Not even considering the possibility that Apple is probably testing multiple batteries, sizes, materials etc. to determine what would be the best in the new phones?
This is one of the things that are wrong with Apple. The execs let the design team pick the battery.
I'm not sure how you could construe execs letting the design team actually design the phone to be a "bad thing", unless you're really asking for Microsoft-esque bullet-point-list feature prescriptions that the engineering somehow has to compromise to match.
In that case, I suppose Apple is happy to lose you as a customer.
"Without corresponding voltage, the true capacity of the battery in terms of milliampere-hours cannot be determined. But presumably a larger watt-hour rating would result in a battery with greater capacity." The true capacity of a battery is messured in watt-hours, not ampere-hours. To get the true energy content from ampere-hours you multiply it by the voltage, resulting in watt-hours.
Not even considering the possibility that Apple is probably testing multiple batteries, sizes, materials etc. to determine what would be the best in the new phones?
This is one of the things that are wrong with Apple. The execs let the design team pick the battery.
Indeed. The phone needs to last a week not half a day. I don't expect a "week of solid use" but I certainly expect "a week of sitting in my coat", at most it lasts 2 days without being charged.
Right now the Retina iPad lasts just a little under 12 hours of solid web browser usage. But It lasts a week without being charged, and that is literately what I expect of it.
I'd not want to upgrade to newer "thinner" phones, only newer longer-lasting ones. People want the smaller screen with a larger battery, not the other way around. That means you can push that weight to thickness instead. There will be people who want a thinner larger device. But a small thin device is not a useful one.
"Without corresponding voltage, the true capacity of the battery in terms of milliampere-hours cannot be determined. But presumably a larger watt-hour rating would result in a battery with greater capacity."
Bigger battery and a ceramic body is not going to excite the bean counters or the general public for that matter. As others have mentioned the smartphone category is now mature, it's all about the software and services from now on.
Comments
I'm not sure how you could construe execs letting the design team actually design the phone to be a "bad thing", unless you're really asking for Microsoft-esque bullet-point-list feature prescriptions that the engineering somehow has to compromise to match.
In that case, I suppose Apple is happy to lose you as a customer.
The true capacity of a battery is messured in watt-hours, not ampere-hours. To get the true energy content from ampere-hours you multiply it by the voltage, resulting in watt-hours.
Right now the Retina iPad lasts just a little under 12 hours of solid web browser usage. But It lasts a week without being charged, and that is literately what I expect of it.
I'd not want to upgrade to newer "thinner" phones, only newer longer-lasting ones. People want the smaller screen with a larger battery, not the other way around. That means you can push that weight to thickness instead. There will be people who want a thinner larger device. But a small thin device is not a useful one.
That is… about as backwards as it gets.