[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Free Android Apps Packed with Ads are Major Battery Drains here

[AnonymousPC]

Wait, where is the part about the Windows Phone apps? And I find it odd that they did not study the effect of this in iOS...

[slamdunk]

"Researchers from Purdue University in collaboration with Microsoft..."

How obvious can you get? A competitor OS gives money to a university to release a study that free Android apps with advertising use more battery.

Hmmmm.

Follow the money people, follow the money. It is the answer to more questions (and research results) in life than you care to know.

[QUADICON]

Wouldn't this be true of any platform offering free apps that have ads?

Hmmm. Why are you picking on Android? Are you an Android hater?

Where is the comparison to iOS or Windows Phone, Bada and others?

When you speak about Apple, you always only take about good things for the most part, seldom the bad stuff. But with Android you try to highlight everything bad and seldom something good.

Hmmm! I don't know which fans/haters are the worse, the posting fans/haters, or the article creating fans/haters..


Also just curious. The ad only appears when the app is open. How do you actually isolate teh fact that such an app drains more battery then the same app without ads? The whole point of the free app is to give you a taste of what the full app is like. The free app likely doens;t take advantage of hardware extended features that would normally cause more battery darin anyways.

For example, a game in the full version may require more GPU and CPU resources. The app may also have multiplayer that may use your WiFi or 3G/4G connection more, which may not be available in the free version.

Not comparing it to another similar mobile platform, just makes you and your article very suspect.

[UKCatFanKevin]

How about the fact that most of these apps don't take up much energy anyway. Unless you spend all day playing games, the app probably will not even show up in your battery use list. Sensationalism journalism at its best.

[crosswordbob]

QUADICON, on 20 March 2012 - 08:12 AM, said:

Wouldn't this be true of any platform offering free apps that have ads?

Hmmm. Why are you picking on Android? Are you an Android hater?

Where is the comparison to iOS or Windows Phone, Bada and others?

When you speak about Apple, you always only take about good things for the most part, seldom the bad stuff. But with Android you try to highlight everything bad and seldom something good.

Hmmm! I don't know which fans/haters are the worse, the posting fans/haters, or the article creating fans/haters..


Also just curious. The ad only appears when the app is open. How do you actually isolate teh fact that such an app drains more battery then the same app without ads? The whole point of the free app is to give you a taste of what the full app is like. The free app likely doens;t take advantage of hardware extended features that would normally cause more battery darin anyways.

For example, a game in the full version may require more GPU and CPU resources. The app may also have multiplayer that may use your WiFi or 3G/4G connection more, which may not be available in the free version.

Not comparing it to another similar mobile platform, just makes you and your article very suspect.

Don't blame PCWorld; blame Microsoft—they commissioned the study, which only tested Android and WP7. No great surprise - battery life is an area MS can be confident their devices will do well against Android, whereas it'd be much closer between their devices and Apple's.

This post has been edited by crosswordbob: 20 March 2012 - 09:23 AM

[xyberviri]

Or you could just turn off your network when you play those games, its not like you need to update facebook while listening to pandora while playing angry birds.

[Mattvm8v]

Well I know from personal experience that Android apps are bigger battery hogs than iOS apps. I own both an Android device and iDevice. I've tested 100s of apps on both platforms and Android apps consume far more battery than iOS apps. Part of the reason is because iOS apps have to live up to a certain standard (even free apps) for Apple to approve them. There is no such policy for Android apps. Android apps can suck as much battery and data as they want because there is no approval policy for Android apps. All Google does is remove apps after they're reported, there is no approve first policy. Which means Android users are test subjects. It means less work for Google.

Now that said. I couldn't tell you the difference between Windows Mobile apps and the other mobile apps seeing as I've never had a Windows Mobile device before.

[TheOldTopkick]

The only thing that this means is that now that we have paid the geld, we will never be rid of the Dane, with an apology to my Danish friends.