Samsung Develops 'Graphene Ball' Battery With 5x Faster Charging Speed (digitaltrends.com) 137
Heart44 writes: A number of outlets are reporting a Samsung laboratory breakthrough allowing smaller and faster charging lithium-ion batteries using three-dimensional graphene. Digital Trends reports: "Scientists created a 'graphene ball' coating for use inside a regular li-ion cell, which has the effect of increasing the overall capacity by up to 45 percent and speeding up charging by five times. If your phone charges up in 90 minutes now, that number will tumble to just 18 minutes if the cell inside has been given a graphene ball boost. What's more, this doesn't seem to affect the cell's lifespan, with the team claiming that after 500 cycles, the enhanced battery still had a 78 percent charge retention. The graphene coating improves the stability and conductivity of the battery's cathode and electrode, so it's able to take the rigors of fast charging with fewer downsides." The technical paper describing how the graphene ball works and how it's produced is published in the journal Nature.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, according to a recent Slashdot article, Elon was suspected to already know about this.
https://hardware.slashdot.org/... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, according to a recent Slashdot article, Elon was suspected to already know about this.
Um... He actually invented this, along with Bitcoin - duh - the next version of which will also use a Graphene coating. :-)
Re: How many reports of 'battery breakthrough'? (Score:4, Funny)
You're right, batteries are hard, we should just give up. Lead acid was good enough for our grandparents, it's good enough for us!
Re:How many reports of 'battery breakthrough'? (Score:4, Funny)
They haven't worked out how to integrate a blockchain yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How many reports of 'battery breakthrough'? (Score:4, Insightful)
They have come to the market. Why do you think that we have personal computers in our pockets that allow for a nearly full day of computing, that are reliable enough for product makers to directly solder them to the electronic devices, and normally last past the expected device lifetime.
The problem is perception.
1. Batteries are boring. they are not flashy, they don't make your apps directly run faster. They just make the cool things other technology uses last longer.
2. Technology is using more power. My Phone, has an Ultra High resolution display, Gigs of ram, a fast processor comparable to some modern laptops and desktops. Sensors and Gyroscopes... and this is a normal consumer devices, Compared to 10 years ago, where we had a flip phone with a 100x100 pixel display (color is optional) And it made phone calls and texts, and a cheap camera, where most people had a separate camera. All this stuff uses more power. So device makers are sticking to a 20 hours battery under normal use. If the battery can last longer, then they put more stuff and speed to the device.
3. We forget the problems of the past. We needed user replaceable batteries in the past, because they would last an average of about a year. Meaning we needed to replace them after a while while our device is still relatively new.
4. We use devices more on battery. Old cell phone usage was just to make calls and texting, but for the most part the device is in our pocket, or charging. Today we as a culture are in front of little glowing squares. We are using these devices all day. Even for laptops, when I have a few hours of meeting I don't bother bringing my power cord, because I know my laptop will last the duration. Back 10 years ago, you always brought your power plug for your laptop, because the device may last 3 hours that is with the screen dimmed all the way down and no apps running. Today I can use my more powerful laptop for the 3 hours quite normally, granted if I go overboard it can vary.
5. Each breakthrough takes years to get out, make sure it works and is safe and reliable, and a fit for such devices. So if it takes 5 years to get to the market. the 3x improvement is the 3x improvement from 5 years ago, and with the other improvements going on when it gets released it is only 1.25x faster. Battery technology doesn't follow Moore's Law it is more linear. So we don't get the same awe effect that we do when we see new technology.
Re: (Score:2)
To counter this, I can buy a dumb phone that stays on for one month without any charging, or with continuous phone calls and texting it will last 7 days. 5 days if I'm using it's crappy web browser and low-res screen. If cell phone makers instead of giving me a pointlessly thinner phone, just gave me a larger battery I could use it for a whole day without needing a charge.
Re: (Score:2)
If cell phone makers instead of giving me a pointlessly thinner phone, just gave me a larger battery I could use it for a whole day without needing a charge.
So buy whatever cell phone you like, buy a combination phone-case/external-battery for it, and you'll have pretty much the functionality you want. Problem solved.
Re: (Score:2)
Those things suck so often though.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to use a basic phone, and having new battery technology to make it last for weeks, that is fine too. However most of these phones are just excess inventory of older phones, with decade old batteries. Or just an old designed not build for the batteries.
