[jimbosyn]

I am more than a little concerned that Apple has not added the estimated battery life to the Macbook Pro specifications page. With estimated ship dates fast approaching, I am a little worried that we will not know the battery life until we receive the product. If there was not a problem with the estimates, why not disclose them? Not disclosing seems to indicate a deficiency of some sort.

Here is some "food for thought". Would you buy a car with out a MPG rating? How about an iPod with no battery life estimates? A cell phone with no "talk time" battery rating? Would you buy a "jug" of milk without knowing if it contained a gallon, half gallon? Would you buy a computer that simply states it has a processor and some ram without disclosing the model and speed of processor, or the amount of ram?

I would NOT.

I have a Macbook Pro on order, but feel as though battery life should be "officially" disclosed prior to shipping the product.

One more thing to consider is that the MBP is still not being manufactured, and everyone's shipping date will be pushed into March. This IMHO would be a valid reason not to disclose the battery life since the "production" models have not finished being tested.

So what this all boils down to is this. Either Apple is running behind on getting these books into production, or they are intentionally withholding specifications on a product that will ship any day now. Which situation would you prefer?

[atc ben]

Originally Posted by jimbosyn

Here is some "food for thought". Would you buy a car with out a MPG rating? How about an iPod with no battery life estimates? A cell phone with no "talk time" battery rating? Would you buy a "jug" of milk without knowing if it contained a gallon, half gallon? Would you buy a computer that simply states it has a processor and some ram without disclosing the model and speed of processor, or the amount of ram?

I would NOT.

I have a Macbook Pro on order, but feel as though battery life should be "officially" disclosed prior to shipping the product.

So, on one hand, you say you wouldn't buy a computer without knowing all about it, but isn't that exactly what you did?

[Enigmaaron]

Let's prioritize a laptop's features (at least my priorities, you are certainly welcome to disagree):
1. Processor
2. Screen
3. Video Card
4. RAM
5. Ports
6. Optical Drive
7. Hard Drive
8. Battery duration
9. Other features (isight, magsafe power, front row, backlit keyboard, etc.)

What I'm trying to say here is that the battery duration for a laptop is one of the least important features of the machine. Maybe most people disagree, but when put in perspective I don't think they would. (Oh and I exclude wireless since pretty much any high end laptop has it all). Compared to the examples you give you certainly would not purchase any of those items since those features you suggest have a pretty high priority if not the top priority.


Another possibility to consider is that Apple is hesitant to release any info because of all the whiny lawsuit happy momma’s boys that sue them for any discretion in approximate battery life and what they actually get. These are the same people trying to sue Apple for “making” them listen to music too loud. Give me a break, this world is nuts with everyone trying to blame someone else for their own stupidity.


Oh and in response to:

Originally Posted by jimbosyn

So what this all boils down to is this. Either Apple is running behind on getting these books into production, or they are intentionally withholding specifications on a product that will ship any day now. Which situation would you prefer?

Shipping NOW!!! As I'm sure all the other people waiting would say as well.

[mduell]

Battery life depends on options/equipment/peripherals and use. I estimate that the MBP's battery life will be 1.25 - 6 hours with a fresh battery. 1.25 hours with the screen on max, all wireless on and in use, CPU at 100% load the whole time, optical drive constantly in use, hard drive constantly reading/writing, numberous USB and FW peripherals drawing maximum power, etc; 6 hours with screen on minimum brightness, wireless off, CPU nearly idle, no peripherals, no optical drive use, minimal hard drive use.

Would it be meaningful if Apple rated the MBP like they rate the PowerBooks? Claim 5 hours, when it gets 2.7 playing a DVD (see C|Net), and only 1.5 under some users normal usage (see other threads in the PB forum).

[jimbosyn]

Originally Posted by mduell

Would it be meaningful if Apple rated the MBP like they rate the PowerBooks? Claim 5 hours, when it gets 2.7 playing a DVD (see C|Net), and only 1.5 under some users normal usage (see other threads in the PB forum).

I just feel like some sort of battery life estimate should be given. I have a 15inch 1.5GHZ albook right now, and know very well that the apple specs are no where near what I get in reality. If i turn the screen brightness way down, and do nothing but textwrangler, xcode, or terminal.app , I get GREAT battery life. But when i am watching a DVD at full screen brightness, it barely lasts 2 hours and 45 minutes. But just because actual usage can fluctuate is no excuse for not disclosing estimates.

