Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24
  1. #16
    Jack Zwick
    Guest

    Re: How bad is 551 Bluetooth?

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Jeff Morris <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Ralph Blach wrote:
    > > Jeff Morris wrote
    > >
    > >> So, when will we have phones with lifetime batteries?
    > >>

    > >
    > > Jeff, hmmm, I think you have been watching far to much Star Trek were
    > > energy cost see to be free. (driven by anti matter)
    > > But until we have portable antimatter pods

    >
    > Au contraire ... as a sailor I'm used to running "off the grid" for
    > months at a time, so I understand the cost of power.
    >
    > Lets see: a 500 milliamp-hour cell at 3.5 volts. Twice a week, so
    > that's 50 Amp-hours a year, or .175 kWatt-hours. About 40 years use
    > would cost a dollar from my power company.
    >
    > If I had to generate that with my small diesel engine and alternator it
    > would take about 5 hours runtime, so the cost would be more like
    > $10-$20, for fuel and wear. (A proper genset would be cheaper.) And
    > then there's solar and wind power - free (for 10 to 20 years) after the
    > initial investment.
    >
    > The point, of course, is that the energy is cheap - its carrying it
    > around that gets problematical. A year's cell use probably only uses
    > the energy equivalent teaspoon of fuel (I'm too lazy to compute it) - we
    > just need to figure out how to convert tiny amounts of fuel into power
    > without the fuss of burning it.
    >
    > One of my frustrations is that every appliance is different. We are
    > seeing some convergence - many gadgets power off USB, for instance. But
    > it seems like every battery is different. Why not power all cell phones
    > (and PDA's and cameras and GPS's and MP3 players ...) off AA or AAA
    > cells? High quality AA's have 2000 milliamp-hours, and can be recharged
    > in 15 minutes. Why not have a phone that runs a few days off a AA, and
    > have a reload system that only takes a few seconds?


    That would be too logical. Cellular manufacturers love unique
    proprietary batteries in unique form factors so they can take a $7 (cost
    to manufacture) battery and charge you $59.99 for it.


    >
    > BTW, your battery bank for your ham setup is about the same as what I
    > have on my boat. However, its major client is a fridge with a large
    > freezer - the cell (and other small gadget) usage is lost in the noise.
    >
    >
    > While it will be a long time before I get a lifetime battery for my
    > boat, I expect we'll see much higher capacity small battery systems, and
    > more convenient charging systems in the next decade.




    See More: How bad is 551 Bluetooth?




  2. #17
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: How bad is 551 Bluetooth?

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:07:23 -0500,
    Jeff Morris <[email protected]> wrote:

    >One of my frustrations is that every appliance is different. We are
    >seeing some convergence - many gadgets power off USB, for instance. But
    >it seems like every battery is different. Why not power all cell phones
    >(and PDA's and cameras and GPS's and MP3 players ...) off AA or AAA
    >cells? High quality AA's have 2000 milliamp-hours, and can be recharged
    >in 15 minutes. Why not have a phone that runs a few days off a AA, and
    >have a reload system that only takes a few seconds?


    Size. Weight. Shape. Capacity.

    The Li-ion battery in my Sony Ericsson Z600 has substantially more capacity
    than a rechargeable AA, is much lighter, and has a flat shape much more suited
    to a cell phone.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  3. #18
    Jeff Morris
    Guest

    Re: How bad is 551 Bluetooth?

    John Navas wrote:
    >>One of my frustrations is that every appliance is different. We are
    >>seeing some convergence - many gadgets power off USB, for instance. But
    >>it seems like every battery is different. Why not power all cell phones
    >>(and PDA's and cameras and GPS's and MP3 players ...) off AA or AAA
    >>cells? High quality AA's have 2000 milliamp-hours, and can be recharged
    >>in 15 minutes. Why not have a phone that runs a few days off a AA, and
    >>have a reload system that only takes a few seconds?

