| Nah, not really. You are absolutely correct about the difference between Joules and A·h, but what I am pointing out here is that they have omitted the time-s

| Nah, not really. You are absolutely correct about the difference between Joules and A·h, but what I am pointing out here is that they have omitted the time-scale entirely. They are not talking about continuous draw here, they explicitly mention the operation of transmitting 10 bytes, which should always be reported in terms of energy, not current/power. So are they trying to report average current, or energy? Well, a typical wireless chip consumes several mA during rx/tx, not 0.026mA. This means they either have invented a wireless chip that is three orders of magnitude more energy efficient compared to industry standards, or they are talking about average current over time (for example, an NRF24L01 consumes up to 14mA during rx/tx: http://www.nordicsemi.com/eng/Products/2.4GHz-RF/nRF24L01 http://www.nordicsemi.com/eng/Products/2.4GHz-RF/nRF24L01). I think we can safely assume therefore that they are talking about average current draw. Coming back to my original point, what is missing from their numbers are duty cycle and data rate. In other words, how often does the chip wake up to transmit a packet, and how many packets/hour can I pump through their network? Given that BLE is just a standard 2.4MHz packet radio, which should draw a comparable amount of current to what they are using, it seems obvious the main difference is traffic rate and duty cycle, which they don't report.