Don't get me wrong. I am chomping at the bit for my MBP to arrive, but in all fairness, $2500 is a lot to spend without full specs.

Come on Apple, give us a ball park figure at least.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by jimbosyn

I just feel like some sort of battery life estimate should be given. I have a 15inch 1.5GHZ albook right now, and know very well that the apple specs are no where near what I get in reality. If i turn the screen brightness way down, and do nothing but textwrangler, xcode, or terminal.app , I get GREAT battery life. But when i am watching a DVD at full screen brightness, it barely lasts 2 hours and 45 minutes. But just because actual usage can fluctuate is no excuse for not disclosing estimates.

So you want a figure that you admit is meaningless. What if they say 10 hours? What if they say 1 hour?
If they would release a battery life curve (along with various configuration/usage points) that would be meaningful; but they won't. They do specify the maximum capacity of the battery, and the power drain of the rest of the system can be approximated to provide a reasonable estimate of battery life, as I did above.

[Simon]

Apple could offer exactly the information mduell estimated. Max and min life. That way people know what ballpark they are in. Saying nothing at all indicates to most customers that there's something to hide. Maybe they'll still add some figures later on.

[NosniboR80]

Can someone who knows about battery life/power give us some education about 1) previous PB's max capacity and wattage, 2) the MBP's same stats, and 3) what that means exactly?

[Simon]

Old 15" PB: 50Wh battery
New 15" MBP: 60Wh battery

[Timetheus]

I wonder if some of this has to do with Rossetta (just a thought). Traditionally the phrase "with just an open word doc" ment your battery life would be pretty good while that was all your doing - but with rossetta memory/proccessor hogging tendancies that phrase may not not mean so much anymore.... I don't really know - but most consumers expect good results when just using Office - which we may not get.

[Timetheus]

Ok, I just read that through it sounds kind of stupid, but do you see what I mean? Apple has more than the usual set of factors when considering this spec. (new platform, new battery, new OS in a way, more code to pushed through... etc.)

[JKT]

<conspiracy theory>I think it could have something to do with USB power drain that has been reported for Windows and the Core Duo. They are saying it is in software, but perhaps it is actually the new chipset.</conspiracy theory>

However, it is perhaps more likely due to the operating system for running the MBP not being ready yet (not saying it isn't, just that is might not be) and they aren't getting reliable figures.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Timetheus

I wonder if some of this has to do with Rossetta (just a thought). Traditionally the phrase "with just an open word doc" ment your battery life would be pretty good while that was all your doing - but with rossetta memory/proccessor hogging tendancies that phrase may not not mean so much anymore.... I don't really know - but most consumers expect good results when just using Office - which we may not get.

No, running Office through Rosetta is not going to put a huge drain on the battery.

[mrmister]

"What I'm trying to say here is that the battery duration for a laptop is one of the least important features of the machine. Maybe most people disagree, but when put in perspective I don't think they would."

In a word: bollocks.

I certainly won't buy one until verified third-party tests have been performed with working models in the field, and I'd advise any sensible person to do the same. Otherwise, caveat emptor.

[Enigmaaron]

Originally Posted by mrmister

"What I'm trying to say here is that the battery duration for a laptop is one of the least important features of the machine. Maybe most people disagree, but when put in perspective I don't think they would."

In a word: bollocks.

I certainly won't buy one until verified third-party tests have been performed with working models in the field, and I'd advise any sensible person to do the same. Otherwise, caveat emptor.

Do you honestly think that Apple is going to release a product that is so short on battery life that it would be rendered virtually useless as a laptop? That would be a heck of a shot in the foot if they did. Perhaps you have some specific need to run a specific set of apps for a specific length of time, but otherwise battery length is just a selling point. Unless it comes out that it only lasts some ridiculously short time like 30 minutes people will buy it. Don't kid yourself. Is it really going to make a difference if it lasts 4 hours instead of 5?

[jimbosyn]

Ok, so my point is that they should at least disclose the estimates. This is based on the fact that they have always given estimates in the past. Why stop now?

So I did some investigation on Dell.com to see if they readily display estiimated battery time. Either I am blind, or they do not. They do show the battery specs, but no estimates of 1-3 hours or so on.

Does anyone have experience with other vendors to know if this is industry standard. Maybe Apple was the exception insted of the rule by giving actual run time estimates. What do you guys think?

