most of my work on that, only going to a higher performance machine for asset (sound/gfx) creation. I wrote a game solely on the openpandora using lua; it was actually quite a nice experience despite the tiny screen. And that thing actually does over 10 hours with one charge.

dragontamer 13y ago

If you get an "old style" laptop, like the Lenovo T-series, you get the same 60Wh battery as you always have, fully updated to the latest tech. Laptop makers always have had old style laptops available. You're welcome to buy them any time. ---------- Another issue though, is that ULV chips kinda suck compared to a typical Laptop M chip. Your 35W laptop chip in the bulkier Lenovo T430s is significantly faster than say... a Surface Pro (using a ULV chip). Either way, there are laptops out there in every configuration. Small&light battery with ULV processor (Surface Pro), Big battery with ULV processor (Samsung Series 7 Ultra Touch), Big Battery with Standard Mobile Processor (Lenovo T430s). If you don't like small and light, then pick up a bigger model. They exist, and they've been selling. If you want 10+ hours of battery life on tiny batteries, Intel even sells Clovertrail Atoms. All of which are lighter than an iPad and offer over 10 hours of battery life.

zokier 13y ago
I don't think you can get any laptop with <20W CPU and decent sized battery (~60Wh). And no, ULV chips do not suck, quite the contrary they are awesome. They combine "good enough" performance (something that ARM or Atoms can not claim) with that yummy low power consumption. But the problem is that OEMs are stuffing all those nice chips to "crappy" ultrabook bodies. I'd be mostly happy with an ultrabook with just another layer of batteries ducktaped on the bottom.
- dragontamer 13y ago
  Samsung Series 7 Ultra Touch, I said it in my previous post. 57Wh battery with a ULV processor. Its heavier than other models because it uses a full sized 57Wh battery. It also uses a dGPU because it has enough power for it. ------------- BTW: The ULV models are all ~30% to ~40% slower than an equivalent M model... and also cost more. 35W laptops can hold their turbo longer and offer better performance. If you're willing to sacrifice that performance for longer battery life, go on ahead. I understand thats what most people want now-a-days however. So... yeah.
- tluyben2 13y ago
  Indeed; could your parent poster maybe point out a bulky laptop with ULV chips? I don't mind bulkier if I get more battery life and higher resolution. Still the modern laptop maker idea is to cram maximal performance fitting the body; if you have a modern bulky laptop, it'll most likely have a gaming GPU and/or raid and/or huge screen on board and empty your battery faster than anything light.

rjzzleep 13y ago

i've been holding off my laptop purchase until i got more than 8 hours of battery life. currently the best option i can think of is the x230 series, but the screen is soso. I have expectations for haswell, and hopefully i can buy a new laptop then. But I'm not really holding my breath considering the mixed messasges we've been getting. I currently have a 480gb ssd and 8gb ram in my ultraportable. the fact that a lot of the ultrabooks have 4gb onboard, and no means to upgrade the harddrive bothers me.