Question - slim phones or battery life?

[joemailey]

Something that bugged me when the iPhone 5 came out.

When the iPhone 5 came out they made it 18% thinner than the 4/4s.

It bugged me because I think the the 4/4s is thin enough. I used a Samsung s3 for a day not that long ago and it was also pretty thin.

So what would you prefer? even slimmer phones or a bigger better longer lasting battery?

Personally I would have preferred apple made the battery 18% fatter than making the phone 18% thinner.

Manufactures seem to focus on making everything thin/slim now days in the phone market, but surely the first manufacture to produce a phone with great battery life would sell loads. I have to charge my phone at work, charge it at home and if I'm not going to be home until late, I have to charge it whilst I'm driving around in the car. Its either that or I make sure I don't use it as often if I'm out and about for the day.

How come a phone not lasting a day has become so acceptable to everyone now? Not to mention one of the best selling things about a blackberry was the battery life, so if someone could make a decent looking phone with a decent battery, it would be pretty good seller.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

How come a phone not lasting a day has become so acceptable to everyone now? Not to mention one of the best selling things about a blackberry was the battery life, so if someone could make a decent looking phone with a decent battery, it would be pretty good seller.

Because we understand that we don't have phones anymore, we have mini computers. I've not heard of a laptop's battery lasting 24 hours, so in my mind the phone is one up on that.

I agree that a longer lasting battery would be great, but that's a limit of battery technology. However, I do see your point about using the space to provide a bigger battery instead of making the phone slimmer.

For me, my galaxy 3's battery life is fine.

[joemailey]

I was merely getting at how manufactures seem to make phones slimmer yet keep battery life the same?

So surely there using some form of technology to make batteries smaller but keep the same power.

So instead of going slimmer how about they use the space they free up and increase the battery life a bit.

As for the laptop argument, the battery life has always been pretty poor on those from the beginning, where as phones started out with great battery life, yet we some how have just accepted/sacrificed whatever is dished out.

To me the only thing phone manufactures have left to do with phones is sort out the battery life, they pretty much have all the features we need now. So battery life would be the missing piece of the puzzle.

Smartphones are meant to allow you to be mobile, but at the rate we're going we can be mobile as long as we're next to power source. Any amount of game playing, browsing, video watching and you battery starts to disappear rapidly.

[Draconian Guppy]

Agree on making phones ridiculously slim... IMO the 4/4s have a sweet spot in thinness. I would much rather they put a bigger batter and keep the iphone 4 thickness in the 5. IMO this thickness is sorta like e-penis, let's brag about having the thinnest apparatus :p

[joemailey]

Agree on making phones ridiculously slim... IMO the 4/4s have a sweet spot in thinness. I would much rather they put a bigger batter and keep the iphone 4 thickness in the 5. IMO this thickness is sorta like e-penis, let's brag about having the thinnest apparatus :p

Yea that's what I think too, its just at the stage where manufactures want to brag about I have the slimmest phone, how about they brag about having the best battery life :D

[Nick H. Supervisor]

As for the laptop argument, the battery life has always been pretty poor on those from the beginning, where as phones started out with great battery life, yet we some how have just accepted/sacrificed whatever is dished out.

Because you don't have a phone anymore, you have a mini computer! You can't compare the battery life of a Nokia 3330 with the battery life of the Galaxy S3, they're completely different devices. You may as well compare a toaster's ability to toast bread with a dishwasher's ability to do the same task.

[Draconian Guppy]

Yea that's what I think too, its just at the stage where manufactures want to brag about I have the slimmest phone, how about they brag about having the best battery life :D

I think motorola does that with the moto razr HD, it has a humongous battery IIRC.

@ intrinsica, I think you're missing the point! We don't want slimmer phones with slimmer (Ergo smaller capacity) batteries! Keep the same thickness and use for bigger battery :p

[joemailey]

Because you don't have a phone anymore, you have a mini computer! You can't compare the battery life of a Nokia 3330 with the battery life of the Galaxy S3, they're completely different devices. You may as well compare a toaster's ability to toast bread with a dishwasher's ability to do the same task.

