For the same reason the Shuttle used to go to 110% throttle every launch. There are engineering specs and when they are met the device is at 100% of rated capability. Whether you call the actual physical "full" measurement 110% that or just cap it off on the display isn't relevant to any actual users.
I guess it's like the crowd that buys a stereo because its dial goes to 11 while the competition only goes to 10.
I guess it's like the crowd that buys a stereo because its dial goes to 11 while the competition only goes to 10.
Yes, but the new higher resolution of the retina display allows for the inclusion of the new setting, "12,'" in the same space that Apple's competitors can still only go to "10!"
Well, I'm more than willing to admit I know very little about battery technology. I'm just confused as to how having the battery display 100% when the battery is at 95% or less of its full charge can be talked away by a technical explanation. It seems like Apple made a judgement decision in its battery logic for this behavior- is there a technical reason Apple couldn't have had it read 100% when the battery was actually at 100%? (of course, fully support it staying at 100% when it is going through its discharge/charge cycle- I'm only concerned with that initial threshold for "100%")
I don't necessarily mean 'deception' in a negative sense- from the little I know, it seems to be a good, simple, solution for the consumer. Again, I fully admit I'm probably making the battery experts around here cringe .
Very fair point. I can't see any explanation for this either. And this quote
Quote:
That's by design, Apple's Michael Tchao said to All Things D on Tuesday. All iOS devices, including the new iPad, will display that they are 100 percent charged just before the device reaches a fully charged state. The device will then continue charging, then discharge a bit, and recharge once again ? a cycle that will continue until the device is unplugged.
Just doesn't explain anything.
And another issue here is, how "just before" this just before is. Could it be possible that on smaller batteries on other iOS devices this just before is a bit different compared to the enormous battery of the new iPad? If people are reporting an hour to real 100% on the new iPad, it could very well be that the extra ten percent on say an iPhone takes another 10 minutes, but on the iPad it takes an hour. I am quite sure from experience that the last % of charge are always the slowest.
Can somebody please get technical here, because apple's simple explanation, amounts to no explanation at all, because it raises the obvious question why not report it at 100% when it is actually 100% and then continue with the discharge and recharge cycle.
I have a suspicion on why they done this, here's my theory: Maybe they guesstimated that no one pulls the plug out exactly at 100%, quite possibly people look at 90% wait around a bit and take the plug out after a few minutes of the reported 100%, at which stage the battery WILL be at an actual 100% because quite possobly it won't be on a discharge cycle.
Even if this, largely unfounded, theory of mine is wrong, it seems they need to tweak the algorithm for the new iPads larger battery and they haven't done so yet, yet they are not admitting this. It would be very interesting if someone could report actual and reported battery charge for their new iPad now, and after an iOS update, I am sure it will be different.
Yep, most high tech devices do this now, sitting at 100% isn't good for lithium ion batteries. The only difference is how they display it I guess. My Nexus S often displays a 98% charge after being plugged in overnight, then in a while it goes back up, then down. With a battery so much larger, it just takes longer to go from nearly complete charge to complete charge and trickle back down.
Why does it matter? "100%" is relative. If when it displays "100%" it reasonably hits the stated battery life, then what's the problem?
The problem might be that on the new iPad when it says 100% it's an actual 90% and it doesn't hit the stated battery life as close, while on an iPod what with the smaller battery when it says 100% it's actually 95% and it comes more close. I would find it very interesting for someone to test actual battery at 100% now, and after an iOS update. I think they haven't brought a spokesman out at all things d for no reason, it seems to me like the typical company strategy (any company not just apple) of deny it first with a rational sounding explanation thn silently fix it with an update.
The problem might be that on the new iPad when it says 100% it's an actual 90% and it doesn't hit the stated battery life as close, while on an iPod what with the smaller battery when it says 100% it's actually 95% and it comes more close. I would find it very interesting for someone to test actual battery at 100% now, and after an iOS update. I think they haven't brought a spokesman out at all things d for no reason, it seems to me like the typical company strategy (any company not just apple) of deny it first with a rational sounding explanation thn silently fix it with an update.
