SoundFoodSoundFoodSoundFood
  • News
  • A/V Media
  • A/V Interiors
  • How Stuff Works
  • iPod & Portable Players
    • Headphones
    • iPod
    • Mp3 & Mp4 Players
  • Equipmet Reviews
    • AC Power
    • Accessories
    • Blu-ray & HD DVD Players
    • HDTVs (Plasma, LCD, Rear Projection…)
    • Home Theater in a Box
    • Music Servers / MP3 Players
    • Power Amps (Multi-Channel, Stereo, Integrated)
    • Preamps (AV, Stereo…)
    • Receivers
    • Remotes and System Control
    • Speakers
    • Subwoofers
    • Video (Projectors, Processors…)
Reading: Zune 80’s battery life well below iPod?
Share
SoundFoodSoundFood
  • News
  • A/V Media
  • A/V Interiors
  • How Stuff Works
  • iPod & Portable Players
    • Headphones
    • iPod
    • Mp3 & Mp4 Players
  • Equipmet Reviews
    • AC Power
    • Accessories
    • Blu-ray & HD DVD Players
    • HDTVs (Plasma, LCD, Rear Projection…)
    • Home Theater in a Box
    • Music Servers / MP3 Players
    • Power Amps (Multi-Channel, Stereo, Integrated)
    • Preamps (AV, Stereo…)
    • Receivers
    • Remotes and System Control
    • Speakers
    • Subwoofers
    • Video (Projectors, Processors…)
Follow US
  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap
  • Contact Us
Copyright © 2007 - 2024 SoundFood. A Symphony of Audio-Visual Tech Updates!
SoundFood > News > Zune 80’s battery life well below iPod?
News

Zune 80’s battery life well below iPod?

Allan Ford November 27, 2007

28.zune80-2.jpgThe just-launched Zune 80 may fall well short of the iPod classic in battery performance, according to benchmarking performed by CNET. The site reports that the hard disk-based player runs for 22 hours with Wi-Fi disabled, eight hours short of the competing 80GB iPod’s official figure of 30 hours. Switching Wi-Fi on without using it drops battery life to about 18.5 hours, the tests show. By contrast, Electronista’s iPod classic review netted 32.5 hours before time constraints forced an early end; CNET’s own review generated about 45 hours of runtime.

No direct explanation is provided for the discrepancy other than the larger screen, which is 3.2 inches versus the Apple player’s 2.5 but shares the same 320×240 screen resolution. Both have recently seen both battery life increases counterbalanced by visual upgrades to their interfaces, but share similar drive technology.

You Might Also Like

Tribit XSound Plus 2: The Ultimate Affordable Outdoor Bluetooth Speaker with 24-Hour Battery Life

Best Music Streaming Services of 2024

Navigating the 8K Dilemma: Is Investing in an 8K TV Justified Without Native 8K Content?

Cambridge Audio’s M100 Wireless Earbuds for Effortless Listening: Immerse Yourself in Seamless Sound

Discover Excellence: Bowers & Wilkins Unveils 700 S3 Signature Series Speakers

Share This Article
Facebook Twitter Copy Link Print
Previous Article Spherical DIY Surround Sound Speakers
Next Article Blu-ray’s 3:1 European lead sign of larger victory?
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest News

NAD C162/C272
NAD C162/C272 System Combination
Equipmet Reviews March 28, 2024
Yamaha DVX-1000 2.1-Channel Home Cinema Review
Home Theater in a Box November 20, 2008
Aiptek Pocket Cinema Projector V10 Review
Video (Projectors, Processors...) October 22, 2008
Optoma Pico Pocket Projector
Optoma Pico Pocket Projector Video Reviews
Video (Projectors, Processors...) October 22, 2008
Copyright © 2007 - 2024 SoundFood. A Symphony of Audio-Visual Tech Updates!
  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap
  • Contact Us
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?