However being that nearly everyone I know of needs to sleep for at least 4 hours every day, they can use that time to charge their phone.
Re: (Score:2)
But you have to find a charger. I'd prefer to not worry about it for days or weeks at a time.
Re:How many reports of 'battery breakthrough'? (Score:4)
I am missing your counter argument. My point is new batteries are better, we just don't see it because popular devices use more power. I am not saying you need a popular smart phone, just that technology for these phones advance in a way to allow a full day of usage as part of their design requirement, if the design runs longer then a full day, then that means they can probably put more features in. If battery length is important, you can make such a choice.
Or is it that you are taking the friendly jabs at your phone at work or school personally.
Re: (Score:2)
To counter this, I can buy a dumb phone that stays on for one month without any charging, or with continuous phone calls and texting it will last 7 days. 5 days if I'm using it's crappy web browser and low-res screen. If cell phone makers instead of giving me a pointlessly thinner phone, just gave me a larger battery I could use it for a whole day without needing a charge.
I picked up a pair of 10k mAh battery packs for $30. Each one of those is enough to charge my phone 3 times, which would be enough to last over a week. It looks like you can get 20k mAh battery packs now, so just buy one of those, tape it to your phone, and it will last twice as long as your continuous-use dumb phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Will it fit in my pocket? I feel like not really.
Re: (Score:2)
buy one of those, tape it to your phone I think this fails the "elegant hack" test.
Re: (Score:2)
There is another problem: Moore's Law. Semiconductors have improved exponentially, improving computing power a million-fold over my lifetime. So people, and perhaps especially nerds, have come to expect a similar rate of improvement in other fields. But that almost never happens[1]. Batteries have dramatically improved over the last 15 years, through steady incremental progress. But still very slowly compared to improvements in computing power, thus giving the illusion of a lack of progress.
1: Some te
Re: (Score:3)
For the past decade-and-a-half or so I have read at least 80 reports of 'Breakthrough in Battery Technology'
All of them claimed to boost battery power, longer lasting battery, and faster charging time
If they are so much better, as claimed, I think the market would welcome them with open arms
Funny thing is no one bring them onto the market
Why is that??
They ARE bringing them to market.
It's not that batteries haven't drastically improved. They have.
The TRUE problem is the telemetry-riddled always-listening power sucking shit they're bolted to.
Here's a perfect example of KISS design maximizing efficiency; the Nokia "candy bar" phone. Fucking thing would last a week on standby, with some obscene amount of talk hours. Smartphone charges could probably last two weeks or more, IF they were not being used as personal video streaming devices. People demand a
Re: (Score:2)
Smartphone charges could probably last two weeks or more, IF they were not being used as personal video streaming devices. People demand a smartphone does everything for them now. Turn off features, cut out 90% of the extraneous bullshit, and (spoiler alert!) battery life would likely increase ten-fold.
I don't play videos on my phone. I surf the web a lot on my phone. Bluetooth off, location tracking off... etc. Have a pretty hefty battery (why I picked it). A year of use, and I can't make it through the day anymore without charging. I don't have too much crap installed either. I do use mine for the basics.
Re: (Score:2)
location tracking off
At the OS level, sure. Don't think that stops the apps themselves. GP did also reference
telemetry-riddled always-listening power sucking shit
but you didn't quote it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: How many reports of 'battery breakthrough'? (Score:2)
I do think you're right, though, that the OS ignores some of those settings, at least for it's
Re: (Score:1)
Things like phone and messages I would expect to run in the background regardless, but I would also expect to see them using less than 1% battery if you haven't used them. Of course, I've never really looked at the IOS battery usage menu that closely, as my iPad all last days, with the one I use as a Chromecast remote lasting weeks between charges; does IOS not list the radios separately from the apps using them?
iOS only lists battery usage by app. The usage also doesn't equal 100%, but is merely representative of percent of battery usage by app. So background connectivity at the OS level is not included. The phone "app" IMNSHO should never be active unless I activate it by calling someone or receiving a call. Same with Messages, as both rely on OS level connectivity, and the OS services those apps when something inbound happens, or you activate them yourself. In IOS with Messages there's slightly more going on, be
Re: (Score:2)
The phone "app" IMNSHO should never be active unless I activate it by calling someone or receiving a call. Same with Messages, as both rely on OS level connectivity, and the OS services those apps when something inbound happens
iOS may service those apps but, then, it's taking on the same role those apps perform for themselves on Android. Those apps have to listen to the radio for incoming calls and messages, so they will use power even when backgrounded; and even if the OS is listening on their behalf, whether or not the OS lists that usage under the app.
