It’s common knowledge across the web – phone addicts around the globe are disappointed by the battery life of the N95. It’s actually one of the few complaints people are having. Someone suggested that it’s due to size. They made the N95 alot smaller than the N80, which also had horrid battery life, but it’s also got a TON more features.
The N95′s battery, when you think about it, will actually last throughout the day, depending on your usage. I’m a pretty heavy user of my mobile, and while I do know that I cut back on usage slightly when I know the battery is at stake, I am still able to last through the day. It should be noted that I am usually somewhere near a plug, too, though, so I guess you could say at this point my battery experience on the N95 is a wash.
However, one thing I noticed is that the N73′s battery is very close to
the same size, if not identical. Thus, I took the following photos of
the two batteries. It turns out, the N73′s battery is slightly thicker,
but also shorter. I would guesstimate that they occupy the same amount
of space, when you take into account the three dimensions. So then why
is the N95′s battery so much less?
I don’t have an answer to this. I don’t think it would have been a big
deal, on a cost or physical size factor, to put in the same mAh that
the N73 has. However, as Jonathan Greene pointed out to me on the phone
the other day, would that really matter? The N73 plows through with its
battery, but it also has an inferior camera, no WiFi, smaller screen,
and no GPS.
What do you think? I personally think that Nokia would have made a
great choice to stuff as much battery in there as possible. But perhaps
they did? Perhaps the few millimeters of thickness difference is what
matters, not overall space? I’m not familiar with battery technology in
the least bit to know.