You are still missing my main point, technically its a smartPHONE. Mini computer is tablet, laptop, netbook.

I know what my smartphone does and I know we have to accept the battery life is going to be worse.

My point is why have we just carried along with phones getting thinner and sacrificing the battery life in the process. Your basically saying thats just how it is battery life won't be the same, technology isn't there etc. I'm not asking for 5 days battery life like a 3330.

I don't care if the phones a mini computer, I understand we won't get the same battery life as basic phone. But you aren't registering my point.

Batteries get slimmer with slimmer phones, slimmer phones keep the same battery life as there previous model. that 18% slimmest would of provided a nice battery increase for the iPhone 5. So why couldn't they just increase the battery life instead of playing the I have the thinnest device competition.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

@ intrinsica, I think you're missing the point! We don't want slimmer phones with slimmer (Ergo smaller capacity) batteries! Keep the same thickness and use for bigger battery :p

I didn't miss that point, but I'd already covered it in my first post when I said that I agree that rather than the manufacturers saying, "we've got all this free space, let's make it thinner" they should say, "we've got all this free space, let's put a larger battery in there."

The point I was clarifying was that you cannot look at the battery life of a phone from 10/20 years ago and say, "now why doesn't my smartphone have that same battery life?"

[joemailey]

I didn't miss that point, but I'd already covered it in my first post when I said that I agree that rather than the manufacturers saying, "we've got all this free space, let's make it thinner" they should say, "we've got all this free space, let's put a larger battery in there."

The point I was clarifying was that you cannot look at the battery life of a phone from 10/20 years ago and say, "now why doesn't my smartphone have that same battery life?"

I was merely using the old phones as the starting ground/bench mark of where battery life was to where it has end up in the phone market and what we have accepted without question. Its clear battery life can be improved. I was never asking the why isn't it the same as old phones. was merely just a bench mark of what was and what is now.

It was never a "why don't I get 5 days battery life like I use to post" more a why have we accepted such bad battery life for the I have the thinnest device competition and why manufactures have decided to neglect battery life for thinness.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

I was merely using the old phones as the starting ground/bench mark of where battery life was to where it has end up in the phone market and what we have accepted without question.

And you don't see how it's wrong to use an old phone's battery life as a bench mark for smartphone batteries? Right, I'm off to toast that bread in the dishwasher. If I use my toaster as a benchmark, it should be done in a few minutes...

To clarify, we're in agreement with one another about the overall issue. As I've said in two posts now, I agree that rather than saying, "here's a lot of free space, let's make the device thinner" they should be saying, "here's a lot of free space, let's put a larger battery in there." Where we're differing is in the idea of using an old phone's battery life as a comparison for smartphones. It just doesn't work like that.

Batteries have not changed much between the Nokia 3330 and the Galaxy S3. What has changed is the devices that consume more power than they used to. Indeed, the Samsung Galaxy S3 has a 900mAh battery whereas the Nokias 3330 had an 850mAh battery. The battery is larger on the S3, but because of what the device does compared to the 3330 it doesn't last as long.

That's all I'm trying to point out. I agree with you in your overall point, but you can't compare phones of 20 years ago with a smartphone.

[Chris Rollason]

The point I was clarifying was that you cannot look at the battery life of a phone from 10/20 years ago and say, "now why doesn't my smartphone have that same battery life?"

My point would be kind of why not?

My girlfriend has the Nokia X2 (well it has 3g on it and she can surf the net on it), which I believe is still current, her battery lasts over a week.

I have a Nokia Lumia 710 whose battery lasts less than 24 hours, with most things turned off.

When we go away to (photograph) a festival for three days at a time, I'm quickly uncontactable (even by the festival organiser). So basically I need to use an old phone in those circumstances. I have got a 2nd battery now for my Lumia (third party bigger capacity). But some phones, you can't change the battery.

