6 hours of on screen time

robertopod1968

Well-known member
Jan 1, 2012
569
0
0
Visit site
Ok so Leo Laporte is reporting 25 percent battery used with 3 hours usage and 1-1/2 hour on screen time. That would add up to 6 hours on screen time. I'm good with that.
 

dpw2atox

Well-known member
Sep 4, 2011
100
6
0
Visit site
I think it depends too what's being done during that time, I saw another report that looping HD video lasted 7 or 8 hrs before the phone's battery died. I'm also sure that the first 1-2 OTA updates should improve this as it seems to be a trend for all new phones.
 

dpham00

Moderator Team VP
Moderator
Apr 23, 2011
30,108
200
63
Visit site
Verge Battery Test indicated 7hr 14 minutes.

The Note II got 9hr 45 min on the verge Battery Test, yet I get about half that much.

Sent from my Verizon Samsung Galaxy Note II
 

briankariu

Well-known member
May 8, 2012
243
0
0
Visit site
I no longer think laporte is reliable. Am still reading reviews, but what surprises me is the different reviews. Read the Engadget and verge reviews and I was like, are they reviewing the same phone???

Posted via Android Central App
 

bunique4life05

Well-known member
Feb 13, 2011
1,754
43
0
Visit site
The battery life between reviewers seem to vary. The difference in battery life could be due to usage,carrier, software or coverage. Unfortunately though I think battery life is just little better than average when you are use the device but the only great on standby or little use.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using AC Forums mobile app
 

roadkizzle

Well-known member
Nov 30, 2010
158
0
0
Visit site
I no longer think laporte is reliable. Am still reading reviews, but what surprises me is the different reviews. Read the Engadget and verge reviews and I was like, are they reviewing the same phone???

Posted via Android Central App

To me it rely doesn't seem that the Engadget and Verge reviews are very different.

The two biggest points of divergence i see are in their opinions on the aesthetics of the device and battery life.

The only real complaints i see on the Engadget review about the looks are the back scuffed and the front white face looked cheap. I really think that the big problem is that I feel all glossy white phones look a lot cheaper than their black counterparts. Also the light colored backs will always show more dirt and scuffs than the dark ones.

The Verge battery test showed 7 hours rather than Engadgets 24+ anecdotal evidence. The Verge one was a full screen on time test surfing webpages. They did say the Moto X faired much better than the the leading phones.

What else did you see that seems to be a big point of divergence between the two reviews?
 

JungleLarry

Well-known member
Dec 2, 2010
663
15
0
Visit site
Here's how I understand it:

The battery itself is not exceptional, so there's no way it's going to beat out devices like the Maxx. The way the phone uses its power is different, but the real battery savings come from actually changing the way you interact with your device. This is apparent from the various "tests" people have done on the phone; stress tests that involve constant screen-on time and such report average to slight-better-than-average battery life, while real world usage tests seem to be more favorable. This plays into the entire philosophy of the device's design anyway -- why shoehorn bigger spec'd hardware in a phone when you can optimize what's already there? If you watch movies all day on your phone, you're not going to be blown away by the battery life on the Moto X. The people who will notice a difference, I'm guessing, are those who no longer have to turn on their entire display just to check their notifcations, etc.

Motorola didn't suddenly invent more power reserve in a smaller battery. What they've done is akin to high-power sports cars that limit their engine output at freeway speeds to save gas mileage. If you stuff the gas pedal into the floor, of course you're going to have to fill up every 50 miles. But if you just drive normally, you'll definitely feel the benefits of only using four cylinders instead of eight.
 

roadkizzle

Well-known member
Nov 30, 2010
158
0
0
Visit site
Yeah. It does seem that the Moto X is beating the HTC One handily in stress tests, and the SGS4 by not as much, but without a massive battery it still can't hold a candle to the giants in the MAXX range.

I'm really intrigued where the new Droid Maxx will fall into the overall spectrum as well as the LG G2. I wonder how efficient the Snapdragon 800 is, especially if we had a phone with its always listening capability utilized.
 

robstunner

Android Connoisseur
Jun 3, 2010
796
28
0
Visit site
Slashgear reported 3.5 hrs screen time with 25% left on the motox. Makes me wonder if some of these praising reviewers are paid off

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4
 

blazin247

Well-known member
Nov 7, 2011
226
33
0
Visit site
Here's how I understand it:

The battery itself is not exceptional, so there's no way it's going to beat out devices like the Maxx. The way the phone uses its power is different, but the real battery savings come from actually changing the way you interact with your device. This is apparent from the various "tests" people have done on the phone; stress tests that involve constant screen-on time and such report average to slight-better-than-average battery life, while real world usage tests seem to be more favorable. This plays into the entire philosophy of the device's design anyway -- why shoehorn bigger spec'd hardware in a phone when you can optimize what's already there? If you watch movies all day on your phone, you're not going to be blown away by the battery life on the Moto X. The people who will notice a difference, I'm guessing, are those who no longer have to turn on their entire display just to check their notifcations, etc.

