why dont we go back to using batteries for smartphones to improve the battery life...these ones are used in watches and stuff and they last for fucking YEARS and when its drained you just pop another in.why are we still fucking about with charger when the solution is righ there?
>>66343102Because ampere hours
>>66343102Lithium metal batteries are the future for phones. Supposedly, they can hold a charge for 30 days.
>>66345187you must /b/ lost
>>66343102Think for a while about the stupid comparison you just made
>>66345176Solid state batteries are the future.
>>66345236I wasn't aware that current batteries had moving parts? Am I missing something? >Flash memory cell = Solid State>Battery charge cells = Solid State?please explain
>>66345264He's referring to solid state batteries as opposed to hard batteries.
>>66345264Here you go you fucking mongoloid.
>>66345343Dude I'm not even OP I was just confused. Heaven forbid.
>>66345372Heaven forbid you have to google 2 words before posting.
>>66345377I actually did, and was reading Wikipedia when you replied. Just a thread not a nuclear missile. You don't have to be an asshole. This isn't /b/
>>66343102This is bait and anyone who falls for it is as stupid as OP is gay
>>66345420>>66345377Now shake hands and make up.
>>66345583Maybe OP just simply lacks the technical expertise as compared to most /g/ents
>>66345593I'm totally fine with that anon. I understand that sometimes there are those anons who are too dense to understand that search engine's are their friend. I don't need to be spoon fed. But I don't mind asking for clarification if I'm genuinely confused or don't know something.
Why smartphones don't use solar panels to recharge???
>>66345607I understand about the spoon feeding I sadly have to do it at my job everyday, but they never learn. But I feel you, if you can find the answer in a quick Google you shouldn't spoon feed.
>>66345593>>66345607Ok I'm sorry.
>>66345699No worries Sir
>>66345699>>66345716That's beautiful and I'm touched in the heart, thank you Anons
>>66343102Watches consume nearly nothing in term of power so it's feasible to use non rechargeable batteries.It's not the same thing with processors and backlit/oled screens, even radio circuits drain power even when only recieving, partly due to complex demodulation , GPS positioning consumes power for example without any radio emissions .
Where can I get new in box mercury batteries?
>>66346000I don't think they're sold anymore. I think the levels of toxicity were too high.
>>66345161but really when are they going to remove the port to relly entirely on wireless charging?
Friendly reminder that Renata batteries are absolute shit and leak way before their voltage drops into unusabilityLiterally any other brand is better than that Swiss scam, even alkaline chinkshit that's passed off as silver it's better when you take into account priceGet Sony's or whatever that's from a reputable non meme brand
>Why don't we go back to batteries anon you realise the old Quartz LCD watches of old drew NANOWATTS of current. Old Nippon watch makers pioneered low power solid state > there is an alternative Yup it's called beta voltaics or nuclear batteries. If you want to strap some Polonium 210 to your wrist for a few years be my guest. Lithium battery tech is the best thing to come into this world T. Some one who had one of the first consumer lithium batteries in my minidisc player in the early 90s
>>66346026I have a bunch of old SLRs that like them. You can fudge it and use newer stuff but the differing voltage fucks with the light meter readings.
>>663461931-3 years we will see it on flagships then its game over