In IOS with Messages there's slightly more going on, because a connection is made to the central server that stays "alive" to indicate you're online.
If we weren't talking about a service meant to support full-time connections, I'd say the keep-alive was necessary but, for this use case, it's just silly. We're talking about de
Re: (Score:1)
The phone "app" IMNSHO should never be active unless I activate it by calling someone or receiving a call. Same with Messages, as both rely on OS level connectivity, and the OS services those apps when something inbound happens
iOS may service those apps but, then, it's taking on the same role those apps perform for themselves on Android. Those apps have to listen to the radio for incoming calls and messages, so they will use power even when backgrounded; and even if the OS is listening on their behalf, whether or not the OS lists that usage under the app.
This is going to be interesting. The phone "app" is the app that allows you to dial, etc. The cellular radio connection is held and maintained by the underlying OS, in both iOS and Android. The apps merely register and call those APIs. I am assuming the phone app does this also, because that's how all other apps communicate with the cellular functionality and, at heart, that's all the phone app is really doing. The only difference is that the phone app can be activated by an inbound call, hence the monitori
Re: (Score:2)
Odd. I have an iPhone 5S bought new, shortly after it came out, so it's four years old now, and with iOS 11 I'm starting to wonder if I might benefit from replacing the battery.
Re: (Score:2)
That's simply not true. I only use my phone for calls & text, plus about a half hour a day playing the occasional game of sudoku (not exactly a computer-intensive game). I'm lucky if it lasts half a day without recharging, let alone a day. This is true of my current phone and my previous one, and was true even when the batteries were new OK, when the batteries were new, they wou
Re: (Score:2)
If you truly only use your phone for calls & text, why not buy a random Nokia? They are still available, and they have a MONTH of standby time now. You'll lose Sudoku, admittedly.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I have a small "dumb" mobile phone from Samsung. It just has a 128x128 color LCD (no touch) and a *real* numeric button pad. It's super-small, only cost $7 and it goes nearly two weeks between charges!
It receives calls, makes calls and does SMS messaging.
Hell... it even has a game of "Super Jewel Quest" and an FM radio built into it.
Even better, I have a pre-pay plan and only need to top up with $20 credit every two or three months because it uses no data.
If I want to watch a video, send email, edit
I have some ni-cads here for you to try (Score:4, Insightful)
I have some ni-cads batteries here you can try out against a modern battery and then you can tell me they haven't gotten any better.
Not Buckyballs? (Score:2)
Just curious, how dissimilar are these 'graphene balls' from buckyballs [wikipedia.org]? Both are made from graphite, and are spherical.
Re:Not Buckyballs? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Not Buckyballs? (Score:4, Informative)
Buckballs are the entire family, Buckminsterfullerene is specifically C60 but the family contains C20 through C2160 (and probably larger).
Re:Not Buckyballs? (Score:4, Insightful)
Buckyballs are much smaller. These siloxane lumps are 10-20x larger than a typical buckyball. You'll probably find that the vapour deposition will result in several sheets of graphene depositing at different points and growing together into a not-quite-perfect coating. Not enough to break the functionality, but enough to disqualify it from the comparatively geometrically pure buckyballs, which have mind-boggling symmetry.
Re: (Score:1)
about as similar as a bowling ball is to a grid iron ball.
Re: (Score:2)
The only way you're getting 500 miles (~130kWH) in 5 minutes is using liquid cooled cables and I'm not so sure that's going to fly from a safety perspective (yes, gasoline filler hoses aren't exactly safe but they're established tech that is well accepted by the consumer through familiarity, that doesn't mean that a new tech can be just as dangerous and be accepted.
Re: (Score:2)
The only way you're getting 500 miles (~130kWH) in 5 minutes is using liquid cooled cables
Or use a higher voltage. At 15kV, you only need 100 Amps, which can be done with regular cables.