Wrong on all counts. Read some more before you go expounding conspiracy theories. The battery "expert" at the bottom of this is DisplayMate's Raymond Soneira. He notes that when the iPad is left to continue charging it gets 11.6 hours of use, well beyond the advertised 10 hours. Apple is saying that when the charge indicator hits 100% you get the 10 hours (9 hours for LTE). As for your conspiracy theory about corporate skulduggery, wouldn't Apple generate much more marketing hype if they could advertise 11 or 12 hours of battery use? Yet they have chosen to stick with the same 10 hours as earlier iPads and maximize the charge-discharge cycles for better battery life.
And this is Apple denying something and being evil? Give me a freaking break.
Wrong on all counts. Read some more before you go expounding conspiracy theories. The battery "expert" at the bottom of this is DisplayMate's Raymond Soneira. He notes that when the iPad is left to continue charging it gets 11.6 hours of use, well beyond the advertised 10 hours. Apple is saying that when the charge indicator hits 100% you get the 10 hours (9 hours for LTE). As for your conspiracy theory about corporate skulduggery, wouldn't Apple generate much more marketing hype if they could advertise 11 or 12 hours of battery use? Yet they have chosen to stick with the same 10 hours as earlier iPads and maximize the charge-discharge cycles for better battery life.
And this is Apple denying something and being evil? Give me a freaking break.
Hold your horses with the projections about apple's evil-ness and conspiracy theories. And don't get so easily. There's a lingering question about why not reporting 100% when it's 100% actually and the technical explanation doesn't answer it so far. Another possible scenario is that apple are reporting 100% when they hit the 10 hour mark so as to get the advertised battery life, and reduce perceived charging times, and if somebody leaves it on more they get the full charge. Come to think of it that's probably why they done it and it doesn't seem to be connected to charge discharge cycles, that's hwy the obvious question hasn't had an obvious answer so far. I guess the extra bit to get to 11.6 hours gives an rather high wait time in this new battery so they display 100% at 10 hours, which is what they advertise rather than have people whine of how long it takes the iPad to reach from say 94% to 100%.
See we finally got to the bottom of it. Though apple techies answer wasn't in all honesty...
There is nothing to see here, move along. This is just some ignorant people who were wrong about Apple once again. Heatgate was bogus and now batterygate turns out to be completely bogus and untrue.
People who are part of ignorantgate should look into getting a clue, and do it quickly, for your own sakes. The moronic media is not much better than the idiots who propagate these stupid rumors. And anybody who falls for these dumb rumors and lies is frankly not too bright.
Which leaves Apple ][ the only un-ignorant, un-clueless, un-moronic, un-idiotic and un-stupid person in existence.
For the same reason the Shuttle used to go to 110% throttle every launch. There are engineering specs and when they are met the device is at 100% of rated capability. Whether you call the actual physical "full" measurement 110% that or just cap it off on the display isn't relevant to any actual users.
Off-topic but kind of related to what you posted about percentages, how is it possible for Priceline.com to be 102% institutionally owned?
Let's talk actual behavior on an actual new iPad, and what I have to offer pertains to my iPad alone, so consider it anecdotal - a data point. With the charger connected and while playing a video stored on a hard drive over my home WiFi, I've noticed the charge percentage decline to as low as 95% while the "charging" indicator still shows a full charge. As far as I'm concerned, this has had no perceptible effect on performance. When I quit the video, the percentage comes back up to 100 in short order. So the readings behave a little differently than the 2010 original iPad that I replaced. Otherwise, it means nothing as far as I'm concerned. If some kind of actual problem surfaces, we can expect Apple to issue a patch. They've done so before.
I recall a similar furor when it came out that the Chevy Volt will report the battery as empty when it still technically has a 50% charge. It still delivers the all-electric range promised, and continues to run on the gas engine as promised.