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by jimbosyn

Here is some "food for thought". Would you buy a car with out a MPG rating? How about an iPod with no battery life estimates? A cell phone with no "talk time" battery rating? Would you buy a "jug" of milk without knowing if it contained a gallon, half gallon? Would you buy a computer that simply states it has a processor and some ram without disclosing the model and speed of processor, or the amount of ram?

I would NOT.

I have a Macbook Pro on order, but feel as though battery life should be "officially" disclosed prior to shipping the product.

Umm, you first make a very good argument about not buying the computer until you know the details - makes sense. I agree with you, but then you through your argument out the window when you mentioned that you bought one. Sounds like you don't take your own sound judgement. While the lack of battery specs isn't holding me back, but rather not wanting to purchase a rev a machine.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Maflynn

but rather not wanting to purchase a rev a machine.

Why don't you want a Rev A machine?

[Spliffdaddy]

Here's some ballpark figures:

A 60Watt/hour battery will provide (yep) 60 watts of power for one hour.

In a low-use 'idle' condition, the MBP would consume roughly 15watts. That means the battery would last for approximately 4 hours.

Playing a DVD would result in a power drain of about 25watts. Which means the battery would last about 2.5 hours.

Worst case, such as playing a 3D game - the machine would suck down 30-35 watts, resulting in a sub-2hour battery life.

The data used for this comparison is taken from similarly configured laptops. Factors such as screen brightness can significantly reduce battery life (up to one hour).

In conclusion, I'd say that you can expect anywhere from 90minutes to 4 hours of battery life - depending on what you're doing and how brightly the screen is lit.

[terigox]

I like your conclusion Spliffdaddy, sounds very reasonable. That type of battery life seems to be about what the majority of laptops get. I don't see how it would be that much different, I mean as far as the processor, the current pentium M's consume around 27watts, and supposedly, the dual cores are supposed to consume sub 25 watts. Which in my opinion would make battery life slightly better, or about the same at least.

Some sources:
Wikipedia
Wikipedia2

*Edit* These are the maximum power ratings btw, at full cpu usage.

[phoenix78]

looking at dell and acer websites that both use the core duo systems the average battery life ("idle") is about 3.5hrs. But that is the Lithium Ion battery.

Macbooks will use the new Lithium Polymer battery. so really you got to do a search on this new technology and see what its relative performance is compared to the Li ion.

i looked at wikipedia and the Li-poly has 20% more charge density, has more than 10,000 charge cycles before it can hold only 80% of its original capacity and it recharges much faster.

so we wil just have to wait and see what the performance of the new battery will be.

cheers,

robM.

[Simon]

As great as Li Polymer may be in terms of longevity and fast charging, 60Wh will always remain 60Wh. If the MBP draws any more than 20W, your battery life will be less than 3h.

[tie]

Originally Posted by Enigmaaron

Let's prioritize a laptop's features (at least my priorities, you are certainly welcome to disagree):
1. Processor
2. Screen
3. Video Card
4. RAM
5. Ports
6. Optical Drive
7. Hard Drive
8. Battery duration
9. Other features (isight, magsafe power, front row, backlit keyboard, etc.)

Well, I definitely disagree. Battery is extremely important. Wireless, too (Apple is well below PC competitors in wireless reception; I've had too many embarassing experiences travelling with colleagues where the PC laptops connect to the networks and I can't even see anything. Apple wireless software is the same as Windows XP before SP2 — terrible.) I couldn't care less about video card (I don't edit movies, but then neither does the vast majority of business users).

[cambro]

Originally Posted by Enigmaaron

Let's prioritize a laptop's features (at least my priorities, you are certainly welcome to disagree):
1. Processor
2. Screen
3. Video Card
4. RAM
5. Ports
6. Optical Drive
7. Hard Drive
8. Battery duration
9. Other features (isight, magsafe power, front row, backlit keyboard, etc.)

What tie said...

We're talking about LAPTOPS here...not desktops that are thin and fold up.
Here are my priorities for a *default* shipping LAPTOP (HD and RAM upgradable), listed in order of importance but more relevantly weighted by impact 1-10 (10=best):

1. Size/weight/form factor (10)
2. Battery life (8)
3. Processor (8)
4. Screen quality (7)
5. Graphics card/vid RAM (7)
6. Wireless performance (range, signal quality, speed etc.) (6)
7. Connectivity (ports) (6)
8. Optical drive capability (5)
9. Hard drive capacity/performance (4)
10. Bells & whistles (iSight, magsafe, backlit keyboard) (3)

For me, LAPTOP size/weight/form factor dominates the equation. Processsor performance and battery life are EQUALLY important, I think.