Given my phone has my schedule and other things I need to run my life, I'd be much happier with a thicker phone and longer battery life.

Given how phones are getting bigger in the other two dimension (hight and width), why the obsession with making the depth as small as possible.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Ok, I give up. I think it's silly that my S3 cannot survive for a month without needing a recharge. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go and check on my toast. It looks a bit soggy.

[Alwaysonacoffebreak]

I think I'm a lucky one with my Lumia 800, with heavy browsing, music and metrotube it usually lasts up to 2 days. That's all I expect for it to be honest and that's all fine, everything under that, meh, no thanks, not a fan of charging every night.

[Draconian Guppy]

That's all I'm trying to point out. I agree with you in your overall point, but you can't compare phones of 20 years ago with a smartphone.

My point would be kind of why not?

My girlfriend has the Nokia X2 (well it has 3g on it and she can surf the net on it), which I believe is still current, her battery lasts over a week.

I have a Nokia Lumia 710 whose battery lasts less than 24 hours, with most things turned off.

Man, browsing in 3G assrapes batteries, show me hard numbers that it lasts over a week, adequately rendering webpages on 3g!

Ok, I give up. I think it's silly that my S3 cannot survive for a month without needing a recharge. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go and check on my toast. It looks a bit soggy.

You may not be excused, put your toast in the dryer! ( following you comparisons :p ).

I think I'm a lucky one with my Lumia 800, with heavy browsing, music and metrotube it usually lasts up to 2 days. That's all I expect for it to be honest and that's all fine, everything under that, meh, no thanks, not a fan of charging every night.

[joemailey]

Posted to soon.... On my phone see below post

[Sandor]

The thing that seems to drain battery life the most is the screen. Seeing phones now with 5"+ screens that have better resolution/clarity than your desktop monitor sucks a lot of power. Certainly appears to be the main culprit on my android phone. Things like the CPUs are more efficient as in a lot of phones they throttle back to a fraction of their full power unless it's needed.

It's a far cry from my old "dumb" phone which would last a week with not much difficulty but it was just a phone and messaging...it didn't have a massive OS, apps, internet, huge screen and dual core processor in it.

[joemailey]

intrinsica - I know your agreeing with me in one part. But I'm not comparing battery life with old phones. Just pointing out the difference & wondering why manufactures decided a long battery life was no longer important over looks & thinness when it came to moving on to smart phones.

They made phones better and improved them greatly and neglected battery life/sacrificed it in the process for looks. It's mainly an observation and a question as why they decided to improve phones and just forget about battery life. It's not a question of why the hell they don't last as long. I know that answer, everyone knows that answer, but they could last a lot longer than they currently do at the minute and still look great. I should be able to mention old phones, with out the old ones smartphones wouldn't be here. They evolved into smart phones and a core feature got neglected at the cost of looks and anything You can do, I can do better kinda competitions just to one up each other.

[Roger H. Veteran]

Basically he's saying that if you want your new phone with 10x power requirements to have the same battery life then you'll need a battery with probably 10x the capacity - not 2-3x like they do now.

Some old Nokia vs Samsung Galaxy S3.

1.8-2.8" screen vs 4.7".

200mhz CPU vs 1.5Ghz

850mAh vs 2000mAh battery

Old OS vs New Hotness OS. (LOL)

I think everyone agrees with you already though, Phones being 7.7mm doesn't do me no good, i'd much rather them being 14mm (DOUBLE!) if that meant i could get a good 2-3 days usage from it. When you think of it too, 14mm is not even that thick, it's about the width of an average pinky finger.

So yeah, my phone now is 9.1mm (Nexus 4) and i saw some people bashing it saying it's so thick compared to the iPhone 5 (or even SGS3) because it's 1.7mm thicker!? :blink: I'm like WTF is wrong with people, 1.7mm is so small that it's not even something i'd think of when comparing 2 devices. Weight surely but not that small of a difference in thickness.

