Igor Stoppa wrote: > On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 14:08 +0100, ext Frantisek Dufka wrote: >> Igor Stoppa wrote: >>>>> n800: 18 days >>>>> n810: 27 days >>>> Impressive, any details where the savings were done? Is this strictly HW >>>> related and the n800 has same OS2008 version as N810? >>> it's both hw and sw; the sw part is about fixing wrong settings in muxing, >>> pullup&pulldown and disabling voltage regulators when not in use or OMAP >>> is in retention. >> Just to confirm, these 18 days are already on N800 with OS2008 and with >> those sw issues fixed? > > I don't remember if i checked exactly the sw version that is public atm > but if it wasn't then it was close enough. > I can't imagine those fixes are in the current software, or anything close to them as a few weeks ago I performed an idle run-down test on an N800 with 2.2007.50-2 (a freshly flashed device with no configuration changes whatsoever, so essentially a factory fresh install with a fully charged battery). After 12 days and 2 hours[1] the low battery alarm began to sound - that is just 2/3rds of what you are saying is possible so why such a large discrepancy - could my 9 month old N800 battery really have lost 1/3rd of it's capacity? Or can this difference really be down to component variance (the tested N800 is from March 2007)? 1. https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2602#c20