The bottom line is that building a laptop requires tradeoffs because an enhancement in one factor usually necessitates tradeoffs in others. Also, the equation for each individual is different depending on their usage habits.

That said, Enigmaaron, battery life in a portable can't be dismissed as one of the most "unimportant." Apple's silence on the battery life of MBP is very, very troubling and jimbosyn is right to say so.

[terigox]

Originally Posted by cambro

What tie said...

We're talking about LAPTOPS here...not desktops that are thin and fold up.
Here are my priorities for a *default* shipping LAPTOP (HD and RAM upgradable), listed in order of importance but more relevantly weighted by impact 1-10 (10=best):

1. Size/weight/form factor (10)
2. Battery life (8)
3. Processor (8)
4. Screen quality (7)
5. Graphics card/vid RAM (7)
6. Wireless performance (range, signal quality, speed etc.) (6)
7. Connectivity (ports) (6)
8. Optical drive capability (5)
9. Hard drive capacity/performance (4)
10. Bells & whistles (iSight, magsafe, backlit keyboard) (3)

For me, LAPTOP size/weight/form factor dominates the equation. Processsor performance and battery life are EQUALLY important, I think.

The bottom line is that building a laptop requires tradeoffs because an enhancement in one factor usually necessitates tradeoffs in others. Also, the equation for each individual is different depending on their usage habits.

That said, Enigmaaron, battery life in a portable can't be dismissed as one of the most "unimportant." Apple's silence on the battery life of MBP is very, very troubling and jimbosyn is right to say so.

I'd definitly have to concur here, and I think my priorities are exactly the same cambro I have no doubts in my mind that Apple will meet our expectations.

[amazing]

After using Apple laptops for over 10 years now (I loved the PB 100), I have to say that battery life and wireless range are most important for me. Speed is a close third.

After my Ti-400, I've grown quite cynical about the "bars of reception" as being the same thing as "good wireless range." Especially when I found out that Apple changed the "bars of reception" to only represent a fluctuating range based upon the particular model. For example, 3 bars of reception in an iBook is NOT the same thing as 3 bars of reception in a Powerbook--the powerbook will have worse reception on stumbler software, but will still display 3 bars.

Battery figures are equally deceptive. For example, I've heard that the MBP energy saver options no longer include the option to specify "high performance" while on battery. The MBP automatically defaults to running only one core while on battery--there appears to be no way to specify that you'd prefer full speed, knowing full well that your battery life will go down.

Given that one of the main reasons for getting a laptop is so that you can have portable computing--namely running on battery--is anybody really enthusiastic about only being able to run at half-speed while on battery? Personally, I'd rather run at full speed and have to buy a second battery.

[Enigmaaron]

Well it appears I am in the minority but it seems much more important to me that my laptop can actually do anything and not how long it can do it while I am in some location that doesn't have electricity. This is a high end laptop, but apparently it does not matter how well it can run high end apps, but how long it can run Office from the battery.

Originally Posted by tie

Apple is well below PC competitors in wireless reception; I've had too many embarassing experiences travelling with colleagues where the PC laptops connect to the networks and I can't even see anything. Apple wireless software is the same as Windows XP before SP2 — terrible.

I really have to disagree with you here. I've used both Macs and PCs (Dells and Compaqs) on the same wireless networks and for years the Mac has far outperformed in wireless connectivity. I currently have two Macs and two Dells sitting at my desk in my apartment and my Macs can see 2-3 more networks than the Dells and have never dropped the connection while the Dells drop it at least once every other day.

[dndog]

Originally Posted by amazing

Battery figures are equally deceptive. For example, I've heard that the MBP energy saver options no longer include the option to specify "high performance" while on battery. The MBP automatically defaults to running only one core while on battery--there appears to be no way to specify that you'd prefer full speed, knowing full well that your battery life will go down.

Where have you heard this?

Sources?

[Salty]

I'm not terribly worried about the battery life on the Macbooks... partly because well... it's a good processor, they'd have to have a freaking space heater in there to get abysmal battery life out of the thing. The Core Duo should be getting good battery life, and other than the screen not much has changed since the PowerBooks... so I wouldn't worry all that much. The battery life might be a bit worse but I don't imagine it could be that bad.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Enigmaaron

I really have to disagree with you here. I've used both Macs and PCs (Dells and Compaqs) on the same wireless networks and for years the Mac has far outperformed in wireless connectivity. I currently have two Macs and two Dells sitting at my desk in my apartment and my Macs can see 2-3 more networks than the Dells and have never dropped the connection while the Dells drop it at least once every other day.

