Are the tests entirely fair...of course not. Do the tests confirm what we already know? That the DInc battery is subpar...yes, it does. Thats why there are so many people buy the 1750 and 1500, 2150....because the 1300 mah is not adequate.
My point was that the tests are so significantly stacked, as to be useless at proving anything. What is a better judge of the Incs battery being subpar, is that it has a 1300 vs 1500 battery. The test itself is so far out there to as to be useless as a phone test.
My DInc will be down to about 40- 50% in about 10 hours of no use...there is no way it would make it 4 days. And I don't have wifi, bluetooth or anything crazy installed or running. And BTW, I'm using a OEM 1500 mah.
If you are losing 50% battery in 10 hours of no use at all, you really need to check some of the battery help threads, because you have a MAJOR problem ( and it's not the phone ). With no use on an Inc getting 2-4% "Time without a Signal" and a 30 min phone call..I was a couple hours shy of 4 days. You should be getting in the 4-6 hours of actual usage time.
Now on to the other stuff...what I'm talking about is a general change with smart phones...not just the Dinc. Of course if you have one phone that is $200 and the other $260, some people will make their purchases based on that.
What I'm talking about is this:
The price of these phones are over $500.00 WITHOUT the carrier's subsidy. If they all included better batteries... and cost $50 more (which is WAY more than what it would actually cost to fix this battery issue...heck 1 Ghz CPU processors cost less than $25)...do you really think that would make much of a difference?
All I'm saying is that this battery problem amongst smart phones is rediculous. Either have a slim phone and have battery problems or get the extended battery and have a brick. There is no in between.
Agreed...and in fact: There IS massive work on battery technology. Prop open a 5 year old phone and you'll usually find a 750 mah battery. 10 years ago we were using 300 mah batteries. Before that...battery technology moved along pretty slowly ( Just think about RC cars from 10 years ago, compared to 20 years ago...pretty identically horrible battery life. )
However, it just isn't fast enough. The speed and power of mobile devices is out-pacing the batteries that power them. ( Kinda makes you wonder if that's part of why the sudden surge of larger mobile devices, after so long of it always being smaller and smaller. )
Better techniques of miniaturizing components doesn't really help, because they just cram more stuff in there. End result is, the battery ends up being the same physical size, so the only increase in capacity would have to come from improved density.
The best thing I can think of personally that would help, is for manufacturers to stop trying to bury the battery into the phone itself. Extend the battery to the full length of the phone or so (Obviously something would need to be done with the main camera.), and try to make it thin. While this wouldn't change stock batteries: It would allow for extended batteries that aren't quite as thick.
Also, as you mention: The latest in phones, should be carrying the latest in battery tech. 1500 mah was last gens battery: I think the DX, D2 and Inc all could have fit 1600s in without any size increase at all.
-------------END REPLY PORTION--------------------
I actually decided to look into the DX forums and read some of the stuff about their battery life. Color me shocked.
It sounded a lot like a repeat of the Incredible. "I get 2 days of heavy usage" and "I only get 6 hours of light usage". There were former Inc owners claiming everything from worse to 3 times better battery.
About the only thing I could discern from it ( real shocker here ) is the DXs screen eats way more battery. In fact, while most Inc users see something like 10% of their battery eaten by the display, DX owners are seeing in the 80s. It also appears the DXs radios use far less. (This is surely partly just from the fact that the display is hogging so much for itself, but in comparison to the system as well, it appears their radios might be using a bit less.) If I had to guess, these 2 things are what is causing the variance. A given user might use his DX and Inc pretty much the same: but compared to another user, he might use the radio more or the screen more.
Once again, it really boils down to: The user. How each given person uses it is going to be the major discerning factor. Ironically enough, it looks like if you want to watch videos/play games/ things that use the screen, go Inc. If you talk on your phone a lot, and have a lot of stuff in the background, use DX, lol. Either way, you're running Android, so it's Win/Win.
Also, we got Froyo first
.