1500MaH battery is shiiping - Page 9

Beachbumcook · #81 (**permalink**) 01-02-2008, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannyPR

Jeez! Come on guys!

Seidio said that the batteries are rated at 1500mah. I did my own tests with a 3rd party and the batteries are rated what Seidio is advertising. Even though that is true they are standing by their products and even if your 30 days are gone they are refunding your money. What else you want?

The persistence of you guys to keep throwing mud in the face of a respectable company that has been providing us quality products for years is just unacceptable. It just makes me wonder if you guys work for Mugen or something.

If you have scientific evidence that their products are not up to their claims (not some freaking software that is not designed to measure battery capacity in the first place) bring it on so we can all see it or better yet call your attorney general and file a complaint.

If not please walk away and let all the unfounded and irrational accusations be burried in the PPCGeeks Archive. Your nagging over stuff that you either never bought or already returned is wasting my bandwith.

Gee.... come on... (as you say)... maybe you work for Seidio???

You sure defend them... you claim 3rd party testing... but we'll just have to take your word for it (but that is OK and thanks for testing).

But their marketing department and website people are so lazy and mis-informed, that many of us just wonder who is doing their testing if they can't even get their math correct? What is the true advantage or increase to this battery... is it 20%, 25% or 36.5%... or something less than that as other have stated.

Why don't you just lay low and offer additonal evidance instead of "bashing" those of us that have legitamate questions and concerns. Funny how you defend their position more than they do!!!

The internet is a powerful tool... Seidio obviously uses it to sell and market their products, but mis a step and have users question one's business practices.... and it can be your worse enemy.

Just for the record, I have not made any unfounded claims against Seidio, just questions/concerns I have had or do have over their use of "user reviews", the math they use to promote their claims, the type of testing they do and the "fit" of the battery in the OEM case.

If you have no other evidence to offer either way (I assume your defending them)... then just lay low and let them speak for themselves and answer my questions (plain and simple) that I posted earlier.

I hear and see where your coming from... but let them speak... if they will???

monkeyboy · #82 (**permalink**) 01-02-2008, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beachbumcook

Interesting results...

This is the kind of testing we have been looking for ...
Maybe the ABC battery meter program is deficient?

Maybe for the lack of knowing better, the "average Joe" has to rely on the programs and testing that one has available since we do not all have friends like yours?

I posed the technically pointed question about how a WM app like the ACB program could possibly provide accurate current/power data to the MSDN group handling power issues for WM devices. This is the response I got:

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeCal

I have no idea how you could accurately measure power with an app. I can think of ways to infer power draw. It's relatively easy to get CPU times, LED blink rates, and knowledge of when the Backlight turns on, etc. If you knew which parts were in the device you could deduce how much power they're drawing, etc. It would be hard to tell if the audio amplifiers are powered, etc.
The way I do power analysis is with hardware. I remove the battery and attach a power supply to the battery leads. The power supply tells me exactly how much power its supplying to the phone, and dumps that data over USB to a nice little app that shows me graphs in real time. With no battery there, all power being drawn needs to be coming from the supply, so I know EXACTLY what's happening.
Mike

I believe he confirms my suspicion all along, which is that there is no way a WM app like the ACB program could provide an accurate read of the current or power consumption of arbitrary WM devices. Plus Mike implies that there are no such WM API hooks in the OS for such data monitoring. If you understood how current can be measure, it would be clear that it is unlikely that your average consumer WM device would be outfitted with what is needed to make such data available (it would add unnecessary complexity to the power mgmt circuitry and probably REDUCE the battery life in the process). In all likelihood, the ACB program is making an educated guess about power/current utilitization of the device based on CPU and I/O usage. -- but such GUESSES would not be very accurate.

MannyPR · #83 (**permalink**) 01-03-2008, 12:15 AM

Like I said before my testing was done to clarify info for my own purposes, I shared for your info like I have shared my experiences with memory cards, equipment, software, etc in this forum before.

I don't work for Seidio, never have. I have been a satisfied Seidio customer since I purchased my Treo 650 accessories from them several years ago, since then I have purchase from them batteries and accessories for several phones (Treo 700p, 755p, 6700. 6800 and 6900). My loyalty to them comes only from the need to preserve one of the few trustworthy merchants really committed to producing quality products for the smartphone market.

There are plenty of companies that, for a fee, can produce the testing that you are looking for. If you PM me I can put you in contact with the EE that did the tests that I posted the results for and I am sure that his company would do those tests with results printed out in a report like you want for a fee since that is what they do.

I am not bashing anyone, I do question your ulterior motive when you continue to bash a company that has refunded your money for a purchase that you were not satisfied with (because someone else wasn't satisfied with it).

I am still waiting for anyone to show any empirical info that the battery doesn't meet specs, the people that have posted that have the battery are saying during the day the battery lasts more than the original by 20 to 25%. Although is not a controlled environment test at the end of the day is why I buy the battery so I still have juice when the OEM battery would be dead.

I have nothing to say about the use of user reviews, if they had asked me I would have written a great one for them. With my battery I am getting over 20% vs the original so I perceive their claim to be on the conservative side. The type of testing they do is for them to release but if their testing process reveals proprietary info about how they achieve the rated capacity then I understand why they don't. Regarding the fit since day 1 Seidio has said that the battery fits tight in the OEM case, I had the same situation with my 755p battery I see it as them maximizing the space in the compartment to get me some extra juice and I have no problem with that.

In law, defamation is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government or nation. Most jurisdictions allow legal actions, civil and/or criminal, to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against groundless criticism.

I have yet to see the grounds for the criticism.

MannyPR · #84 (**permalink**) 01-03-2008, 01:18 AM

I might not be board certified and my posts are not legal advice to anyone nor I have presumed to do so. I was a law student in my earliest years and know some about trade law because that is what the firm I worked for did.

Trade libel is the intentional disparagement of the quality of property. "Unlike classic defamation, [the defamatory statements] are not directed at the plaintiff[base ']s personal reputation, but rather at the goods a plaintiff sells or the character of his or her business, as such." Guess v. Superior Court , 176 Cal.App.3d 473, 479 (1985). The disparagement must result in pecuniary damage to the plaintiff. The disparagement may be in the form of a false statement of fact or opinion. (see 5 Witkin Sum. Cal. Law Torts Â§573, citing Rest.2d, Torts Â§Â§626)

Research those cases and research the Lanham Act, I think you will be surprised how wrong your assumptions are. Besides your post is OT.