9300 miserable battery life...

Facelift9300 wrote:The battery only lasts me about 18 hours before it goes dead.

Is there a problem with my battery or is the battery lift extremely short on this unit?

I don't know if there is a problem with your unit, but I get great battery life (compared to other PDA-phones I've used). I get about 2.5 days on average. It is the screen on these devices that has the biggest impact on the battery. Try reducing the screen idle time and lower the brightness.

Raven wrote:I don't know if there is a problem with your unit, but I get great battery life (compared to other PDA-phones I've used). I get about 2.5 days on average. It is the screen on these devices that has the biggest impact on the battery. Try reducing the screen idle time and lower the brightness.

Well I don't believe you could possibly get 2.5 days with any significant useage.
I find that if I am using mine anything like as it is intended, then it runs down within the day invariably. And even faster if you are using WiFi which I do. I have had to install 3 chargers all around my house to make sure it is on charge wherever I happen to be, and likewise in the car.

I cannot understand why Nokia made this slimmer than the 9210 with a smaller battery with obviously larger demands on the battery life of WiFi Bluetooth and faster processor.
They ought to consider making a fat double sized battery available but there would be problems fitting it cos of the camera lens and would require an alternative battery cover. So I shall make do with a spare battery, but it is a real pain to have to shut down to swap it over.
It is certainly nothing like the battery life of a 9210i

Well duh, obviously WLAN is a HUGE battery drainer... What did you expect?

And yes, my 2.5 days is with what I'd call significant usage. Which includes an hour or so of e-book reading, about an hour of web browsing, an hour of gaming, an hour of MP3 playing, some calls (usually short) and a few SMS's, e-mail retrieving every hour and the usual PIM stuff. That's roughly my average every day usage.

And like I mentioned above the screen (with the exception of continuous WLAN/GPRS usage of course) is _the biggest_ battery drainer. So turn down the brightness and idle time. I wouldn't get half the battery life I get now if I were to have the screen on the highest brightness level.

Raven wrote:Well duh, obviously WLAN is a HUGE battery drainer... What did you expect?

And yes, my 2.5 days is with what I'd call significant usage. Which includes an hour or so of e-book reading, about an hour of web browsing, an hour of gaming, an hour of MP3 playing, some calls (usually short) and a few SMS's, e-mail retrieving every hour and the usual PIM stuff. That's roughly my average every day usage.

And like I mentioned above the screen (with the exception of continuous WLAN/GPRS usage of course) is _the biggest_ battery drainer. So turn down the brightness and idle time. I wouldn't get half the battery life I get now if I were to have the screen on the highest brightness level.

Well DUH, what I expect is that when not using WiFi that we might get a full day's use for other purposes as we did with the old 9210i.
And I don't see any reason to be rude or patronising in your post.

Even for use as a phone and light useage PDA the 9500 does not last a full day, and that is not really very good. It would certainly dissuade me from recommending it.

And oh duh!! my screen is already set to lowest brightness, and shortest setting, so it still comes out as poor.

My comment is objective whilst yours clearly seems biassed, which is not surprising since you are the moderator.

stubby wrote:Even for use as a phone and light useage PDA the 9500 does not last a full day, and that is not really very good.

In that case, you clearly have a faulty unit.

My comment is objective whilst yours clearly seems biassed, which is not surprising since you are the moderator.

What? How is my comment biased? Just because my comment is positive, that means I must be biased, huh? 🙄

What the hell would I have to gain by lying about something like battery life?! If I thought the battery life was crap I would damn well say so. But it is even better than my old P800 and P900, so I'm not complaining.

It seems more people are beginning to think your replies are rude Raven (also see other thread) 😉 (FYI, I disagree with those people).

I get even more battery life out of my 9500 (3-4 days). I don't use it as much as you guys do. But it seems to be a faulty unit indeed, because less then a day is NOT normal.

u shouldnt leave ur bluetooth on it drains battery life like a bitch, also for security reasons, all the symbian viruses going around

I have Bluetooth on all the time and I still get 3-4 days. And those viruses are all for series 60. The 9300/9500 use series 80, no viruses for that yet

Am I the only one that has noticed that the original poster is talking about a Nokia 9300 and the rest of you are all waffling on about 9500s?

