XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, uk.telecom.mobile   
   From: marianjones@helpfulpeople.com   
      
   Tyrone wrote:   
   >> 4. The analysis of measured battery capacity versus class was one of the   
   >> more counterintuitive findings. You showed that higher efficiency classes   
   >> tend to have smaller batteries, which implies that software, silicon, and   
   >> system-level optimization dominate over raw capacity. This is a valuable   
   >> correction to the common assumption that larger batteries always correlate   
   >> with better endurance as the endurance is a function of multiple factors.   
   >   
   > And yet you were the ONLY person here making the "common assumption". You   
   were   
   > told multiple times by multiple people that higher efficiency means the phone   
   > can have a smaller - and LIGHTER - battery while maintaining long run times.   
   > Which makes the phone that much more attractve. You were told multiple times   
   > that "software, silicon, and system-level optimization dominate over raw   
   > capacity".   
   >   
   > Of course you did not believe us, since we are all just "Stupid Apple   
   Trolls".   
   >  Right?   
   >   
   > So can we now assume that you will FINALLY cease your absurd claims that   
   > "Apple puts crappy batteries in iPhones"?  "The analysis of measured battery   
   > capacity versus class" was only counterintuitive to you.  To everyone else it   
   > makes perfect sense.   
      
   Maybe you misunderstood all the iPhone ever produced before June 20, 2025.   
      
   I've been saying for years that the Apple claim on high efficiency was a   
   brazen lie & the dismal June 20th EU mandated "B" results proved me right.   
      
   Not a single iPhone prior to the very latest could earn even close to an A.   
   I knew that would be the case because I understand what Apple products are.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)