Discussion:
mobile phones
(too old to reply)
cowboy carl
2004-11-08 00:24:45 UTC
Permalink
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology which
*only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like bluetooth or
colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would only need charging
once a month.

i'd buy it.

cc
jess
2004-11-08 13:10:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by cowboy carl
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology
which *only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like
bluetooth or colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would
only need charging once a month.
does a colour screen really take up more battery than a monochrome one?
Alun Harford
2004-11-08 14:12:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by jess
Post by cowboy carl
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology
which *only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like
bluetooth or colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would
only need charging once a month.
does a colour screen really take up more battery than a monochrome one?
About 3 times as much I suspect.

Alun Harford
jess
2004-11-08 18:47:32 UTC
Permalink
"jess" wrote in message
Post by jess
does a colour screen really take up more battery than a monochrome one?
About 3 times as much I suspect.
wow.
cowboy carl
2004-11-08 19:54:37 UTC
Permalink
"jess" wrote in message
Post by jess
does a colour screen really take up more battery than a monochrome one?
About 3 times as much I suspect.
wow.
have you never owned a mobile phone without a colour screen?

cc
jess
2004-11-08 20:49:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by cowboy carl
"jess" wrote in message
Post by jess
does a colour screen really take up more battery than a monochrome one?
About 3 times as much I suspect.
wow.
have you never owned a mobile phone without a colour screen?
of course.

they didn't come with information on how much battery life they saved
though.

:rolleyes:
cowboy carl
2004-11-08 16:53:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by jess
Post by cowboy carl
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology
which *only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like
bluetooth or colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would
only need charging once a month.
does a colour screen really take up more battery than a monochrome one?
yes, colour screens require a different kind of backlight.

monochrome can just use a couple of LEDs at the edge.

cc
Gaurav Sharma
2004-11-08 23:46:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by cowboy carl
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology which
*only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like bluetooth or
colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would only need charging
once a month.
i'd buy it.
cc
5 years ago a Nokia 6210 monochrome would do about 10 days of good
usage on a 700mh cell. Today a colour Nokia 6820 can do about 10 days
on the same cell, and is smaller and more versatile (e.g. qwerty
keyboard).

A Nokia 1100 only does texting and calling, costs £30 on ebay.
Battery life is relatively poor. Your theory does not correlate.

It's like saying you'd marry a ugly chick as long as you get laid
every 30mins.

G.Sharma.
cowboy carl
2004-11-09 00:12:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gaurav Sharma
Post by cowboy carl
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology which
*only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like bluetooth or
colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would only need charging
once a month.
i'd buy it.
cc
5 years ago a Nokia 6210 monochrome would do about 10 days of good
usage on a 700mh cell. Today a colour Nokia 6820 can do about 10 days
on the same cell, and is smaller and more versatile (e.g. qwerty
keyboard).
A Nokia 1100 only does texting and calling, costs £30 on ebay.
Battery life is relatively poor. Your theory does not correlate.
It's like saying you'd marry a ugly chick as long as you get laid
every 30mins.
You missed my point.

The reason they have the same battery life is due to advances in battery
technology.

Colour screens use more power than monochrome screens. If you agree with
that, then you must agree that a monochrome phone will have a longer battery
life than a colour phone.

And for me, battery life is high priority (for no particular reason other
than it bugs me having to recharge my phone every two days).