However, due to the battery technology used, if it is frequently fully depeleted, the battery would have a very short life indeed, and be extremely costly to own. By using a bigger battery, and only using the top 50% of its working range, the battery should last as long as the rest of the car.
Hence displaying a 0% charge and running off the gas motor when the optimum state has been reached is much easier for a user to understand than exposing the complexity going on.
I don't think there is any difference; just detractors trying to cast proper design as lies.
Comments
I wonder if we can figure out what the next big faux issue that will arise with Apple products.
When left in a Las Vegas desert the black iPad gets 10 degrees hotter than the white ipad
Gate
When left in a Las Vegas desert the black iPad gets 10 degrees hotter than the white ipad
Gate
Apple's 6th gen iPhone will support LTE... but only for their home continent... resulting in eLTEist-gate.
"You've got to be fucking kidding me."
For the same reason the Shuttle used to go to 110% throttle every launch. There are engineering specs and when they are met the device is at 100% of rated capability. Whether you call the actual physical "full" measurement 110% that or just cap it off on the display isn't relevant to any actual users.
I guess it's like the crowd that buys a stereo because its dial goes to 11 while the competition only goes to 10.
I guess it's like the crowd that buys a stereo because its dial goes to 11 while the competition only goes to 10.
Yes, but the new higher resolution of the retina display allows for the inclusion of the new setting, "12,'" in the same space that Apple's competitors can still only go to "10!"
Close yes but that only counts in horse shoes. This variability is often seen in iPhone batteries too.
And hand grenades. Don't forget hand grenades.
Hm, I'm guessing an hour and a half of additional charging is JUST before it reaches full charge?
Yes, as the charge function is nonlinear, it flattens progressively the more the cells are charged. It's just physics.
http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/a..._ion_batteries
Well, I'm more than willing to admit I know very little about battery technology. I'm just confused as to how having the battery display 100% when the battery is at 95% or less of its full charge can be talked away by a technical explanation. It seems like Apple made a judgement decision in its battery logic for this behavior- is there a technical reason Apple couldn't have had it read 100% when the battery was actually at 100%? (of course, fully support it staying at 100% when it is going through its discharge/charge cycle- I'm only concerned with that initial threshold for "100%")
I don't necessarily mean 'deception' in a negative sense- from the little I know, it seems to be a good, simple, solution for the consumer. Again, I fully admit I'm probably making the battery experts around here cringe
Very fair point. I can't see any explanation for this either. And this quote
That's by design, Apple's Michael Tchao said to All Things D on Tuesday. All iOS devices, including the new iPad, will display that they are 100 percent charged just before the device reaches a fully charged state. The device will then continue charging, then discharge a bit, and recharge once again ? a cycle that will continue until the device is unplugged.
Just doesn't explain anything.
And another issue here is, how "just before" this just before is. Could it be possible that on smaller batteries on other iOS devices this just before is a bit different compared to the enormous battery of the new iPad? If people are reporting an hour to real 100% on the new iPad, it could very well be that the extra ten percent on say an iPhone takes another 10 minutes, but on the iPad it takes an hour. I am quite sure from experience that the last % of charge are always the slowest.
Can somebody please get technical here, because apple's simple explanation, amounts to no explanation at all, because it raises the obvious question why not report it at 100% when it is actually 100% and then continue with the discharge and recharge cycle.
I have a suspicion on why they done this, here's my theory: Maybe they guesstimated that no one pulls the plug out exactly at 100%, quite possibly people look at 90% wait around a bit and take the plug out after a few minutes of the reported 100%, at which stage the battery WILL be at an actual 100% because quite possobly it won't be on a discharge cycle.
Even if this, largely unfounded, theory of mine is wrong, it seems they need to tweak the algorithm for the new iPads larger battery and they haven't done so yet, yet they are not admitting this. It would be very interesting if someone could report actual and reported battery charge for their new iPad now, and after an iOS update, I am sure it will be different.
