[KLanD]

Nuke61, on 28 March 2012 - 09:32 AM, said:

KLanD, on 28 March 2012 - 08:23 AM, said:

Data is data. 21Mb/s x 24hrs of a constant (or almost constant) data stream?

I don't think they had a continuous data stream, but rather, tried to simulate typical usage. In any case, Anandtech had already tested other LTE devices, including phones, as hotspots. It makes sense that the new iPad would last a really long time compared to other devices since it has a laptop sized battery.

http://images.anandt...h4605/40359.png

That's gotta be an old graph, cause my S2 lasts more than ~4-5hrs under above-normal use.

[KLanD]

DP

This post has been edited by KLanD: 29 March 2012 - 04:59 AM

[Nuke61]

KLanD, on 29 March 2012 - 04:58 AM, said:

That's gotta be an old graph, cause my S2 lasts more than ~4-5hrs under above-normal use.

The graph shows usage as a hotspot, so your phone lasts longer than 4-5 hours as an LTE hotspot?

[KLanD]

Nuke61, on 29 March 2012 - 06:22 AM, said:

KLanD, on 29 March 2012 - 04:58 AM, said:

That's gotta be an old graph, cause my S2 lasts more than ~4-5hrs under above-normal use.

The graph shows usage as a hotspot, so your phone lasts longer than 4-5 hours as an LTE hotspot?

I'm sure it could. On the road, it lasts all day with LTE, Wifi, push email (2 accounts), notifications on and I'm usually texting, reading/sending emails, verifying files and videos, etc.. So, ya, if I turn off the screen and only use it as a hotspot, I can see it going for at least 7-8hrs or more. Again, I haven't actually tested this (and I'm actually tempted to do so this weekend), but I can't see how being a hotspot can take more juice than than having both the LTE and wifi on at once.

[Nuke61]

It would be interesting to see, but the 24 hours that the iPad can last as an LTE hotspot shouldn't be surprising, given its battery size.

[KLanD]

Nuke61, on 29 March 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

It would be interesting to see, but the 24 hours that the iPad can last as an LTE hotspot shouldn't be surprising, given its battery size.

I can't disagree with that, the new iPad is like 80% battery

[BillHood]

nonseq, on 27 March 2012 - 09:35 AM, said:

RobertoRecine, on 27 March 2012 - 08:47 AM, said:

Does it blow up before or after reaching 116 Fahrenheit?

Well, to try to give it some sort of context, the National Coffee Institute suggests that the ideal temp for serving hot coffee is 185 F. Other sources say that coffee at 116 F would be considered tepid or luke warm.

So far no explosions have been reported and no actual new iPad owners have really complained about this. Most complaining seems to have come from those who do not own/use a new iPad and do not plan to own/use one.

You are kidding, right? Love my iPad but See how long you can sit in a "Luke" warm hot tub at 116. Little much cool aid.

This post has been edited by BillHood: 24 May 2012 - 03:57 PM

[Nuke61]

BillHood, on 24 May 2012 - 03:56 PM, said:

nonseq, on 27 March 2012 - 09:35 AM, said:

RobertoRecine, on 27 March 2012 - 08:47 AM, said:

Does it blow up before or after reaching 116 Fahrenheit?

Well, to try to give it some sort of context, the National Coffee Institute suggests that the ideal temp for serving hot coffee is 185 F. Other sources say that coffee at 116 F would be considered tepid or luke warm.

So far no explosions have been reported and no actual new iPad owners have really complained about this. Most complaining seems to have come from those who do not own/use a new iPad and do not plan to own/use one.

You are kidding, right? Love my iPad but See how long you can sit in a "Luke" warm hot tub at 116. Little much cool aid.

Unless you're going to take a "bath" in a tub full of 116*F iPads, it's not a problem. I ran my iPad exactly as described by Consumer Reports, with the iPad resting on my bare leg. It was warm, but not uncomfortably warm, much less painful or dangerous.

[crosswordbob]

KLanD, on 29 March 2012 - 07:23 AM, said:

Nuke61, on 29 March 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

It would be interesting to see, but the 24 hours that the iPad can last as an LTE hotspot shouldn't be surprising, given its battery size.

I can't disagree with that, the new iPad is like 80% battery

This is true, but note that the same battery only offers an additional hour for the wifi-only model—the same hour that previous wifi-only versions held against the 3G versions. If LTE were such a battery-drain as we know it to be in early-adoption devices, surely the wifi-only model should be managing far more than an extra hour?

To me this suggests that the LTE chip in the new iPad is a hell of a lot more power-efficient than that in early-adoption devices, and that the souped-up battery in the new iPad has more to do with the display than the LTE. This chimes with Apple's public statements about not endorsing LTE until it could be implemented without insane battery-drain.

[KLanD]

crosswordbob, on 24 May 2012 - 06:48 PM, said:

KLanD, on 29 March 2012 - 07:23 AM, said:

Nuke61, on 29 March 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

It would be interesting to see, but the 24 hours that the iPad can last as an LTE hotspot shouldn't be surprising, given its battery size.

I can't disagree with that, the new iPad is like 80% battery

This is true, but note that the same battery only offers an additional hour for the wifi-only model—the same hour that previous wifi-only versions held against the 3G versions. If LTE were such a battery-drain as we know it to be in early-adoption devices, surely the wifi-only model should be managing far more than an extra hour?

To me this suggests that the LTE chip in the new iPad is a hell of a lot more power-efficient than that in early-adoption devices, and that the souped-up battery in the new iPad has more to do with the display than the LTE. This chimes with Apple's public statements about not endorsing LTE until it could be implemented without insane battery-drain.

Oh for sure. All that extra battery is going into driving the graphics chips and the screen.