Apple looking to increase battery life with dense lithium battery cells - Page 2

[QUOTE=Naboozle;1810696]
Battery technology has become so complex these days, especially with higher capacity types used in mobile computers, that they have their own computers to monitor their health.

Where are you getting this? There is no mention in the article of a different charger requirement and the article didn't bother to provide us with a link to the actual patent. If this is just a matter of different algorithms and possibly a new material, why would it require a different charger? It will still plug into the same power outlets, so any changes can be entirely internal.

Personally, I'd like to not have to charge my iPhone every day. Be nice if I could charge it only once every couple days or once a week with even heavy usage. I agree that the MBP has great battery life, at least as advertised since I don't have one, but I think this has much more immediate benefits for the iPhone and iPad products.

Not a chance. If Apple makes it that far, the iCar will be driving us. The steering wheel will be just another option on the iCar.

More is always better. Anyway, what do you expect? You want them to fire their battery engineers so they can spend money on a user interface engineer or something...

Mobile components are advancing faster than battery tech. We're starting to see dual and even quad core SoC designs, higher density displays, higher bandwidth radios, feature laden operating systems, etc... These things are power hungry. If you don't concentrate on the power source, you'll be stuck with devices that have impractical usage limitations.

It would seem to me that all the new devices coming out, bragging about all the new tech and high end specs are being irresponsible and in denial when comes to power usage.

Apple has spent years, not only in working on creating better batteries, but also in designing a highly efficient operating system that makes the most out of any and all available hardware.

Apple has been working on battery tech for a while now. They were so proud of their achievements that they dedicated a whole segment to discussing battery tech when the first unibody Macs were introduced two years ago.

I just don't see how this new patent is different from what's already implemented on the unibody MBP. http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/battery/

And to previous poster (EU USB charger rules), the charging system is controlled onboard the device, not the charger.

Well said. Modern mobile devices involve an intricate system of tradeoffs among battery life, size, weight, performance and cost. Apple seems to be the most focused, of all the manufacturers of such devices, on keeping each of these factors in balance in order to deliver the most satisfying user experience. Not just satisfying at the point of sale because the specs go to 11, but satisfying after owning and using the device for a period of time.

I would say that that's because Apple isn't obliged to compete with cookie cutter hardware and someone else's OS in a market where the sole point of differentiation is going to be a few numbers on a bullet list. Another fraction of an inch of screen size, a few more Hz of CPU, more RAM, another port, etc. etc. might get you a little buzz on the tech sites, but it necessarily impacts every other aspect of the device. Of course, this opens Apple to accusations of being behind the curve, or "getting their ass kicked" by the latest and greatest device du jour, but Apple has created a market for themselves where they can concentrate on something other than naked spec whoring, to the betterment of their customers.

dense makes for more weight

And that ^, everyone, is what someone whose sense of humor is derived from Jokes and Their Relation to The Unconscious thinks is funny.

The topic at hand reminds me of a post over at Aysmco, regarding profits and the ability to innovate. The idea is that the smart phone business is still in its early days, with lots of room for improvements that consumers are willing to pay for. It's only when a product gets as good as it reasonably needs to be that true commodification sets in, at which point what profit as is available goes to whoever can cuts costs the most.

But until then, being able to do basic research and development with your platform which results in real improvement adds value to your product. The question Asymco asked was "where is the money for that basic R&D for Android vendors going to come from ?"

We have Apple, with it's famously high margins and deep pockets, willing and able to spend a lot on making the iOS platform as good as it can be. And we have Android manufacturers obliged to "innovate" on top of their OS with widgets and the like, and being obliged to sell their wares for as little as possible in a crowded, price sensitive market.

For the time being, as smart phone uptake is still growing rapidly, just bumping specs will continue to fuel demand. But at some point your potential market will become jaded. They'll have gone through several generations of fancy home screens with lots of eye candy, and they'll be looking for real utility.

It will be interesting to see what happens then, if Apple can continue to use its profits to bring genuinely superior products at extremely competitive prices to market. What if Apple has battery life that tops the nearest competition by 50%? 100%? It's not out of the question, Apple is clearly willing to spend more than anyone else in chipping away at those battery minutes-- bringing actual battery chemistry in-house, further refining hardware and software efficiencies, endlessly working the problem

Android licensees simply aren't in a position to do that. They can purchase the latest battery tech, and hope Google keeps things efficient, but they have no real incentive to invest heavily in eking out a few more minutes than the next guy-- not when it's so much easier to act as if a dual core processor makes you the captain of a starship.

And battery life is just one area. Apple is going to keep spending to increase the desirability of their iOS products. The Android manufacturers are going to keep dropping in whatever Google gives them, and whatever parts the industry provides, with "innovation" being increasingly limited to Atrix style gimmickry, widgets, and brief windows of spec list superiority.

Now maybe that's all most people really want, but I don't think this story is well told by focusing on current market share numbers. Apple is still going to be pouring money into iOS when Android is entirely commodified. I think that's when it gets interesting-- after all, just look at what's happening with Apple notebooks sales numbers.

Wait for me to invent them.. Putting my idea hat on...now, let me see..this go here... hmmm.. billions

And your point is????????

Couldn't this be the technology that Apple already adopted with 'smart batteries' when they rolled out the unibody MacBook Pros?

The article was quite clear on that. Read it again. From the bottom of the article.


Notice the mention of a patent? We don't need the actual link. The article tells us what it does.

Patents can be given for modification of existing devices if it brings unique advantages. This would do that. It wouldn't be compatible with other batteries, and the battery wouldn't compatible with different chargers.

This patent is from 2009. Have you thought about the fact that this patent relates to those batteries? And the charger is different from what we see in phone chargers. What you linked to in Apple's site is for a computer, not a phone.

The charger and battery form a system. One requires the other. Neither can work with a different part.

Yes, it does look that way.

That's factually incorrect. There are no compatibility issues with using even a first-gen MagSafe charger from a prior generation MacBook to charge current MacBooks provided you have chosen one with the proper wattage rating. The new "smart" battery system on the current unibody systems is independent of the charger. Oh and BTW, unibody was introduced in 2009 around the time of this patent.

Likewise, the technology is non-exclusive to laptops. Any device with sufficient space can implement the same whether it's an iPhone or iPad or something else. Lastly, you can use a first-gen iPhone's charger to charge an iPhone 4. In fact, many old iPod chargers pre-2007 are also capable of charging it. This again disproved your assertion that the battery and charger must form a system. Again, charging is controlled by the onboard chip, not the charger that is plugged into the wall.