This would do nothing for battery improvement/performance.
It would simply reduce the need to plug in to charge.
You're playing semantics. The end result is the same. If I can go longer without actually having to plug in my device to charge it, I don't care if its technically increased battery performance or not. What I care about is that my device has increased performance and is more useful.
Comparing it to a car, would you rather have a larger gas tank (don't have to fill up as often) or better gas mileage (use less gas)?
This isn't the same. Obviously in a car it matters a great deal because I'm paying for the gas. I can honestly tell you that I wouldn't care if my car actually got better gas mileage or if it somehow magically made more gas while I was driving. I could go longer between fill ups and it wouldn't cost me any more. This is a ridiculous but more accurate comparison.
This isn't the same. Obviously in a car it matters a great deal because I'm paying for the gas. I can honestly tell you that I wouldn't care if my car actually got better gas mileage or if it somehow magically made more gas while I was driving. I could go longer between fill ups and it wouldn't cost me any more. This is a ridiculous but more accurate comparison.
I didn't say it was an exact comparison but obviously you are not interested. You seem to think the battery will "magically" be a better battery by charging it.
Back to my original point (and you original statement).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndirishfan1975
If it allowed even a moderate improvement in battery life it would be great...
Imagine if you were able to get 25-30% better battery performance
This would do nothing for battery improvement/performance.
It would simply reduce the need to plug in to charge (as often).
On top of the solar aspect, It sounds like you wind up with a display with built-in, very high-resolution, capacitive AND optical sensors. This could open up entirely new interactions with the device, possibly even "mouse-over" type events.
You mean ... like calculators? Yeah, those pocket gadgets would never run on solar cells. No way.
Not quite the same. Solar calculators generally don't have backlights, I haven't seen such anyway. They are incredibly thrifty with power that it makes phones look gluttonously thirsty in comparison.
I can see this mainly extending standby. A solar cell on a phone can't keep up with the backlight's power needs, the efficiency just isn't even close.
Not quite the same. Solar calculators generally don't have backlights, I haven't seen such anyway. They are incredibly thrifty with power that it makes phones look gluttonously thirsty in comparison.
I can see this mainly extending standby. A solar cell on a phone can't keep up with the backlight's power needs, the efficiency just isn't even close.
Especially since this Is solar glass, however this could extend battery life(act like it) and minorly charge when sitting in sun, I hope they still combine many technology's so that a no cord IPhone could come out.
Some rough calculations:
an iPhone face is about 0.120x 0.060 meters, bright daylight is about 500 W/m^2, if you have a 15% efficient solar cell, that would be about 0.5 Watts of power.
The iPhone battery is about 5 Watt-hours. If you go through 40% of your charge per day, that is 2 W-hours.
Lots of caveats...
If it was 0.5 W, that's almost enough to power the device by itself. The quoted runtime for video watching or WiFi browsing is 10 hrs. With a 5 WHr battery, that's 0.5 W.
So it's doubtful the concept here, dual touch sensor and solar cell, can come close to that. Or maybe there or other things preventing companies from doing it, like not being transparent or or some other thing.
They could add a solar panel on the back. In which case, users have to change habits and always leave their phones out with the back facing the light.
If they could get 0.5 W, transform the current to something useable, and make the layer thin, I have to imagine some company would already have tried it. No one has.
I liked an earlier patent that Apple filed allowing the unit to charge the battery by movement like a self winding watch. THAT I think would be great if it worked since putting a phone in your pocket or carrying around a tablet in your hands while they sway back and forth while you walk would trickle charge the battery.
I liked an earlier patent that Apple filed allowing the unit to charge the battery by movement like a self winding watch. THAT I think would be great if it worked since putting a phone in your pocket or carrying around a tablet in your hands while they sway back and forth while you walk would trickle charge the battery.
To note that, this is also in my future apple device drawings
Comments
You're playing semantics. The end result is the same. If I can go longer without actually having to plug in my device to charge it, I don't care if its technically increased battery performance or not. What I care about is that my device has increased performance and is more useful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndirishfan1975
You're playing semantics. The end result is the same.
I'm not playing semantics and its not the same.
I'd much rather have battery improvement and increased performance instead of having it charge without plugging it in.
If the battery performance increased, you would not have to charge it as often, plugged in or not.
Comparing it to a car, would you rather have a larger gas tank (don't have to fill up as often) or better gas mileage (use less gas)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndirishfan1975
This isn't the same. Obviously in a car it matters a great deal because I'm paying for the gas. I can honestly tell you that I wouldn't care if my car actually got better gas mileage or if it somehow magically made more gas while I was driving. I could go longer between fill ups and it wouldn't cost me any more. This is a ridiculous but more accurate comparison.
I didn't say it was an exact comparison but obviously you are not interested. You seem to think the battery will "magically" be a better battery by charging it.
Back to my original point (and you original statement).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndirishfan1975
If it allowed even a moderate improvement in battery life it would be great...
Imagine if you were able to get 25-30% better battery performance
This would do nothing for battery improvement/performance.
It would simply reduce the need to plug in to charge (as often).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandman999
I've never understood the value of solar energy for devices you carry in your pocket.
You mean ... like calculators? Yeah, those pocket gadgets would never run on solar cells. No way.
Not quite the same. Solar calculators generally don't have backlights, I haven't seen such anyway. They are incredibly thrifty with power that it makes phones look gluttonously thirsty in comparison.
I can see this mainly extending standby. A solar cell on a phone can't keep up with the backlight's power needs, the efficiency just isn't even close.
If it was 0.5 W, that's almost enough to power the device by itself. The quoted runtime for video watching or WiFi browsing is 10 hrs. With a 5 WHr battery, that's 0.5 W.
So it's doubtful the concept here, dual touch sensor and solar cell, can come close to that. Or maybe there or other things preventing companies from doing it, like not being transparent or or some other thing.
They could add a solar panel on the back. In which case, users have to change habits and always leave their phones out with the back facing the light.
If they could get 0.5 W, transform the current to something useable, and make the layer thin, I have to imagine some company would already have tried it. No one has.
I liked an earlier patent that Apple filed allowing the unit to charge the battery by movement like a self winding watch. THAT I think would be great if it worked since putting a phone in your pocket or carrying around a tablet in your hands while they sway back and forth while you walk would trickle charge the battery.