    >
    >
    > Size. Weight. Shape. Capacity.
    >
    > The Li-ion battery in my Sony Ericsson Z600 has substantially more capacity
    > than a rechargeable AA, is much lighter, and has a flat shape much more suited
    > to a cell phone.
    >


    You have a point with the shape, but that's a design issue that could be
    dealt with. On all other points, I don't think you're correct. A NiMH
    AA is 2000 mAmp-hours at about 1.3 Volts and weighs a bit over an ounce.
    A Li-ion cell battery is 600-800 mAmp-hours at 3.7 Volts, so it
    holds about the same power, and also weighs about an ounce.

    The only clear advantage Li-ion has of NiMH is a lower self discharge
    rate - certainly nice for some applications but not for gadgets that get
    charged frequently like cells phones.

    However, the relative merits are beside the point: it would be simple to
    create a standard flat li-ion battery.








  4. #19
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: How bad is 551 Bluetooth?

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:47:55 -0500,
    Jeff Morris <[email protected]> wrote:

    >John Navas wrote:


    >> The Li-ion battery in my Sony Ericsson Z600 has substantially more capacity
    >> than a rechargeable AA, is much lighter, and has a flat shape much more suited
    >> to a cell phone.

    >
    >You have a point with the shape, but that's a design issue that could be
    >dealt with.


    Not really -- NiMH cells are round for good reason.

    >On all other points, I don't think you're correct. A NiMH
    >AA is 2000 mAmp-hours at about 1.3 Volts and weighs a bit over an ounce.


    It's actually rated at 1.2V. At 2000 mAh, that's a total energy of 8640
    Joules.

    > A Li-ion cell battery is 600-800 mAmp-hours at 3.7 Volts, so it
    >holds about the same power, and also weighs about an ounce.


    My Li-ion cell is actually rated 780 mAh at 3.6V, for a total energy of 10109
    Joules, almost 20% more than the AA on paper, and more in practice.

    I don't have a precision scale handy, but the Li-ion cell battery is clearly
    much lighter than NiMH AA. That's a big issue, since the weight of the
    battery is a big factor in the weight of the phone.

    >However, the relative merits are beside the point: it would be simple to
    >create a standard flat li-ion battery.


    That's been tried, but never got much of anywhere, because it's less efficient
    than custom designs, and the market is too intensely competitive to tolerate
    such inefficiency.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  5. #20
    Jeff Morris
    Guest

    Re: How bad is 551 Bluetooth?

    John Navas wrote:

    >> A Li-ion cell battery is 600-800 mAmp-hours at 3.7 Volts, so it
    >>holds about the same power, and also weighs about an ounce.

    >
    >
    > My Li-ion cell is actually rated 780 mAh at 3.6V, for a total energy of 10109
    > Joules, almost 20% more than the AA on paper, and more in practice.
    >
    > I don't have a precision scale handy, but the Li-ion cell battery is clearly
    > much lighter than NiMH AA. That's a big issue, since the weight of the
    > battery is a big factor in the weight of the phone.
    >


    You might be surprised - the Li-ion batteries I have handy (for a V60
    and T720) are 29 and 26 grams respectively. AA Batteries run 26 to 31
    grams. And while I mentioned 2000 mAmp hours, you can get them up to
    2500 mAmp-hours now. It isn't clear there's a significant difference.

    >
    >>However, the relative merits are beside the point: it would be simple to
    >>create a standard flat li-ion battery.

    >
    >
    > That's been tried, but never got much of anywhere, because it's less efficient
    > than custom designs, and the market is too intensely competitive to tolerate
    > such inefficiency.
    >


    Aren't which reaching the point of diminishing returns now? The size of
    the phones won't go that much smaller. The T720 battery is about 1/8
    inch smaller than the V60 - was that really necessary?






  6. #21
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: How bad is 551 Bluetooth?

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:04:05 -0500,
    Jeff Morris <[email protected]> wrote:

    >John Navas wrote:


    >> My Li-ion cell is actually rated 780 mAh at 3.6V, for a total energy of 10109
    >> Joules, almost 20% more than the AA on paper, and more in practice.
    >>
    >> I don't have a precision scale handy, but the Li-ion cell battery is clearly
    >> much lighter than NiMH AA. That's a big issue, since the weight of the
    >> battery is a big factor in the weight of the phone.

