On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 09:48:51 -0700, Alan wrote:

>>>> Interesting how often Apple breaks the law.
>>>> https://en.agcm.it/en/media/press-releases/
>>>
>>> I can't see a single article that mentions "Apple".
>>
>> Either you're blind, stupid, a liar, or you didn't click on the page.
>> Or all of the above.
>
> You presented a link to a page that didn't contain the word "Apple"...
>
> ...and you're suggesting I have to go digging for it?

Classic. Look up what Dunning Kruger means. You're the D-K poster child.
You know nothing. You deny everything. Without even clicking the links.
You're a Dunning-Kruger poster child for ignorance beyond comprehension.

plonk

On 17 Jul 2024 16:31:57 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

>>>>> Except that it only affected Apple
>>>>
>>>> Liar. Samsung was fined at the same time:
>>>> https://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-slow-down-fine-2018-917806/
>>>
>>> Apple was charged with both criminal and civil crimes, almost all of
>>> which Apple had to settle for a total of well over 100 times that
>>> Samsung fine.
>>
>> So the size of the fine is important...
>>
>> ...why exactly?
>
> So he can try to move the goal post.

You're the one who moved the goalpost to Samsung and then when it was shown
that Apple has over one hundred times the fines, then you back off Samsung?

You, along with that Alan, are Dunning Kruger poster children for Apple.

plonk

On 2024-07-17 10:53, Mickey D wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 09:48:51 -0700, Alan wrote:
>
>>>>> Interesting how often Apple breaks the law.
>>>>> https://en.agcm.it/en/media/press-releases/
>>>>
>>>> I can't see a single article that mentions "Apple".
>>>
>>> Either you're blind, stupid, a liar, or you didn't click on the page.
>>> Or all of the above.
>>
>> You presented a link to a page that didn't contain the word "Apple"...
>>
>> ...and you're suggesting I have to go digging for it?
>
> Classic. Look up what Dunning Kruger means. You're the D-K poster child.
> You know nothing. You deny everything. Without even clicking the links.
> You're a Dunning-Kruger poster child for ignorance beyond comprehension.
>
> plonk

I went to the link YOU provided.

I found this text:

Date Title

17/07/2024 PS12793-PS12805 - Italian Competition Authority:
investigation launched against Armani and Dior group companies for
alleged unfair commercial practices

05/07/2024 PS12699 - Italian Competition Authority: closed proceedings
on Easter eggs, Chiara Ferragni’s companies will pay EUR 1.2 million to
the social enterprise “I Bambini delle Fate”

04/07/2024 PS12717 - Italian Competition Authority: investigation
launched against Interflora for unfair commercial practices

02/07/2024 Italian Competition Authority: thanks to commitments made to
the Authority, compensations to consumers and micro-enterprises from
energy companies rise to around EUR 128 million

01/07/2024 A562 - Italian Competition Authority: fine against the FIGC
for abuse of a dominant position

26/06/2024 A524B - Italian Competition Authority: closed proceedings for
compliance with the decision on abuse of a dominant position against
Leadiant; thanks to the Authority’s action, two group’s companies
reduced the price of medicine

20/06/2024 PS12638 - Italian Competition Autohrity: 6 million fine to DR
Automobiles for unfair commercial practices

13/06/2024 I869 - Italian Competition Authority: investigation launched
for alleged anti-competitive agreement in tenders issued by Ama

12/06/2024 PS12660 - Italian Competition Authority: following Agcm
intervention, Intesa Sanpaolo and Isybank overcome criticalities in the
transfer of current accounts

06/06/2024 I868 - Italian Competition Authority: investigation launched
against eight undertakings for anticompetitive agreement in the market
for the active principle ranibizumab

Note what is NOT in there.

You just couldn't be bothered to provide your actual cites.

And once you did and I address some of them...

....suddenly you "plonk" me.

On 2024-07-16 14:17, Chris wrote:
> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-07-16 08:38, Harry S Robins wrote:
>>
>>> Charge cycles are not the number of times a battery has been charged.
>>
>> No shit. I've snipped the rest of your post as well trodden ground.
>>
>> The fact remains that iPhones are the single most popular family of
>> smartphones out there. Bar none.
>
> Can you back that up?
>
> According to this report Apple only out-shipped Samsung in 2023 for the
> first time in 12 years. Plus, given 2023 was the worst year for shipments
> in ten years means that there are more Samsung phones in use than Apple.
> https://www.ft.com/content/57163469-8682-4897-bbb2-1a200e4711d4

If you discount all of the bottom of the barrel crap that Samsung sells
in price ranges Apple doesn't support, I'll stand by my statement.

