PC Mechanic, New Article

Did Battery Life Improve At All With "Big" Laptops?

Posted: 17 Feb 2011 03:00 AM PST

It’s well known that a netbook with a 6-cell battery at bare minimum can hold a charge for a least 5 hours, and if you’re really stingy with the power usage, 7 hours is actually well within reach.

But what about traditional “big” laptops with 14-inch and above screens? Are they still the lumbering beasts that can only hold a charge for 3 hours and nothing more?

Fortunately the answer to that question is no, because they have improved.

Firstly, to the best of my knowledge, all new full-sized laptops come shipped with a 6-cell battery. I suppose if you really looked you could find one out there that still sells with a 3-cell, but I wouldn’t buy that.

Second, a basic $500 full-size laptop such as the Dell Inspiron 14R claims to achieve “up to 5 hours” using the standard 6-cell it comes with. Realistically speaking this means you should get 3.5 hours out of it.

Third, and this is what matters most, 9-cell 90WHr battery options are readily available for full-sized laptops – even for the basic models. This should be able to power your laptop on battery with normal usage for a full 5 hours. And by “normal usage” I mean doing average web browsing, no serious gaming, no serious data crunching and no super-large downloads as wi-fi cards are notorious for eating up battery life quickly.

There is, however, always a drawback.

When I priced out a basic $500 Dell Inspiron 14R, a 9-cell could only be added in as an accessory. The price: $179.99 – on top of the price of the unit itself.

Dell, if you happen to read this, you seriously need to offer the option of selecting a 9-cell as the shipped battery in the unit for all laptop offerings. I don’t want to add a battery, I want the 6-cell gone and the 9-cell to be shipped with the unit. It should be a $50 to $75 option over the 6-cell, and that’s a reasonable enough increase in price to get the extra 1.5 hours of battery life.

Post from: PCMech. Helping Normal People Get Their Geek On And Live The Digital Lifestyle.

Did Battery Life Improve At All With "Big" Laptops?

Apple Ruins New Subscription Plans By Getting Greedy

Posted: 16 Feb 2011 09:12 AM PST

So, the big Apple news yesterday was that Apple released subscription billing capability into the App Store. This is actually really cool in many ways. It allows magazine publishers to easily distribute to iOS devices. It also allows some cool opportunities for web entrepreneurs to do subscription services on iOS devices.

Problem is, Apple ruined it by getting greedy and acting arrogant.

Here are the bullet points:

App developers pay Apple 30% of all sales through the App Store. This includes recurring billing.
Apple says that apps can no longer have links to outside stores in their apps.
Apple now dictates that, if you offer subscriptions outside of the App Store that go into an iOS app, then you must also offer it inside the App Store at the same or lower price (and hence pay Apple 30%)

Alright, #1 I get. I mean, Apple’s 30% share is pretty steep, but it is nothing new and it is just the cost of doing business with Apple. There is no doubt that Apple has created a huge economic ecosystem inside the App Store, and they get to set those terms whether you like it or not.

#2 is greedy. The most well-known application affected by this will be the Amazon Kindle app. With that app, you buy books by clicking a link which takes you to Amazon.com to buy the book. Then, once bought, it delivers wirelessly to your Kindle app. According to the new rules, you can’t do that anymore. They’re forcing Amazon to go through the App Store and pay Apple 30%.

It is important to point out here that:

Amazon is not using Apple’s billing system. They’re using their own. Therefore, it isn’t costing Apple anything.
Amazon is simply opening a link in a web browser.

As for #3, it is likened to price fixing, and that’s something that has already sparked antitrust issues. Apple is reaching out and telling other companies how to price their stuff by saying that they MUST offer the same (or lesser) rate inside the App Store. In other words, Apple is demanding their cut. All because of the choice of hardware of the end user.

There are numerous apps affected by this:

Amazon Kindle
Hulu
Netflix
Rhapsody (who is already fighting back)
many others, I’m sure.

Basically, Apple is proclaiming that if it takes place on hardware they built, they want a cut of all the action that takes place on it. And let me remind you that 30% is a SKY HIGH cut, MUCH more than the usual 2.5% credit card fees. A forced 30% to Apple economically prohibits many services from being accessible on an iOS device because these companies already operate on low margins.

Plus, many publishers acquire tons of marketing information from their subscribers base. With Apple’s model, Apple keeps all those customers and the publishers gets no information at all. It is just completely prohibitive no matter how you slice it.

Who Owns Your Device?

I’m even going to break it down further: Who owns your iPad or iPhone?

Users (like me) bought it fair and square. I decide to run apps on it to interface with the things that I use. If I can’t do that, I have no reason to own one.

We already have to put up with a restricted device that only works on the App Store restrictions. People (like me) have to jailbreak the damn thing in order to make our device do things which Apple should have thought of. Apple is always fighting efforts to jailbreak – even though I own the device and paid plenty for it.

These new App Store restrictions make it feel like RENT. And from a landlord which changes the rules anytime it suits them.

What’s next? They’re going demand 30% of my own business revenue because I use a Mac?!

Why I Bought An iPad

I bought one in order to access the stuff I use. Others do as well. Apps like Kindle and Netflix have brought TONS of business to Apple. Now, Apple rewards them by saying “screw you, pay us”.

I choose to buy books from Amazon, and now Apple is making it harder. I choose to have a Netflix subscription, and now Apple is making it harder.

Economically, I could easily see some of these major companies and publishers pull out of the App Store. Which diminishes my need to own something like an iPad.

Simply put, if that happens, I will not buy another iOS device. Because my reason is gone.

Apple Bows To Capitalism

There will be those who blindly jump on the “Apple is evil” bandwagon. And, no, they’re not evil. They’re just successful.

People keep buying iOS devices. Simply put, Apple has mastered the art of making money, and developers left and right are trying to cash in on that. Many have, too. The App Store is a simple system to build on, but it doesn’t mean Apple should be able to FORCE companies to use it.

At the end of the day, capitalism rules. Apple will change if people start taking their business elsewhere.

Personally, I hope to see more companies fight Apple on this. I like Apple, for the most part. I think their hardware is awesome. But, this move is indicative of a level of arrogance that is beyond the level of common sense.

It opens a huge opportunity for competitors. Today, Google has responded with their own new payment system which provides a lot more control to publishers. This is a huge boost to Android.

I might be an iPad guy (for now), but I want some stiff competition. So, come on, Google! I hope Android starts looking awesome on tablets and I hope the new Web OS Touchpad does well. I hope they start pricing competitively and start kicking Apple’s butt. Apple is making it easy. Don’t blow it!

Because the iPad has had tablet dominance for too long now, and selfish moves like the one the company made yesterday show it.

Post from: PCMech. Helping Normal People Get Their Geek On And Live The Digital Lifestyle.

Apple Ruins New Subscription Plans By Getting Greedy