cc
Gaurav Sharma
2004-11-09 12:25:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by cowboy carl
Post by Gaurav Sharma
5 years ago a Nokia 6210 monochrome would do about 10 days of good
usage on a 700mh cell. Today a colour Nokia 6820 can do about 10 days
on the same cell, and is smaller and more versatile (e.g. qwerty
keyboard).
A Nokia 1100 only does texting and calling, costs £30 on ebay.
Battery life is relatively poor. Your theory does not correlate.
It's like saying you'd marry a ugly chick as long as you get laid
every 30mins.
You missed my point.
The reason they have the same battery life is due to advances in battery
technology.
Reread my second sentence sir. Cell capacities today are roughly the
same. Verify with Niall, Nokia website, whatever. Therefore YOU have
missed the point. The advances have been in shrinking batteries
slightly and retaining charge, both of which have been transferred to
newer, smaller handsets.
Post by cowboy carl
Colour screens use more power than monochrome screens. If you agree with
that, then you must agree that a monochrome phone will have a longer battery
life than a colour phone.
And for me, battery life is high priority (for no particular reason other
than it bugs me having to recharge my phone every two days).
cc
Don't choose a unsuitable phone then, sir.

G.Sharma.
JohnDoe
2004-12-08 21:44:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by cowboy carl
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology which
*only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like bluetooth or
colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would only need charging
once a month.
Digital cameras don't use the battery if you don't use them, bluetooth
doesn't use the battery either if you have it turned off.
Alun Harford
2004-12-09 18:08:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by cowboy carl
Post by cowboy carl
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology
which
Post by cowboy carl
*only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like
bluetooth or
Post by cowboy carl
colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would only need
charging
Post by cowboy carl
once a month.
Digital cameras don't use the battery if you don't use them, bluetooth
doesn't use the battery either if you have it turned off.
Non-sense.
These things mean that a bigger, faster, more powerful, more power-hungry
ARM processor core is required. This uses more of your battery.

Alun Harford
Niall Saville
2004-12-10 01:06:55 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 18:08:16 -0000, "Alun Harford"
Post by Alun Harford
Post by cowboy carl
Post by cowboy carl
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology
which
Post by cowboy carl
*only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like
bluetooth or
Post by cowboy carl
colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would only need
charging
Post by cowboy carl
once a month.
Digital cameras don't use the battery if you don't use them, bluetooth
doesn't use the battery either if you have it turned off.
Non-sense.
These things mean that a bigger, faster, more powerful, more power-hungry
ARM processor core is required. This uses more of your battery.
ARM cores use very little power when in sleep mode.
--
"You can't trust anyone!"
- "Try pseudo-trust. Like a compromise."
sachi, 2001
Alun Harford
2004-12-10 17:42:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Niall Saville
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 18:08:16 -0000, "Alun Harford"
Post by Alun Harford
Post by cowboy carl
Post by cowboy carl
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology
which
Post by cowboy carl
*only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like
bluetooth or
Post by cowboy carl
colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would only need
charging
Post by cowboy carl
once a month.
Digital cameras don't use the battery if you don't use them, bluetooth
doesn't use the battery either if you have it turned off.
Non-sense.
These things mean that a bigger, faster, more powerful, more power-hungry
ARM processor core is required. This uses more of your battery.
ARM cores use very little power when in sleep mode.
True, but the statement was *no* power.

Alun Harford
Niall Saville
2004-12-13 09:46:55 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:42:15 -0000, "Alun Harford"
Post by Alun Harford
Post by Niall Saville
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 18:08:16 -0000, "Alun Harford"
Post by Alun Harford
Post by cowboy carl
Post by cowboy carl
i bet if they made a mobile phone with today's battery technology
which
Post by cowboy carl
*only* texted and allowed voice calls, and no fancy things like
bluetooth or
Post by cowboy carl
colour screen or digital camera, then the battery would only need
charging
Post by cowboy carl
once a month.
Digital cameras don't use the battery if you don't use them, bluetooth
doesn't use the battery either if you have it turned off.
Non-sense.
These things mean that a bigger, faster, more powerful, more power-hungry
ARM processor core is required. This uses more of your battery.
ARM cores use very little power when in sleep mode.
True, but the statement was *no* power.
But all phones use *some* power when running. Y'know, so they can, um,
receive phone calls.

(And actually, the statement wasn't *no* power - you were the first
one to mention that ;)
--
"You can't trust anyone!"
- "Try pseudo-trust. Like a compromise."
sachi, 2001
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...