Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.mobile.android    |    Discussion about Android-based devices    |    236,313 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 235,404 of 236,313    |
|    Alan to Marian    |
|    Re: Analysis of new EU energy efficiency    |
|    30 Dec 25 18:06:27    |
      XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, uk.telecom.mobile       From: nuh-uh@nope.com              On 2025-12-30 17:31, Marian wrote:       > 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.              1. a "B" isn't dismal.              2. Apple clearly explained why they CHOSE to have their phones scored as       a "B".              >       > 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.              Like you understood privileged ports and SMB on iOS?              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca