Is 60 total cycles too low for device usage by now, since I got it as soon as it came out?That's my take on it! The device is working for me, not the other way around
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPad Pro Why doesn’t Apple ever significantly improve battery life?
- Thread starter Marswarrior462
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ipad pro
- Sort by reaction score
60 cycles in 90 days is moderate to heavy use. Battery is still rated for 500 cycles, I believe. Only the iPhone 15 series batteries got upped to 1000. So at this rate you will be around 80% battery health at 2 years after release.
I thought the batteries on the iPad and Apple Watch were rated for 1000 cycles too
No it's more like saying I won't run my engine at the redline even though modern cars can live there for quite a long time. Not forever though.
Could be. I might have missed it. Then .667 cycles a day gets you 4.1 years of use.
At the extreme yes but it's a false trade-off in practice. Of course at any given time with the hardware technology there is a trade-off between capacity and size. However these have both improvced since the say the original iPad Pro 12.9" such that all else being equal they could make something both thinner and with longer battery life. This assumes the software is at least as efficient as it used to be.
I’m on a 13” M4. I started with 80% this morning, have been web browsing for 90 minutes constant, and am now showing 73%. This is consistent with the battery life I have been getting in the 2 weeks I have had this model. I charge every 3 days or so.
One thing you can do in the MacOS that you can't do in iOS is go through the Library/Launch folders with a chainsaw.
I don't think there's such a thing as "too low" or "too high" -- it's just dependent on your usage.
I've had my iPhone 15 Pro for about 11 months and it's got 329 cycles. But you could ask someone else and they might have half as many or twice as many.
There are lot more significant variables than just those arbitrary limits. Limits become more crucial when you are going to shut down the iPad Pro and not use it for months. There is no data that clearly shows limits extend battery health. It’s a guideline.
I went in last week and had a look, that’s why I have these opinions! The 11” Pro is ok, but I don’t like the 13”. I liked both of the Air sizes better.
I accept that my tastes are in the minority.
That’s rather a bit of false equivalence. How does wanting a slightly sturdier iPad with better battery life equate to me wanting supersized MacBooks?
I have a 14”, and there’s not much I’d like to change on it! In fact, some people are already claiming that they’re too fat, but I like the current thickness.
My point in referencing the 1st gen is that iPads feel a whole lot more flimsy now, and I don’t like that. It’s not an attack on other people liking thin iPads!
Speaking of making portable things more portable, for the life of me, I can't figure out why Minis have a market when I can pick up a 2012 13" Macbook Pro from a recycler for ten bucks, and it weighs less than a Mini, comes with a built-in screen, and is serviceable with a regular Phillip screwdriver. Clone over Mojave/HFS+, and done.
As fun as it is for us to tinker with old machines, and make them continue to be useful, sometimes it is nice to just have something new.
Also, since I already have a laptop that I really love, and will be my main machine for a long time to come, what I want from a secondary device is, essentially, a second screen that take with me, that I can use independently when I don't need to use a laptop, or in circumstances a laptop is less ideal, not a whole second laptop!
I do want to go set up my 2008 iMac again though. I have some old Adobe CS5 that I need to convert to more portable formats.
They sure have improved battery life for me!!!! 15 plus has much better life than the 13 as one example. Try using the older MacBooks with DVD drives and spinning hard drives. Todays Mac’s have a far better battery.
Minis are not "smaller" than laptops, unless the container you're carrying it in is a lunchbox.
Soooo….
You don’t want the ACTUAL inconvenience of poor battery or result of usage - namely the battery depletion…
So, instead, you ARTIFICIALLY create what would happen in 2 years today by simulating poor battery performance by limiting it arbitrarily today…
In a hope that in two years or more you won’t have an impact on your battery as heavy as 80% (which is the suspected degradation in two years).
I mean… this just doesn’t make sense if you are complaining of battery issues today. Just use it.
NM. (I forget how often Apple causes momentary confusion in discussion of its own product-lines by giving disparate devices the same name. Carry on, then.)
female with noodle arms here. the lighter the better
apple should just make a charging case with a huge battery for all the beef bois out there that need 20 hours of battery life. keep the design light for the rest of us
apple has really made its user base incredibly neurotic
you are almost certainly not meaningfully extending the life of your battery using the 80% limit.
if you use your phone for many hours a day (i guarantee many here use it 10+ hours a day) like many people you will slowly degrade the battery welcome to real life where things decay
you are almost certainly not meaningfully extending the life of your battery using the 80% limit.
if you use your phone for many hours a day (i guarantee many here use it 10+ hours a day) like many people you will slowly degrade the battery welcome to real life where things decay