Your experience is not very common.
(Those are actually just the first 6 hits on Google for "powerbook wifi reception.")

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by mduell

Why don't you want a Rev A machine?

Because of the prospect of having a design problem.

Looking back at apple's recent history with revision A machines mean I don't want to be on the bleeding edge.

Here's an incomplete list Revision A:
Of the 15" alu - white spots
G5 iMac - heating issues
G5 PowerMac, powersupply and cooling issues.

Mike

[Enigmaaron]

Originally Posted by mduell

Your experience is not very common.
(Those are actually just the first 6 hits on Google for "powerbook wifi reception.")

Interesting. My experience has been quite the opposite and I've handled plenty of machines in different networks. I never knew people have had such issues with apple wireless, it's always worked seamlessly for me (maybe I have some kind of Apple friendly aura around me that makes my Macs work great).

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Maflynn

Because of the prospect of having a design problem.

Looking back at apple's recent history with revision A machines mean I don't want to be on the bleeding edge.

Here's an incomplete list Revision A:
Of the 15" alu - white spots
G5 iMac - heating issues
G5 PowerMac, powersupply and cooling issues.

Any revision can have design problems. Apple's first revisions are no worse than the later revisions.

Here are 7 examples of bugs or recalls that affected multiple revisions, multiple revisions excluding the first revision, or all revisions:
Giant iBook repair program covers every "snow" G3 revision.
PowerBook G3 power adapter recall does not affect Rev A.
15" PowerBook battery recall affects 2nd half of rev A and 1st half of rev B.
iBook and PowerBook battery recall does not affect Rev A of either machine.
The "G5 freezes" problem only affected Rev B.
The G5 "chirps" affected revisions A, B, and C.
The iPod battery lawsuit that Apple settled included Rev A, B, and C.

[jwoods]

Didn't Apple already say the battery life would be as good, if not better, then as on the Powerbooks? There is your estimate.

On the other hand, if you can sit and watch a DVD for 2+ hours, you can find an outlet to plug it into to do so (even at an airport), IMHO.

If you must go battery only......c'mon, how many people rely on ONE battery when traveling?

I haven't ordered one yet. I want to see what happens with the iBook (Macbook?) first.

[DKeithA]

Originally Posted by mduell

Any revision can have design problems. Apple's first revisions are no worse than the later revisions.

Here are 7 examples of bugs or recalls that affected multiple revisions, multiple revisions excluding the first revision, or all revisions:
Giant iBook repair program covers every "snow" G3 revision.
PowerBook G3 power adapter recall does not affect Rev A.
15" PowerBook battery recall affects 2nd half of rev A and 1st half of rev B.
iBook and PowerBook battery recall does not affect Rev A of either machine.
The "G5 freezes" problem only affected Rev B.
The G5 "chirps" affected revisions A, B, and C.
The iPod battery lawsuit that Apple settled included Rev A, B, and C.

I totally agree with you. The revision A Macs that I have owned have had no more problems than later revisions.

[MORT A POTTY]

I'd agree too mduell, DKeithA. I'm on a Rev. A intel iMac right now and have zero issues. it's next to a Rev. A iMac G5 which has no issues either.

[inkhead]

The mac book pros will get about 3-ish hours of battery life. Unfortunately battery life isn't greatly increased because the new high-end GPU eats power for lunch. It's still on par with your current powerbook g4 if not better and faster.

[Marko Karppinen]

It's also a bit different when you introduce a whole new architecture, like the G5, and a corresponding chipset that isn't used in any other product. This time though, every laptop manufacturer on the planet is using the same off-the-shelf CPU and chipset as the MacBook Pro.

[jamil5454]

Originally Posted by inkhead

The mac book pros will get about 3-ish hours of battery life. Unfortunately battery life isn't greatly increased because the new high-end GPU eats power for lunch. It's still on par with your current powerbook g4 if not better and faster.

I'm up for a faster battery any day of the week!

[mrmister]

Well, now we know why Apple didn't post battery estimates--they were deciding whether they would upgrade to faster Core Duo chips, and probably didn't want to release one set of battery times, then have to revise it downward, even a little, if they bumped up the processor speed.