[tsupersonic]

I'd rather R&D go into battery technology - all it seems people do these days is make higher capacity batteries while the screen on smartphones gets bigger, and CPU/GPU's get far more powerful. Everyone is also worried about having the thinnest device, and that's just silly. Give me a functional phone with a 4.3-4.5" HD display, at least 2-3 days of battery (WITH heavy usage), 4G LTE in a 8-10 mm thin profile.

I think Motorola has done something really nice with the RAZR HD Maxx and RAZR Maxx, even though they are just high capacity batteries in a very thin profile.

[joemailey]

Basically he's saying that if you want your new phone with 10x power requirements to have the same battery life then you'll need a battery with probably 10x the capacity - not 2-3x like they do now.

Some old Nokia vs Samsung Galaxy S3.

1.8-2.8" screen vs 4.7".

200mhz CPU vs 1.5Ghz

850mAh vs 2000mAh battery

Old OS vs New Hotness OS. (LOL)

I think everyone agrees with you already though, Phones being 7.7mm doesn't do me no good, i'd much rather them being 14mm (DOUBLE!) if that meant i could get a good 2-3 days usage from it. When you think of it too, 14mm is not even that thick, it's about the width of an average pinky finger.

So yeah, my phone now is 9.1mm (Nexus 4) and i saw some people bashing it saying it's so thick compared to the iPhone 5 (or even SGS3) because it's 1.7mm thicker!? :blink: I'm like WTF is wrong with people, 1.7mm is so small that it's not even something i'd think of when comparing 2 devices. Weight surely but not that small of a difference in thickness.

I know what he's saying and I fully understand his point, but I never asked why my phone doesn't last as long as a 3330. Just referenced older phones as smart phones are based on those, that's where they started.

But they neglected battery life as we change generations and improved everything else and sacrificed battery life for looks. It was never about smartphones lasting the same length of time as basic phones. I was just trying to point out they could last longer if manufactures would make a better effort and remember what was great about the older generation. Somewhere along the lines someone decided smartphones lasting a day on average would do and no has tried to change it since.

It would be like laptops transforming to ultra books and ultra books only lasting half an hour on battery life because to make them thinner they cut the batteries in size. But that's ok because the screens better and there lighter and thinner and faster and prettier.

[MikeChipshop Member]

My HTC 8X hasn't been charged for 40 hours and it's only just going in to the last 20% and that's with everything switched on and full bright screen. I'd say that's pretty except-able for everyday use.

If i was going somewhere were i thought i may not be able to get near a power supply for more than a couple of days then chances of me having my phone switched on all the time are slim and the chances of having WiFi, Bluetooth, auto-syncing turned on a re non-existent.

I totally understand where you're coming from, but i personally would rather have a nice slim, easy to hold and carry phone, than one that has a longer battery life and is a brick.

[joemailey]

My HTC 8X hasn't been charged for 40 hours and it's only just going in to the last 20% and that's with everything switched on and full bright screen. I'd say that's pretty except-able for everyday use.

If i was going somewhere were i thought i may not be able to get near a power supply for more than a couple of days then chances of me having my phone switched on all the time are slim and the chances of having WiFi, Bluetooth, auto-syncing turned on a re non-existent.

I totally understand where you're coming from, but i personally would rather have a nice slim, easy to hold and carry phone, than one that has a longer battery life and is a brick.

I'd be very happy if my phone lasted 40hrs between charges.

[MikeChipshop Member]

I'd be very happy if my phone lasted 40hrs between charges.

I mean, obviously 8 of those hours i was asleep but the phone was still on, just not in actual use.

[Draconian Guppy]

So yeah, my phone now is 9.1mm (Nexus 4) and i saw some people bashing it saying it's so thick compared to the iPhone 5 (or even SGS3) because it's 1.7mm thicker!? :blink: I'm like WTF is wrong with people, 1.7mm is so small that it's not even something i'd think of when comparing 2 devices. Weight surely but not that small of a difference in thickness.

Probably the size of their brains :p or penis :shifty: