Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Batteries...
From: Chris Holt <amiga2k_at_cox.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:44:27 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: "Holger Lembke" <holger_at_hlembke.de>
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 9:10 AM
Subject: RE: Batteries...
> > I'd say go for it. They are priced pretty good, and even if
> > they don't live
> > up to 100% of thier spec, they are probably still better than 1850s.
> to put a little math into it:
> only looking at the 1700mAh and up (and working ones), you can expect a
> value of 96,6+-2% to meet the values they promise.
> for 1800mAh and up its 96,58+-2,3%, for 1850mAh and up its 98,6+-0,7%.
> My interpretation: the mid-range wants to palliate their values.
> Holger Lembke
Cover, hide? Lessen, abate? Looks more to me like they want to exaggerate
Thanks for doing the math. (and making me go to dictionary.com) :P
It's a good sign though that they are rating more conservatively, perhaps
doing tests that more closely approximate real world use. I'm getting great
performance out of my Energizer (Sanyo) 1850s.
Received on 2003-02-04