Re: (Score:2)
The only way you're getting 500 miles (~130kWH) in 5 minutes is using liquid cooled cables ...
I think Monster Cable sells them - gold plated. The electrical clarity is crystal clear.
90 mins for a full charge? (Score:1)
What phone takes 90 minutes for a full charge?
All the current Androids do 50% in 15 mins and 100% within 45 mins.
I smell bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it's an EV you'd probably prefer more range at the same size. And if you're talking a lead-acid starting battery in a standard car - it's strengths are very different than lithium-ion, and it would likely take a far more expensive Li-Ion battery to do its job. And what would be the point? To shave a few pounds off a kilo-pound machine?
Re: (Score:2)
Convenience and traveling.
I quite agree that 200 miles is more than enough for most people's daily driving, it probably even goes a week for a lot of people most of the time. But charging overnight currently mostly assumes you have a garage or carport, or own your own home to install curbside charging, while a quick google suggests that only 46% of people have garages (~70% live in single family homes * ~66% of homes have garages = ~46% of people have garages). ~64% own their homes so curbside charging is
500 charges is not enough (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm charging my S8+ ~1.5 a day. 500 charges means that after just 1 year the battery is at 78% of capacity, What happens after 1.5 years?
Even for those who charge only once a day, 500 charges is ~1.5 years, which is less than the common 2-year lifespan of the phone.
Increasing the battery density probably won't help either, as manufacturers will again make thinner phones instead of increasing capacity.
Re:500 charges is not enough (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm charging my S8+ ~1.5 a day. 500 charges means that after just 1 year the battery is at 78% of capacity, What happens after 1.5 years?
Even for those who charge only once a day, 500 charges is ~1.5 years, which is less than the common 2-year lifespan of the phone.
Increasing the battery density probably won't help either, as manufacturers will again make thinner phones instead of increasing capacity.
If their 45% capacity increase estimates are accurate, you will not have to endure as many cycles per year, and for the average user not charging as often as you do, that will likely translate to a couple of years. Besides, after a year, all current smartphone batteries are running at some level of degradation. It's essentially expected.
As far as it not lasting, smartphone factory warranties are typically one year. Manufacturers don't give a shit how long your service contract is. That's your problem. Their only job is to manufacture hardware that lasts through the warranty period, and not much longer. Revenue is maximized that way.
Re: (Score:2)
If their 45% capacity increase estimates are accurate, you will not have to endure as many cycles per year, and for the average user not charging as often as you do, that will likely translate to a couple of years.
As I wrote , the major manufacturers tend decreasing the size and the weight of the phone instead of increasing battery capacity (there is some capacity increase only to accommodate larger power-hungry screens).
Re: (Score:2)
If their 45% capacity increase estimates are accurate, you will not have to endure as many cycles per year, and for the average user not charging as often as you do, that will likely translate to a couple of years.
As I wrote , the major manufacturers tend decreasing the size and the weight of the phone instead of increasing battery capacity (there is some capacity increase only to accommodate larger power-hungry screens).
With regards to shitty design, consumers need to start voting with their wallets to take back hardware design. It's obvious no manufacturer has consumer interest in mind, and instead is solely focused on maximizing revenue.
The problem is convincing the blindly ignorant masses who happily take whatever paper-thin bullshit design is thrown at them, all because it's the "new" one.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem with voting with your wallet is the same as with actually voting - you can only vote among the options provided. Personally I haven't seen many nice chunky phones that only have to be charged once a week. Have you?
Plus there's the problem with "optimistic" advertising - it's not often you hear about a phone whose charge actually lasts as long as advertised. Some do, many don't. And if you can't trust the claims on the box... well that's about as much "research" as the average consumer is goi
Re: (Score:2)
The larger problem is that these aren't technical tools for a technical audience anymore, the blindly ignorant masses are 98% of the customer base now and what sells to them is what drives design.
And since they drive the entire product cycle anymore, there's no choices left. Here and there projects pop up which claim to produce a smartphone that does something the market leaders don't, but they always seem to fizzle because of the overhead of an actual new smartphone design.