Why does it matter? "100%" is relative. If when it displays "100%" it reasonably hits the stated battery life, then what's the problem?
The problem might be that on the new iPad when it says 100% it's an actual 90% and it doesn't hit the stated battery life as close, while on an iPod what with the smaller battery when it says 100% it's actually 95% and it comes more close. I would find it very interesting for someone to test actual battery at 100% now, and after an iOS update. I think they haven't brought a spokesman out at all things d for no reason, it seems to me like the typical company strategy (any company not just apple) of deny it first with a rational sounding explanation thn silently fix it with an update.
The problem might be that on the new iPad when it says 100% it's an actual 90% and it doesn't hit the stated battery life as close, while on an iPod what with the smaller battery when it says 100% it's actually 95% and it comes more close. I would find it very interesting for someone to test actual battery at 100% now, and after an iOS update. I think they haven't brought a spokesman out at all things d for no reason, it seems to me like the typical company strategy (any company not just apple) of deny it first with a rational sounding explanation thn silently fix it with an update.
Wrong on all counts. Read some more before you go expounding conspiracy theories. The battery "expert" at the bottom of this is DisplayMate's Raymond Soneira. He notes that when the iPad is left to continue charging it gets 11.6 hours of use, well beyond the advertised 10 hours. Apple is saying that when the charge indicator hits 100% you get the 10 hours (9 hours for LTE). As for your conspiracy theory about corporate skulduggery, wouldn't Apple generate much more marketing hype if they could advertise 11 or 12 hours of battery use? Yet they have chosen to stick with the same 10 hours as earlier iPads and maximize the charge-discharge cycles for better battery life.
And this is Apple denying something and being evil? Give me a freaking break.
Wrong on all counts. Read some more before you go expounding conspiracy theories. The battery "expert" at the bottom of this is DisplayMate's Raymond Soneira. He notes that when the iPad is left to continue charging it gets 11.6 hours of use, well beyond the advertised 10 hours. Apple is saying that when the charge indicator hits 100% you get the 10 hours (9 hours for LTE). As for your conspiracy theory about corporate skulduggery, wouldn't Apple generate much more marketing hype if they could advertise 11 or 12 hours of battery use? Yet they have chosen to stick with the same 10 hours as earlier iPads and maximize the charge-discharge cycles for better battery life.
And this is Apple denying something and being evil? Give me a freaking break.
Hold your horses with the projections about apple's evil-ness and conspiracy theories. And don't get
See we finally got to the bottom of it.
There is nothing to see here, move along. This is just some ignorant people who were wrong about Apple once again. Heatgate was bogus and now batterygate turns out to be completely bogus and untrue.
People who are part of ignorantgate should look into getting a clue, and do it quickly, for your own sakes. The moronic media is not much better than the idiots who propagate these stupid rumors. And anybody who falls for these dumb rumors and lies is frankly not too bright.
Which leaves Apple ][ the only un-ignorant, un-clueless, un-moronic, un-idiotic and un-stupid person in existence.
For the same reason the Shuttle used to go to 110% throttle every launch. There are engineering specs and when they are met the device is at 100% of rated capability. Whether you call the actual physical "full" measurement 110% that or just cap it off on the display isn't relevant to any actual users.
Off-topic but kind of related to what you posted about percentages, how is it possible for Priceline.com to be 102% institutionally owned?
Anyone? Typo?
http://www.google.com/finance?q=priceline
However, due to the battery technology used, if it is frequently fully depeleted, the battery would have a very short life indeed, and be extremely costly to own. By using a bigger battery, and only using the top 50% of its working range, the battery should last as long as the rest of the car.
Hence displaying a 0% charge and running off the gas motor when the optimum state has been reached is much easier for a user to understand than exposing the complexity going on.
I don't think there is any difference; just detractors trying to cast proper design as lies.