[cisco-voip] Anyone have the 7921G yet?

[Jonathan Charles]

Same problem with the 7920... if you walked off-site with it, it would go
into hyper-AP search and kill the battery...



Jonathan

On 3/24/07, Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
>
>  Mine was down to minimal battery level afte 2 days idle.  I didn't wait
> until it died though.   This is while associated however.  I took it home
> one night to try and get working to my AP at home (no WPA so couldn't
> work).  A few hours idle with no association really killed the battery.
>
>
> -Ryan
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Johnson, Ken
> *Sent:* Friday, March 23, 2007 3:55 PM
> *To:* Jonathan Charles
> *Cc:* ciscovoip
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Anyone have the 7921G yet?
>
>  In my experience – it definitely is in the multiple hours of talk time –
> can't say I've tried 8 without re-cradling it. Pretty sure I've gone close
> to 4 at least. I usually drop it in the cradle after I'm done talking so
> don't have extended figures for what happens if I talk for four hours and
> then leave it on standby and pick up later without a recharge.
>
>
>
> Standby time? I'd say it has at least 50 hours – which is an improvement
> over the 7920's 24 hour time even with extended battery J It probably has
> more – again – two days is about the max I've left it off the charger
> intentionally or otherwise.
>
>
>
> Ken Johnson
>    Mgr. Network Services,
>    Information Technology
>    LeTourneau University
> _________________________________
> http://www.ciptug.org
>
>
>
> *From:* Jonathan Charles [mailto:jonvoip at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, March 23, 2007 2:50 PM
> *To:* Johnson, Ken
> *Cc:* Stu Packett; ciscovoip
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Anyone have the 7921G yet?
>
>
>
> Well, it certainly prettier...
>
> Question is, does it live up the advertised battery life?
>
> 8 hours of talk time, 100 hours of standby time...
>
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
> On 3/23/07, *Johnson, Ken* <kenjohnson at letu.edu> wrote:
>
> Yes and it is a 200% improvement over the 7920. I can't recommend it
> enough.
>
>
>
> Ken Johnson
>    Mgr. Network Services,
>    Information Technology
>    LeTourneau University
> _________________________________
> http://www.ciptug.org
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Stu Packett
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 22, 2007 1:17 PM
> *To:* ciscovoip
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Anyone have the 7921G yet?
>
> I just saw that Cisco listed the 7921G on their website.  Has anyone
> actually used it yet?
>
>
>
> http://cisco.com/en/US/products/ps7071/index.html
>  ------------------------------
>
>
> Spam <http://antispam.letu.edu/canit/b.php?c=s&i=1439790&m=8619f27ff58f>
> Not spam<http://antispam.letu.edu/canit/b.php?c=n&i=1439790&m=8619f27ff58f>
> Forget previous vote<http://antispam.letu.edu/canit/b.php?c=f&i=1439790&m=8619f27ff58f>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>
> Spam <http://antispam.letu.edu/canit/b.php?c=s&i=1485189&m=b2910973c266>
> Not spam<http://antispam.letu.edu/canit/b.php?c=n&i=1485189&m=b2910973c266>
> Forget previous vote<http://antispam.letu.edu/canit/b.php?c=f&i=1485189&m=b2910973c266>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20070325/efe45888/attachment.html