XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone   
   From: marianjones@helpfulpeople.com   
      
   Chris wrote:   
   >> Chris, you are shifting the discussion away from the actual point.   
   >   
   > I am not. Prior to the EU regulation, some simple maths on existing data   
   > showed efficiency differences between Apple and other phones very   
   > effectively.   
      
   What I'm saying is a matter of fact, not opinion.   
      
   Earlier this year, Apple couldn't certify a single iPhone for an A in   
   efficiency even as Apple touted the word "efficiency" 12 times in every   
   9-page iPhone description to that point (I haven't checked the new ones).   
      
   >   
   >> Which is fine, if the topic were "battery life" and not "efficiency".   
   >>   
   >> But the topic is efficiency.   
   >   
   > Remember how you used to boast how your crappy A32 had a better battery   
   > than all iphones ever? Simply because it was 5,000 mAh.   
      
   I said it had a bigger battery.   
   And it does.   
      
   Why are you so upset about mere facts?   
   These are not opinions, Chris.   
      
   They're simply facts.   
   They're not subject to debate.   
      
   >   
   >> The question here is not whether iPhones have good battery life.   
   >> a. The question is how "efficiency" is defined and measured.   
   >> b. And, when defined & measured, how Apple's iPhones fared.   
   >   
   > It's very clearly defined in the EU documentation.   
   > https://rocksolid-eu.pugleaf.net/groups/misc.phone.mobile.ipho   
   e/articles/200508   
   >   
   > The iphones compared very well. Especially against Samsung.   
      
   Only the last batch of iPhones managed to get an "A" in efficiency.   
   Earlier this year, all the iPhones sold in the EU failed to earn an A.   
      
   That's not subject to debate, Chris.   
      
   It's not an opinion.   
   It's a fact.   
      
   >> This is not a discussion of the wondrously creative ways Apple manages to   
   >> throw the word "efficient" 12 times in the 9-page iPhone data pages.   
   >   
   > Oh ffs! Why do you keep repeating these lies? The document is a brochure   
   > about iphone *chargers* and reflects efficiency as required by the EPA. IT   
   > HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IPHONES THEMSELVES.   
      
   There's one for every iPhone, Chris.   
   Look again.   
      
   >> There is only one regulated, independent efficiency metric for smartphones:   
   >> the EU energy label.   
   >> A. That metric does not measure battery size or battery life.   
   >   
   > Not true. It measures and reports both.   
      
   No. You don't understand. It *needs* both to calculate the efficiency.   
   But it reports on the efficiency.   
      
      
   >   
   >> B. It measures energy efficiency under standardized test conditions.   
   >   
   > That too.   
      
   That's all it does.   
      
   >> When the EU labels were first published earlier this year, every iPhone   
   >> model at launch received a B in efficiency. Meanwhile, every major Android   
   >> manufacturer had at least one model that earned an A. That is simply what   
   >> the EU data shows. It is not an opinion, and it is not "dogma."   
   >>   
   >> It is the only standardized efficiency benchmark we have.   
   >> Battery life is not efficiency.   
   >   
   > Battery life is *a function* of efficiency.   
      
   And a function of size. And heat. And use. And a bajillion other things.   
      
   >> A device can have excellent battery life because of usage patterns, display   
   >> choices, or thermal limits, while still scoring lower on a regulated   
   >> efficiency test.   
   >>   
   >> You are free to argue that the EU metric is flawed or incomplete,   
   >> but you cannot replace a regulated efficiency standard with your own   
   >> definition and then claim that others are confused.   
   >   
   > Right. So why do you continue in that vein? You are the epitome of choosing   
   > your own definitions when called out.   
      
   Huh? I am not "choosing my own definitions", Chris.   
   I'm pointing to the EU standards.   
      
   And the fact remains, up until the latest batch of iPhones, not a single   
   iPhone that went through the battery of EU standard tests, earned an A.   
      
   Not even one.   
      
   That's not subject to debate, Chris.   
   It's a fact.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)