Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamokazi
Hi Bob, I really appreciate your testing...
This is mainly aimed at your radio tests. I agree with you, I think a lot of people have a placebo effect going with the 1.11 radio...you've put up a variety of numbers showing no difference, so I'm inclined to believe them over casual observation. What I do disagree with is that you seem to think no radio revision will ever make a difference because it is just software. I think it could, and this is why:
While just software (or firmware as I would imagine it is closer to) the radio software is what tells the radio chip to do anything. If it's telling it to scan for better towers, or sending data for transport, it is giving commands to the radio chip. Bugs or inefficiencies in the radio software could affect the battery and signal performance, by either not switching to another tower, sending erraneous data packets, etc. So newer versions could fix or improve upon old ones.
Basically what I'm getting at is don't stop testing  I think a future radio version could make a difference, and the kind of testing you do will prove it definitively. |
I essentially agree with you. The radio (or any) software could have an impact depending on the bugs. This is especially true if you were comparing different "generations". However, I consider the three that I looked at to be the same generation. And if you assume that the mfr produced "bug-free" products, then the results would be as I have shown. If one had a major flaw, it should have shown up in the test results. But I think the primary difference is going to show up in signal performance, not in the battery area. As I said, in the post, I don't have the capability to test the signal performance....but I do expect that's where your primary difference is going to show up.
Bob
01-30-2009, 01:27 AM
Threaded Mode