And in many ways, doesn't the sm
Re:500 charges is not enough (Score:4, Insightful)
Thing is the EU wised up and mandated that everything now comes with a two year warranty in an attempt to stop landfill, filling up with cheaply manufactured junk that fails after a just over a year. A market of 500 million first worlder's is generally too big to miss out on.
Re: (Score:1)
A market of 500 million first worlder's is generally too big to miss out on.
Tell that to 17 million people in the UK. Fucking morons.
Re: (Score:2)
The EU has 2year warranty by law since decades.
I live in Germany, as long as I can remember it never was less than two years.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The number of cycles that is usually quoted for Li-Ion batteries is ~1000 for 80% depth of discharge (DoD of 100% can lower that to 200-300).
I don't know under what conditions 500 cycles were achieved (the articles only says 5C, but not DoD).
Re: (Score:3)
That's 500 cycles of rapid charging. You probably don't supercharge your phone 1.5 times a day.
Re: (Score:2)
Easy enough to avoid - just don't use a compatible fast charger.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, if I do need to charge w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I had heard that if you keep your charge between 50% and 80% you minimize wear and tear on your battery. I have an iPhone 7 that I've had for 13 months. I've tried to keep the battery charge in that range. There have been times when I've left it on the charger and it charged to 100%. I've also had it drain down to maybe 20% or so.
Using the iOS app "Battery Life", just this week my wear level dropped from 0% to 3%. I had used this app on my iPhone 5 prior to that and it had showed my battery was worn do
Re: (Score:2)
Why is this not built into the phone by default? I rarely drop below 50% with my usage pattern. I think it would be great to be able to have the battery never charge above 90%, even when left on the charger. I've seen a laptop with this feature, and it sounds like a great idea especially on phones with a built in battery. I'd gladly take 10% less potential battery that I never use over having my battery stay in better shape longer. I'm not sure exactly how it works, but it seems that you'd lose that top 1
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you buy a new phone if your current one were still holding 90% of it's original charge capacity? Sure, there's a percentage of the population that falls for the "new and shiny", but I think most people probably still wait until their existing phone starts having problems.
I'd be willing to bet that even with replaceable batteries "I need a new battery" adds some extra motivation to just buy a new phone instead.
Re: (Score:2)
My Sony ZX1 compact has something called battery care. I plug it in at night and it tells me that it will reach 100% charge just before I wake up. Further as I understand it the 100% displayed charge is actually only 90% of the capacity of the battery.
Re: (Score:2)
That should already be happening, internally. But it needs to display as 100% because no consumer wants a phone that can only charge to 90% - what a rip-off that would be perceived to be.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm charging my S8+ ~1.5 a day. 500 charges means that after just 1 year the battery is at 78% of capacity, What happens after 1.5 years?
Even for those who charge only once a day, 500 charges is ~1.5 years, which is less than the common 2-year lifespan of the phone.
Increasing the battery density probably won't help either, as manufacturers will again make thinner phones instead of increasing capacity.
After a year your battery power remains around 80%. At this rate after 1 year your battery will last for 7.8 hrs if it lasted 10 hrs initially(not bad considering you supercharge it everytime). Next year it will be 6.2 hrs and next year it will be 5 hrs. So after 3 years it will be at 50% of capacity. Not bad for me. Considering it will increasing capacity by 45% at initial stage. So theoretically it will be 75% of capacity after 3 years. And one more thing- charge cycle of li-ion is different than charging
Re: (Score:2)
> Considering it will increasing capacity by 45% at initial stage.
Sadly, given current market trends I'd bet on a 31% thinner battery with the same capacity instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
80% is the standard measure of battery lifetime that manufacturers use. Some phone manufacturers will replace your battery if it goes below that level within the warranty period, but I don't know if Samsung is one.
Having said that, how are you managing 1.5 charge cycles a day?! Based on reviews of the S8+ you should be seeing about 10% for an hour of streaming video, or 20% in the fake-HDR ultra-brightness video enhancement mode. Heavy browsing and app use should get you maybe 6 hours of solid use. Maybe yo
Re: (Score:2)
I get 3-5 days on a single charge of my phone.
It has a 4500mAh Li-Ion battery. On a light use day, I still have 98% or so battery when I go to bed. On a heavy use day, I'll burn through up to 15%.