Motorola didn't suddenly invent more power reserve in a smaller battery. What they've done is akin to high-power sports cars that limit their engine output at freeway speeds to save gas mileage. If you stuff the gas pedal into the floor, of course you're going to have to fill up every 50 miles. But if you just drive normally, you'll definitely feel the benefits of only using four cylinders instead of eight.

I think Junglelarry describes it perfectly. Powering your phone on to check the time 50x a day versus watching Netflix 8 hours straight. The Moto X will help conserve power with the first scenario, but with the second scenario, you aren't going to be tapping into the power-saving qualities of the phone and won't see anything out of the ordinary.

With that said, why isn't there a standard battery drain test that is accepted by the tech review community? I generally get my reviews from this site and anandtech, but perusing other sites it's interesting to note how wildly different the battery claims are.
 

bunique4life05

Well-known member
Feb 13, 2011
1,754
43
0
Visit site
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJTlB_S7ct0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Good review and the battery life seems to be on par with the verge figures as well. I waiting to see whats AC and Phonedog get but it seems you can get 2-6 hours more than most popular smartphones today. It seems you can get 24 hours with minimal use but moderate to high seems to be 12-16 hours.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using AC Forums mobile app
 

accesschristopher

Active member
May 7, 2012
27
0
0
Visit site
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJTlB_S7ct0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Good review and the battery life seems to be on par with the verge figures as well. I waiting to see whats AC and Phonedog get but it seems you can get 2-6 hours more than most popular smartphones today. It seems you can get 24 hours with minimal use but moderate to high seems to be 12-16 hours.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using AC Forums mobile app
Thx for post. His reviews are always right on point. Great guy.. I am sold
 

Kevin OQuinn

AC Team Emeritus
May 17, 2010
9,267
496
0
Visit site
I thought the idea of Peek was that you wouldn't be turning the screen on as much. If that's the case wouldn't stand by time be far more important?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4
 

Kevin OQuinn

AC Team Emeritus
May 17, 2010
9,267
496
0
Visit site
I don't quite understand what you are getting at?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using AC Forums mobile app

I've never understood the focus on screen on time.

That's especially true for this phone, where the idea is that you're not powering the screen on all the time to see notifications.

I get that use cases are different, and I know mine have changed, but I have a Nexus 7 for media consumption and gaming. My phone battery will be used for keeping in touch with people.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4
 

roadkizzle

Well-known member
Nov 30, 2010
158
0
0
Visit site
I thought the idea of Peek was that you wouldn't be turning the screen on as much. If that's the case wouldn't stand by time be far more important?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

I feel that it is important to understand both aspects. It is important to look at the standby time and Active Display for normal average day or traveling usage.

I am also very interested in how the phone compares with others for heavy usage, say spending five hours talking in the forums and reading Moto X reviews. Would I be able to do this without worrying about plugging in my Moto X like i do currently with my Xperia TL.
 

bunique4life05

Well-known member
Feb 13, 2011
1,754
43
0
Visit site
I've never understood the focus on screen on time.

That's especially true for this phone, where the idea is that you're not powering the screen on all the time to see notifications.

I get that use cases are different, and I know mine have changed, but I have a Nexus 7 for media consumption and gaming. My phone battery will be used for keeping in touch with people.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

I understand now. Well moto x used as media consumption nets you better than average but not great and I think that is what some are concerned about. I am good mix of both because I read articles and browse through my music leaving screen on time a concern of mine.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using AC Forums mobile app
 

Ry

Moderator Captain
Trusted Member
Nov 16, 2010
17,654
214
0
Visit site
To me it rely doesn't seem that the Engadget and Verge reviews are very different.

The two biggest points of divergence i see are in their opinions on the aesthetics of the device and battery life.

The only real complaints i see on the Engadget review about the looks are the back scuffed and the front white face looked cheap. I really think that the big problem is that I feel all glossy white phones look a lot cheaper than their black counterparts. Also the light colored backs will always show more dirt and scuffs than the dark ones.

The Verge battery test showed 7 hours rather than Engadgets 24+ anecdotal evidence. The Verge one was a full screen on time test surfing webpages. They did say the Moto X faired much better than the the leading phones.

What else did you see that seems to be a big point of divergence between the two reviews?

After reading the Engadget review, watching their review view, and listening to the Engadget and Engadget Mobile that covered the Moto X, it's clear that Engadget is hammering the "midrange" point home. Engadget seems to still be hung up on specs. That's fine. I fully expect the LG G2 to be their phone of the year.
 

Trending Posts

Forum statistics

Threads
943,003
Messages
6,916,842
Members
3,158,768
Latest member
jokomad