"Phones in use" is a whole other discussion depending on how long people
keep phones and what secondary market a phone ends up in.

>> And that is for a reason and has
>> pretty much nothing to do with the battery, it's capacity or endurance
>> over charge cycles.
>>
>> Amongst friends and colleagues 90% are iPhone users and this goes back
>> over 10 years and 3 or more phones per person. Tip: none changed their
>> phones due to the battery.
>>
>> None has ever even mentioned issues with the battery.
>
> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery life
> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.

Which would be a terrible thing for a phone maker to offer. A phone
that suits a narrow niche of need v. phones that suit the broadest range
of needs.

Most people are perfectly content with the notion of plugging in their
phone in the evening secure in the knowledge that it will be fully
charged for the new day.

And for many people, phones will go 2 days w/o a charge.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

On 2024-07-16 11:17, Chris wrote:
>> None has ever even mentioned issues with the battery.
> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery life
> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.

What early "smart phone" had a battery that lasted four or five days?

On 2024-07-17 14:36, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-07-16 11:17, Chris wrote:
>>> None has ever even mentioned issues with the battery.
>> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery
>> life
>> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.
>
> What early "smart phone" had a battery that lasted four or five days?

One you charge and leave on the sideboard unused.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

Alan Browne wrote on Wed, 17 Jul 2024 14:24:55 -0400 :

>> According to this report Apple only out-shipped Samsung in 2023 for the
>> first time in 12 years. Plus, given 2023 was the worst year for shipments
>> in ten years means that there are more Samsung phones in use than Apple.
>> https://www.ft.com/content/57163469-8682-4897-bbb2-1a200e4711d4
>
> If you discount all of the bottom of the barrel crap that Samsung sells
> in price ranges Apple doesn't support, I'll stand by my statement.

While I don't disparage anyone who loves their phone, we should always keep
in mind that the design of the iPhone is as a dumb terminal in that almost
everything Alan Browne loves about it requires a login account on an
Internet server - which - if Android users wanted it - they could do too.

The real disability of the dumb-terminal iPhone is it can't do hundreds (if
not thousands) of useful things that Android does every day.

Given nobody spends less in R&D than Apple (proportional to revenue), nor
does anyone spend more in marketing (except for beer & cola companies), the
people who love iPhones are the same kind of people who loved Virginia
Slims (because they were told a woman's cigarette liberated them, that's
why - and they believed it).

Apple Marketing is genius, you have to agree - as Marketing always aims for
the most gullible customer who is "proud" to be fleeced by Apple execs.

> "Phones in use" is a whole other discussion depending on how long people
> keep phones and what secondary market a phone ends up in.

On that topic alone, the Android users may not be aware that almost every
Apple iPhone failed miserably the EU test for longevity - mostly due to the
fact that Apple puts the crappiest cheapest smallest batteries possible.

There is no other factor more directly associated with overall phone life
than the capacity of the battery - where no iPhone battery in history is
even close to the size of my 2021 free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G cheap phones!

There is no phone that needs more daily charging than the iPhone, and tens
of millions of iPhones are prematurely replaced due to the crappy battery.

We won't even get into the fact iPhones have always had the worst total
ownership costs of all cellphones - and yet iPhone owners are proud of
spending the most for devices that can't do half of what Android phones do.

Why can't iOS save photos to a user-defined timedate format like Android?
Where are the wifi graphical debuggers on iOS (hint, it's brain dead).
Where are the encryption container tools on iOS (hint, it's brain dead).
Where are the automatic call recorder tools on iOS (hint, it's brain dead).
Where are the system wide foss firewalls on iOS (hint, it's brain dead).
Where are the fake gps spoofing apps on iOS (hint, it's brain dead).
Where are the true ad free youtube clones on iOS (hint, it's brain dead).
Where are the historical IPA backup tools on iOS (hint, it's brain dead).
Where are the system wide foss ad blocking on iOS (hint, it's brain dead).
Where's the real foss torproject tor browser on iOS (it's brain dead).
etc.

>> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery life
>> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.
>
> Which would be a terrible thing for a phone maker to offer. A phone
> that suits a narrow niche of need v. phones that suit the broadest range
> of needs.

If your phone is recently made and you're still charging it daily, then
it's not an Android phone as only iPhones have those puny crappy batteries.

> Most people are perfectly content with the notion of plugging in their
> phone in the evening secure in the knowledge that it will be fully
> charged for the new day.

