> >=20 > >>1. Sufficient battery life. 2hrs is not even close to > >>sufficient. Try more like 8hrs MINIMUM. > >=20 > > 8 hours of continuous use? If so, is it disk or peripheral (wifi)=20 > > intensive? > >=20 > > Also, can you show me an existing laptop with this type of runtime? >=20 http://www-132.ibm.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?category= Id=3D 2059153&storeId=3D1&catalogId=3D-840&langId=3D-1 http://www-132.ibm.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId= =3D-8 40&langId=3D-1&partNumber=3D92P1006&storeId 7.5 + 3.5 Goes to 11. :-) ------ First off, never trust spec's that are not verified or audited because = the marketing people like to exaggerate these figures. If you read the fine print on their web page they state that the numbers have not been = verified. IBM is notorious for stretching the truth in order to meet or beat specs = so I suspect that these are the best numbers that an engineer achieved with = an almost brand new battery with the screen turned down nice and low. I must admit that 7.5h is impressive but the additional 1 pound of = battery should not be counted in the calculation. It's too big and too clunky. Might as well cart around a car battery and add it to the runtime calculation too! -Tony -- Subscription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" toWear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.blu.org Please, *PLEASE* don't subscribe through a forward/expander/false domain
From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty
Archive created with babymail