6250mah phone!?

[IFeaRZz]

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Doogees-HomTom-HT6-phablet-with-its-6250-mAh-battery-and-4G-LTE-costs-just-139.99_id74062

I feel this is incredibly insane the specs seem decentish also I'd just like to see what you all think to this as it'd be interesting to see Linus's views on this.

[Guest]

it seems way-way too good to be true...

[dizmo]

Eh, the rest of the spec kind of suck. Also, these phones generally have absolutely horrible optimization, resulting in worse battery life than you'd get out of say a Note 5.

[Vozella]

There's already a Company called BLU that makes 5000 and 4000 mah smartphones.

[LAwLz]

I wish phone companies would start advertising batteries in Wh instead of mAh.

Anyway, I kind of doubt that phone will have godly battery life anyway. Those super cheap Chinese phones usually have really poor quality batteries in them. If it doesn't explode in your pocket it will probably degrade at an incredibly fast rate.

[Godlygamer23]

I have moved your thread to Mobile Devices due to it being in violation with our requirements for Tech News posts.

When creating a thread in the News subforum, please make sure your post meets the following criteria:

• Your thread must include some original input to tell the reader why it is relevant to them, and what your personal opinion on the topic is.
• Your thread must include a link to at least one reputable source. Most of the time, this should be a respected news site.
• Your thread should also include quotes from the cited source(s). While you shouldn't just copy the entire article, your quote should give the reader a summary of the article in a way that gives the key details, but also leaves room for them to read the full article on the linked website. Please use quote tags (the speech bubble at the top of the editor, under the  ) to show that you have copied this content from another site.
• The title of your thread must be relevant to the topic and should give a reader a good idea of the contents of the thread. Copying the title of the source is permitted but absolutely not required.
• If your article is about a product or some form of media, images are always appreciated, although they are not required.

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/11724-read-before-posting-in-this-section/

[patrickjp93]

I wish phone companies would start advertising batteries in Wh instead of mAh.

Anyway, I kind of doubt that phone will have godly battery life anyway. Those super cheap Chinese phones usually have really poor quality batteries in them. If it doesn't explode in your pocket it will probably degrade at an incredibly fast rate.

It would be watts, not watt hours. mAh is current * time. Watt hours would also simply be an incorrect notation since a watt is a measure of energy per moment. The correct way to notate it would be Joule-Hour, which simply is watts.

[Pyroven]

It would be watts, not watt hours. mAh is current * time. Watt hours would also simply be an incorrect notation since a watt is a measure of energy per moment. The correct way to notate it would be Joule-Hour, which simply is watts.

 

No, Watts is the measurement of the rate of energy transferred over time. Power= Work Done /Time. Therefore the Power*Time will give you the Energy. Watt-Hour is just another measurement of energy the same as a Joule or Calorie. That's why your electricity bill is calculated by how many Watt-Hours you've used - it's a measurement of energy.

 

 

 

A Joule-Hour doesn't make any sense at all. That would be how long you have an amount of energy. As in if I have a doughnut that's 800 calories and I keep it for 8 hours, it'd be a 6400 calorie-hour doughnut. I don't know where you're getting so confused.

[Guest Kloaked]

There's already a Company called BLU that makes 5000 and 4000 mah smartphones.

 

If you're implying this company/phone has no space on the market, have you seen the amount of high end Android phones on the market?

 

*LG comes out with a new flagship* "There's already a company called Samsung that makes flagship phones."

 

See the logic?

[patrickjp93]

No, Watts is the measurement of the rate of energy transferred over time. Power= Work Done /Time. Therefore the Power*Time will give you the Energy. Watt-Hour is just another measurement of energy the same as a Joule or Calorie. That's why your electricity bill is calculated by how many Watt-Hours you've used - it's a measurement of energy.

 

 

 

A Joule-Hour doesn't make any sense at all. That would be how long you have an amount of energy. As in if I have a doughnut that's 800 calories and I keep it for 8 hours, it'd be a 6400 calorie-hour doughnut. I don't know where you're getting so confused.

Work is energy. Someone forgot that little fundamental fact of physics.

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/energy

 

Power is dWork/dTime = dEnergy/dTime

 

And it makes perfect sense. It's the amount of time you can provide a certain amount of energy, exactly what a battery does.

[Vozella]

If you're implying this company/phone has no space on the market, have you seen the amount of high end Android phones on the market?

 

*LG comes out with a new flagship* "There's already a company called Samsung that makes flagship phones."

 

See the logic?

No. I was saying that they aren't the first to make a cheap phone with a large battery.

[Pyroven]

Work is energy. Someone forgot that little fundamental fact of physics.

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/energy

 

Power is dWork/dTime = dEnergy/dTime

 

And it makes perfect sense. It's the amount of time you can provide a certain amount of energy, exactly what a battery does.

 

I literally said it was energy.

 

Look I can't make you see where you're wrong, so I just hope you realise it yourself.

 

Joule-Hour wouldn't be how much energy it could provide for how long, that would be Power/Time. Joule-hours (Forgetting the fact it makes literally no sense) would be the fact that the battery can hold energy at all, with time just strapped on the side. IE a battery holds energy, if it holds energy indefinitely (IE nothing is draining it) then it'd have an infinite Joule-Hour rating.

 

I don't see how you're not seeing this.

[patrickjp93]

I literally said it was energy.

 

Look I can't make you see where you're wrong, so I just hope you realise it yourself.

 

Joule-Hour wouldn't be how much energy it could provide for how long, that would be Power/Time. Joule-hours (Forgetting the fact it makes literally no sense) would be the fact that the battery can hold energy at all, with time just strapped on the side. IE a battery holds energy, if it holds energy indefinitely (IE nothing is draining it) then it'd have an infinite Joule-Hour rating.