Oh, and my phone was only $240, no contract, no financing. It's an LG X Power 2, known as LG X Charge in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you're running your battery down to near-zero every day, you're not doing full discharge/recharge cycles, so your battery should last longer than 500 charges.
As for what to do when the battery life is no longer long enough -- swap it out for a new battery. (Sorry, iPhone users, you'll have to hire a college kid to do it for you)
Re: (Score:3)
Increasing the battery density probably won't help either, as manufacturers will again make thinner phones instead of increasing capacity.
To which 90% of most users will stick in a fat ass case so they can get a better grip on the paper thin phone.....
Re: (Score:2)
I think they are quoting full cycles. That is the only explanation that I can come up with for a claim that 78% capacity after 500 charges is competitive. Lithium batteries are known to deliver a much larger amount of total lifetime energy when they are recharged before being fully discharged. So a full cycle test is not representative. It would be nice to see a new test emerge that says what the average lifetime power delivery would be with a more optimal charging pattern.
An example of this is the actual d
Re: (Score:2)
If you ask samsung, or any other corporation that sells consumer products they would reply: Buy new one.
This is exactly what they _WANT_, and it's easy to see because everything you buy new lasts less than previous version of the same thing.
The New Samsung Battery (Score:1)
Is Blazing Fast!
New battery technology!!! (Score:2)
Wrong journal (Score:1)
The article was published in Nature Communications - Nature Publishing Group's open access journal. Nature itself is a journal that has 3-4x the impact factor of Nature Communications. This probably doesn't matter to most people but it is a way to gauge how novel/impactful the research was perceived by the scientific community.
Re: (Score:2)
And now you know what brand extension is.
They're doing the same thing with the word "graphene." They've coated glass beads with a few dozen layers of graphite, which is not a new idea, but calling it "graphene" will get it talked about.
Basic Lipo battery question (Score:2)
Serious question: What's the shelf-life of a Lipo cell? I've looked at a bunch of datasheets and I can't find any specs on this. I'm not talking about the self-discharge rate but rather if I get a cell from the manufacturer, which is usually at 50% charge, and let it sit for several years without ever cycling it, what happens to the cell's performance? Does it lose the ability to hold charge? Does it lose the ability to deliver the rated current output? If it degrades over time, what's that degradation
I'm waiting for the marketing... (Score:2)
New battery technology! (Score:3)
Here's the thing: I must've heard of a new revolutionary battery technology at least once a month for the past 5 years or so.
The problem is always mass production.
Can Samsung churn out batteries with graphene balls for all devices that currently use Li-po batteries at similar costs and similar speeds?
If not, then it won't be replacing anything. And this story is yet another one for the archives.
Two Things (Score:4, Informative)
1) They'll just make the battery smaller, I'd guess. Why would a company whose job it is to sell hardware want that hardware to disrupt their product cycle (cynical, I know)?
2) DON'T charge you battery to 100% or discharge to near-zero. I don't have links, but there are some neat articles around the internet regarding the chemistry of li-ion batteries and charge/discharge. It's shown that charging to ~80% and discharging to only ~40% allows the battery to last far far longer; that's what I do, and so far it's working out very well.
Re: (Score:2)
DON'T charge you battery to 100%
How do you prevent it from charging 100% when you're asleep ?
Re: (Score:2)
DON'T charge you battery to 100%
How do you prevent it from charging 100% when you're asleep ?
Code yourself a simple app to sound an excruciatingly loud alarm when charging reaches 80%. You wake up, and pull the plug out when you throw the thing against the wall, job done.
Re: (Score:2)
Companies may make the phone smaller if they can make the battery smaller, but they generally have incentive to put as much battery as possible in the device. Batteries are largely irrelevant in the product cycle, because approximately nobody buys a new phone because the battery has deteriorated. I'm using a four-year-old phone, and my sister-in-law just stopped using my wife's seven-year-old phone earlier this year, and the batteries were still satisfactory.
Neither my wife, my sister-in-law, nor I b
goodness gracious (Score:2)
Manufacturing Break Through (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Do you guys write these things down on sticky notes to save for the next Samsung article?
Lets see, not clever, unique, or innovative. Your like the online equivalent of my 6 y/o telling me the same knock knock joke he heard last week for the hundredth time.
Re: (Score:1)