View Single Post
  #18112 (permalink)  
Old 05-17-2010, 04:11 PM
mikep7779's Avatar
mikep7779
N00b
Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 37
Reputation: 25
mikep7779 is just getting started
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Send a message via AIM to mikep7779
Re: (¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.- 'Energy' |May 13| 21903|23569 -.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmatthewsatiug View Post
I'm no expert on this, but I think most people would benefit from direct push rather than checking every 15 minutes. The benefit of direct push is that you phone only checks email when you get one. That avoids using power to check/establish a connection when no mail exists.

The direct push technology is pretty cool. I can't remember all of the details (you can find it on Microsoft's web site, I read it a few years ago, so this is from my faulty long-term memory) but essentially your phone creates a connection to your exchange server that gets a tickle when new mail arrives.

So if you tend to get multiple messages in 15 minutes, you might save power by letting those messages stack up and getting them through one connection. On the other hand, if you're like most folks, you might go a few hours before needing to receive a message. Direct push, in that case, would save your battery.

I've tested it on my system, and I get a benefit of direct push over having mail checked every 1 hour. I didn't test beyond that because I simply am not willing to wait more than 1 hour (max) to get email on my phone.

The key thing to understand is that with direct push it is not like you're maintaining a completely active data session all the time. that would probably drain your battery very quickly.

Give it a try, I've been extremly happy since my Apache days using WinMo 5.
Thanks!
Reply With Quote