Maybe Apple has just revised their estimated battery life numbers to be closer to real-world usage numbers?

It looks like Apple standardized their battery testing to match with what they started to do with the Mac Book Air. Basically including wireless being active, etc.

In other words more realistic numbers for reasonable work flows.

The systems don't operate at 55W, 60W, etc. They have a 55 watt/hour battery, 60 watt/hour batter, etc. which it outlines the energy capacity of the battery they contain.

In other words with a 55W/h battery that allows you to run for 4.5 hours the system is burning, on average, about 12W an hour during that time.

My 1st gen MBP 17" doesn't meet the specs for the machine at the time, and I get less life out of a battery charge than Apple claimed at time of purchase. I agree with others that Apple may have changed the way they measure this.

I also noticed a change in battery performance (other on the Apple discussions also noticed it), on upgrading to Leopard. Not sure if this may have a bearing.

Has anybody noticed that the Remote is no longer included? It's a $19 option....

It is clear that 4.5 hour estimate is with WiFi? That would give it quite some more time on an airplane, where WiFi and BT are off. If all you do is work on some slide shows or text reports, with brightness turned way down, you could fly from NYC to Paris (a 7 hour flight) and not even run out of juice (with takeoff, final approach, meal service shaving off an hour or two). Watching ripped movies would probably flex the CPU muscle a bit more, for a little less time, but still most likely longer than 4.5 hours.

I can't remember getting anywhere near this amount of time from a ThinkPad (same screen size).

Is a previous generation. never got anywhere close to 5.5 hours of battery life. more like 3.

Maybe Apple has just revised their estimated battery life numbers to be closer to real-world usage numbers? totally agree with that statement. Though I really would like to see the test that Apple runs to get their estimates. I would just like to see them reproduce the results that they are talking about. It is clear that they are now including wireless being turned on when they are talking about wireless on battery life. What is not clear is the brightness level of the screen, what is included in "wireless" (i.e. Bluetooth and WIFI) and what is there use? Using BT with a wireless keyboard is one thing, but using it to transfer data is another. Basically, I am wondering if Apple figured out a real world use to finally figure out battery-life it purports before they get into a legal battle with customers about false claim at the class action level. Transparency is what we want.

There really isn't any change. They lowered the amount of time but added the phrase "wireless productivity." Before, the 6 hours was never talked about with wireless use.

If this is a change towards more realistic battery-life claims under real-world usage conditions, then I applaud Apple for doing this.

Hey, maybe someday we'll get accurate hard drive sizes! :)