    >
    >You might be surprised - the Li-ion batteries I have handy (for a V60
    >and T720) are 29 and 26 grams respectively. AA Batteries run 26 to 31
    >grams.


    I'm actually comparing my Z600 battery to a 2000 mAh Rayovac I-C3 AA battery.
    The lighter weight of the Z600 battery is unmistakable.

    >And while I mentioned 2000 mAmp hours, you can get them up to
    >2500 mAmp-hours now. It isn't clear there's a significant difference.


    The ratings war in AA has led to unrealistic numbers. In addition, Li-ion
    capacity is more usable in practice, decreases less with repeated usage, and
    suffers from much less self-discharge. The overall result is that my Z600
    battery has a substantial energy advantage over NiMH AA in practice.

    >>>However, the relative merits are beside the point: it would be simple to
    >>>create a standard flat li-ion battery.

    >>
    >> That's been tried, but never got much of anywhere, because it's less efficient
    >> than custom designs, and the market is too intensely competitive to tolerate
    >> such inefficiency.

    >
    >Aren't which reaching the point of diminishing returns now? The size of
    >the phones won't go that much smaller. The T720 battery is about 1/8
    >inch smaller than the V60 - was that really necessary?


    Apparently so -- competition is intense and brutal. And shape is just as
    important as size.

    The simple fact is that if NiMH were better, then manufacturers would use it,
    but they don't, because Li-ion is better.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  7. #22
    Jack Zwick
    Guest

    Re: How bad is 551 Bluetooth?

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Jeff Morris <[email protected]> wrote:

    > You might be surprised - the Li-ion batteries I have handy (for a V60
    > and T720) are 29 and 26 grams respectively. AA Batteries run 26 to 31
    > grams. And while I mentioned 2000 mAmp hours, you can get them up to
    > 2500 mAmp-hours now. It isn't clear there's a significant difference.


    BUT compare price. Walgreens will have a AA Li-Ion for $8.



  8. #23
    Ralph Blach
    Guest

    Re: How bad is 551 Bluetooth?

    Jer,

    Thanks for the laugh. It was very good chuckle at the end of hard day.

    Chip

    Jer wrote:
    > Jeff Morris wrote:
    >
    >
    >> So, when will we have phones with lifetime batteries?
    >>

    >
    >
    > Probably when they're small enough to be surgically implanted when the
    > new client is still in the delivery room. It'll absord it's energy from
    > the bloodstream like anything else under the skin, visual controls and
    > display imbedded in a iris implant, audio via bone-conduction implants
    > (left /right for stereo), and all other personalisations will be via an
    > inductive programming unit. A future world model will replace the
    > programming unit with another implant in the frontal lobe to offer true
    > stand-alone functionality and improved high-speed BT performance. I
    > understand they're still working through a bug or two, such as the wet
    > diaper issue (seems to attenuate the BT interface) and another bug
    > related to incessant crying (causes random system reset events when the
    > pain threshold is exceeded), but normal growth patterns of the host is
    > expected to eventually overcome both minor problems without further
    > development.
    >




  9. #24
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: How bad is 551 Bluetooth?

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Tue, 30 Nov
    2004 20:20:07 GMT, Jack Zwick <[email protected]> wrote:

    >In article <[email protected]>,
    > Jeff Morris <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> You might be surprised - the Li-ion batteries I have handy (for a V60
    >> and T720) are 29 and 26 grams respectively. AA Batteries run 26 to 31
    >> grams. And while I mentioned 2000 mAmp hours, you can get them up to
    >> 2500 mAmp-hours now. It isn't clear there's a significant difference.

    >
    >BUT compare price. Walgreens will have a AA Li-Ion for $8.


    Bzzzt! AA Lithium aren't Li-ion (different chemistry) and aren't
    rechargeable!

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12