FYI Facelift9300, I have a 9300 and I get about 2.5 days regular use out of it, so I think you have a faulty unit/battery.

Delta737 wrote:It seems more people are beginning to think your replies are rude Raven (also see other thread)

So it seems. 😊

As far as I'm concerned, that's their problem. Those two people in question both stooped to personal attacks because of a reply they perceived as rude, rather than take it up with the webmaster (Rafe) - which would be the appropriate procedure.

Chaser81 wrote:Am I the only one that has noticed that the original poster is talking about a Nokia 9300 and the rest of you are all waffling on about 9500s?

I'm talking about the 9300 as well, it was just 'stubby' that started going on about how miserable his 9500's battery life was. The 9500, incidentally, has an even higher capacity battery than the 9300.

Raven wrote:I'm talking about the 9300 as well, it was just 'stubby' that started going on about how miserable his 9500's battery life was. The 9500, incidentally, has an even higher capacity battery than the 9300.

1. I have had two 9500's now, the latest being a SIM Free replacement direct from Nokia, due to their inability to reflash my phone with v4.51. Both were similar in battery life, and I am sure neither phone was faulty in this aspect.

2. Battery capacity of the
9210 is 1300mAh,
as is the 9500 1300mAh.
9300 capacity is 970mAh.
So the 9500 ought to be better for normal (non-WiFi) useage than the 9300 a reasonable person might assume.

3. Published talktime
for 9210 is 10 hrs,
for 9500 is 6 hrs,
for 9300 is 7 hrs.
So even Nokia presumably know and accept that the 9500 has less talktime than a 9300 and far less than a 9210. And that is not with any other functions burning battery such as Bluetooth or WiFi.

4. There could be another factor which affects battery life which is location from cell mast. I spend most time in a Fair area (rural) for signal strength, in which case my 9500 may be boosting broadcast signal strength, thus increasing battery consumption. Even if that is the case, it is of relevance to other users, or potential users because like me it affects the viability of the phone. And conversely the same has not been true of either my 9210 or 9210i.

In my own case, I can live with this, but I was far happier with the 9210i battery life, and it is compensated for by the trade off with other functionality on the 9500.
However it does mean that whilst I would have sold my 9210i, now I shall not, and if I am travelling a long way from a charger, then I may revert to the 9210i purely because of its superb battery life.

And it means I have had to order a second 9500 battery to compensate, and it rather spoils the overall impression.

stubby wrote:4. There could be another factor which affects battery life which is location from cell mast. I spend most time in a Fair area (rural) for signal strength, in which case my 9500 may be boosting broadcast signal strength, thus increasing battery consumption.

Yes, that may be the case in your situation. I think we all can agree, finally without someone being called 'biased', that the battery life you are getting is far from 'normal'. I've heard reports from a lot people that the 9500's battery life is just as good, or better, than that of the 92xx.

3. Published talktime
for 9210 is 10 hrs,
for 9500 is 6 hrs,
for 9300 is 7 hrs.

Those figures are not entirely correct. According to Nokia the 92xx and the 9500 both have a Talk time of "Up to 4 - 10 h", whilst the 9300 have a reported Talk time of "Up to 3 - 7 h".

Hi,

I have had a 9500 and since Feb I use a 9300.
Battery life is not bad under normal conditions so I have to charge it only every 3-4 days with one exception:

When I start a special program (email - Push - Service from space2go), which is then active in the background with permanent GPRS - Connection the batteruy drains out within 12-15 hours ...

Bye

Klaus

Thanks for all the comments. I really hope that I have a faulty unit because its a great phone. I have had the experiene of using a P910 and I truned the brightness all the way down and get about 2 solid days of useage (e-mail, browsing, bluetooth for 6-7 hours, and calls). For my 9300, I only get 12-18 hours if I do all the above and I get 2 days worth if I don't open up the big screen. Is my unit faulty then?

I would say so. Admittedly, I have only had my 9300 for 2 days now, but the first few days are the ones where you use it the most (trying out all the features, etc) and I still havent had to charge my 9300 since I got it.