 

I don't see how you're not seeing this.

It can give some number of joules j for a number of hours h such that jh <= rating r in joule-hours. I'm not wrong. This is clear out of my physics text, the very same used by MIT.

[Pyroven]

It can give some number of joules j for a number of hours h such that jh <= rating r in joule-hours. I'm not wrong. This is clear out of my physics text, the very same used by MIT.

 

Okay, then maybe I am wrong. But that explanation does not make any sense. I would understand what you were saying if you were talking about battery retention over time (When not being used), however not if you are taling about while the battery is being used.

 

The bit that doesn't make sense is where you seem to be saying it's energying the phone, but it's not, it's powering the phone. You don't supply Energy to a component, you supply Power, or energy over time. You transfer energy to a component.

 

Energy is what we're measuring when we want to know how much battery a battery can have. There's no reason to randomly multiply it by time.

 

However, the best way of calculating how much energy a battery can hold is by measuring how much power it can supply over a given period of time, or for how long it can supply a given power. That's the only reason time is being brought into it, is because power is energy divided by time, so we multiply it by time to reverse it.

 

The only thing I can think of is that we must be thinking of different things.

 

 

 

 

 

If I were to give you a number of doughnuts for a number of years, you'd think immediately that I was lending you them - because that's the only way which makes sense.

 

If I were to give you a number of doughnuts per month for a number of years - you would be receiving delicious treats which you could consume with pleasure.

 

I don't think components borrow energy. Do you understand what I'm saying now? There has to be a rate for it to make sense.

[patrickjp93]

Okay, then maybe I am wrong. But that explanation does not make any sense. I would understand what you were saying if you were talking about battery retention over time (When not being used), however not if you are taling about while the battery is being used.

 

The bit that doesn't make sense is where you seem to be saying it's energying the phone, but it's not, it's powering the phone. You don't supply Energy to a component, you supply Power, or energy over time. You transfer energy to a component.

 

Energy is what we're measuring when we want to know how much battery a battery can have. There's no reason to randomly multiply it by time.

 

However, the best way of calculating how much energy a battery can hold is by measuring how much power it can supply over a given period of time, or for how long it can supply a given power. That's the only reason time is being brought into it, is because power is energy divided by time, so we multiply it by time to reverse it.

 

The only thing I can think of is that we must be thinking of different things.

 

 

 

 

 

If I were to give you a number of doughnuts for a number of years, you'd think immediately that I was lending you them - because that's the only way which makes sense.

 

If I were to give you a number of doughnuts per month for a number of years - you would be receiving delicious treats which you could consume with pleasure.

 

I don't think components borrow energy. Do you understand what I'm saying now? There has to be a rate for it to make sense.

The english term "powering" is under physics the actual phenomenon of providing energy. It's a linguistic snafu. I mean the amount of energy it can provide under use for a certain amount of time.

 

If a phone consumes energy at a rate of 0.02 joules per second (or 0.02 Watts) for 60 seconds, you've used 1.2 joules. 4500 Joule-Hours is 4500*3600 Joules * seconds. Such battery would be able to provide you with 1 joule per hour for 4500 hours or 4500 joules for 1 hour if all circuits had no resistance.

 

Retention and capacity are two very different quantities which is where I believe you're getting confused.

[Pyroven]

The english term "powering" is under physics the actual phenomenon of providing energy. It's a linguistic snafu. I mean the amount of energy it can provide under use for a certain amount of time.

 

If a phone consumes energy at a rate of 0.02 joules per second (or 0.02 Watts) for 60 seconds, you've used 1.2 joules. 4500 Joule-Hours is 4500*3600 Joules * seconds. Such battery would be able to provide you with 1 joule per hour for 4500 hours or 4500 joules for 1 hour if all circuits had no resistance.

 

Retention and capacity are two very different quantities which is where I believe you're getting confused.

 

1J/s x 1s = 1J

 

Not

 

1J/s x 1s =1Js

[patrickjp93]

1J/s x 1s = 1J

 

Not

 

1J/s x 1s =1Js

Okay I think I understand where your confusion is. Think of the number itself as a maximum rating of how much energy you could draw in the unit of time given. Drawing 4 amps of current (a couple layers removed from Watts since voltage is unknown) for an hour would wipe out a 4000 mAh battery. The time is just a scalar of how much energy the battery can have stored up at the maximum.

[makimo]

Hah... 6250mah... pfffttt!

Read about this!

 

http://www.gsmarena.com/this_chinese_handset_has_a_whopping_9000_mah_battery-news-15097.php

[Suika]

Honestly I'm pretty sure I can replicate this phone by taping an extended battery on the back of my Moto X Pure. Looks like it would be the same size, too.

[ybriK]

This seems to good to be true, I really want to pull the trigger but I don't know. Sorry for the hi-jack of the thread but is there a phone that's much better in the same price range or perhaps a bit more higher cost?

[RagnarokDel]

yeah it's bullshit. That phone is way too small for that kind of battery power. The one with a 5000mah battery yesterday was clearly thicker then any flagship phone.

[LAwLz]

It would be watts, not watt hours. mAh is current * time. Watt hours would also simply be an incorrect notation since a watt is a measure of energy per moment. The correct way to notate it would be Joule-Hour, which simply is watts.

Both are correct.

You could use joule if you wanted, but that describes the same thing as watt hours (times 3600) and Wh is far more common. I use Wh because that's what is most commonly used on things such as batteries.

 

1Wh = 3600 joule

 

Call me crazy but I think it is more elegant to write 32.4Wh instead of 116,640 joules.

I have to agree with @Pyroven on this. Joule-hour makes no sense for measuring batteries in. It is either joules or Wh, and out of those Wh is far more the most convenient.