I'm glad there is a sensible explanation, and it makes me laugh and laugh to read all the people who invented circutious explanations for why Apple wouldn't post the battery time--and the many who were perfectly fine buying a laptop whose specifications are unknown. The world is full of trusting people, I suppose.

Congratulations to Apple for getting faster chips--and I bet we'll see that battery life posted shortly, I should hope.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by mrmister

Well, now we know why Apple didn't post battery estimates--they were deciding whether they would upgrade to faster Core Duo chips, and probably didn't want to release one set of battery times, then have to revise it downward, even a little, if they bumped up the processor speed.

The power consumption for the 1.66 through 2.16Ghz Core Duo is the same, 31W max, and Apple still hasn't posted a battery life estimate.

[wtmcgee]

It's a bit strange that they haven't posted anything, but Jobs did say in an interview it would be 'about the same'.

Considering how much faster these chips are, that's pretty impressive.

[amazing]

After re-reading this thread, I'm even more disappointed with Apple: If predicting battery life is as simple as people in this thread believe, why hasn't Apple posted any figures yet? The omission is so glaring that Jobs was even asked about it in an interview--and that's the only statement we have from Apple about battery life. Come on, folks: Is a direct question to Jobs in an interview the only way to get an estimate of battery life on a much-hyped, brand new laptop with a news-worthy new Intel chip, in a transition to new architecture that critically important to Apple's future?

OK, we're all cynical about battery life estimates from manufacturers, so what? Why can't Apple just post the estimates, as vague as they are? This is a shipping model, after all, isn't it? Surely they've got some idea?

With the models now beginning to ship, don't people think this is a little strange?

[terigox]

Unless, they are still making fairly major changes to the systems that would throw their numbers off considerably? I'm confused with you amazing.

[Enigmaaron]

Originally Posted by amazing

OK, we're all cynical about battery life estimates from manufacturers, so what? Why can't Apple just post the estimates, as vague as they are? This is a shipping model, after all, isn't it? Surely they've got some idea?

Because then people will sue them if there battery lasts one minute less than the estimated time.

[harrisjamieh]

Originally Posted by Enigmaaron

Because then people will sue them if there battery lasts one minute less than the estimated time.

No they won't - people don't sue companies even if battery life is half as much, because everyone knows its an estimate, and that the estimate if for minimal power usage. If someone buys a laptop hoping to get the manufacturers estimated battery life out of it, then they need their head checking. My iBook is rated at 6 hours battery life - most I have ever ever ever got is 5.25 hours, and thats with screen on min brightness, and typing up a doc with no wireless, no nothing

[Enigmaaron]

Originally Posted by harrisjamieh

No they won't - people don't sue companies even if battery life is half as much, because everyone knows its an estimate, and that the estimate if for minimal power usage. If someone buys a laptop hoping to get the manufacturers estimated battery life out of it, then they need their head checking. My iBook is rated at 6 hours battery life - most I have ever ever ever got is 5.25 hours, and thats with screen on min brightness, and typing up a doc with no wireless, no nothing

Perhaps you haven't heard of the iPod battery lawsuit that apple settled?
http://www.appleipodsettlement.com/notice.html

And now there is a lawsuit in process claiming the iPod causes hearing loss and consumers were not properly warned. People will sue for anything and Apple is probably trying to avoid these frivolous lawsuits as much as possible. Before everyone jumps and says that it's different for an iPod which just plays music there are just as many power saving features. For instance the level of volume, the contrast, the backlight...

[mrmister]

I suspect they aren't saying anything because it sucks--I'd like to believe otherwise, but the longer they're silent, the more I suspect it.

[Enigmaaron]

Originally Posted by mrmister

I suspect they aren't saying anything because it sucks--I'd like to believe otherwise, but the longer they're silent, the more I suspect it.

Or maybe it's another marketing scheme. On the 27th they will "discover" they could fit a bigger battery that lasts 10 hours, but now they won't ship until the 15th of March. They will of course give us with pre-orders the option to upgrade to the even bigger super sized battery for an additional charge.

[jimbosyn]

Originally Posted by Enigmaaron

Or maybe it's another marketing scheme. On the 27th they will "discover" they could fit a bigger battery that lasts 10 hours, but now they won't ship until the 15th of March. They will of course give us with pre-orders the option to upgrade to the even bigger super sized battery for an additional charge.