It's interesting how well marketing sways gullible people, where the facts
show the best a 3-1/2 trillion-dollar company with almost no R&D to speak
of, can come up with for an "Android competitive" phone, is the following:

The iPhone SE battery capacity = 1642 mAh.
The $200 Nothing CMF1 battery capacity = 5,000mAh

The iPhone SE RAM capacity = 4GB
The $200 Nothing CMF1 RAM capacity = 8GB

The iPhone SE display = 4.7" LCD IPS
The $200 Nothing CMF1 display = 6.67" Super AMOLED

The iPhone SE display refresh = 60Hz
The $200 Nothing CMF1 display refresh = 120Hz
The iPhone SE removable portable storage capability = 0 bytes
The $200 Nothing CMF1 removable portable storage capability = 2TB

At every price point, the iPhone is overpriced underpowered garbage.
But hey, you can get it in a bright YELLOW color!
https://youtu.be/cJ9swRs13UA

And think of all those emoji! Woo hoo! Emoji is what Apple does best!

BTW, this is what's "great" in the iOS 18 according to Marques Brownlee:
<https://youtu.be/ArcI4A5nvBo>

I guess this is the best a company without R&D to speak of, can do
(in an entire year of development, this is the best R&D can do?)...

1) The Calculator
Scientific, math notes with graphical solutions, syncs across
your AppleID devices, changes variables, answers in handwriting
2) Little Things
Game Mode CPU priority, Photos App search, Shazam shortcuts,
RCS Support (in 2024, clap, clap), read receipts, typing indicators
3) Homescreen Customization
Finally. Kind'a. Icons can go anywhere, welcome to 2024,
Large icons, tinting icons,
4) Passwords App
Collected existing settings, sharing iPhone passwords,
Defaults to Face-ID, not platform compatible
5) Control Center
colorful, expanded pages, stretch size, more controls,
including flashlight intensity & beam width (fails),
lockscreen controls,

Notice Marcques Brownlee says, numerous times, that Apple is about five
years behind Android on all that Apple today markets to its customers.

Given nobody in tech spends less than Apple in R&D, it's no wonder
yet again, as usual, Apple is five years (or more) behind Android.

> And for many people, phones will go 2 days w/o a charge.

You fill up your car gas tank when it needs it, right?
If it were an Apple gas tank, it would be five gallons instead of twenty.

Of course you'd have to fill up your Apple gas tank every single night.
But with Android phones having five, six, and seven amp hour batteries as a
matter of course, your charging regimen is like your gas tank regimen.

You charge an Apple iPhone every God darn chance you get.
But with Android, you charge it for an hour or two - whenever it needs it.

Alan Browne wrote on Wed, 17 Jul 2024 14:40:18 -0400 :

>> What early "smart phone" had a battery that lasted four or five days?
>
> One you charge and leave on the sideboard unused.

The iPhone *must* be charged every night because of the crappy battery.

Apple puts the smallest cheapest battery components such that almost every
iPhone ever built miserably fails the EU lifetime testing requirements.

HINT: The gullible herd-animal Apple owner is always the last to know.
Why? Because they only read Apple advertisements.
And Apple is never going to tell you that their batteries are crap.

But wait!

Apple did tell these ignorant low-IQ uneducated Apple zealots that!
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/101575>

No iPhone meets EU lifetime requirements except the latest iPhones, which,
let's be very clear, barely squeak into the barest minimum lifetime years.

Meanwhile, some Android phones long ago *doubled* EU lifetime requirements!

On 2024-07-17 13:03, Andrew wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote on Wed, 17 Jul 2024 14:40:18 -0400 :
>
>>> What early "smart phone" had a battery that lasted four or five days?
>>
>> One you charge and leave on the sideboard unused.
>
> The iPhone *must* be charged every night because of the crappy battery.

And yet it is among the longest running smartphones...

<https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>

'The 14 Plus is the hardest iPhone 14 model to recommend, but battery
life is the big thing in its favour. This is a phone that can
comfortably last two full days of normal use, and potentially stretch to
three if you only use it occasionally.'

<https://www.techadvisor.com/article/724337/best-battery-phone.html>

'The best phones with the best battery life:

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
Google Pixel 8 Pro
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
Motorola Edge Plus (2023)
Sony Xperia 1 V
REDMAGIC 9 Pro
OnePlus 12
OnePlus Open
Samsung Galaxy A15 5G
Unihertz Tank'

<https://www.androidauthority.com/best-android-phone-battery-life-2-755699/>

>
> Apple puts the smallest cheapest battery components such that almost every
> iPhone ever built miserably fails the EU lifetime testing requirements.

Why must you lie?

>
> HINT: The gullible herd-animal Apple owner is always the last to know.
> Why? Because they only read Apple advertisements.
> And Apple is never going to tell you that their batteries are crap.
>
> But wait!
>
> Apple did tell these ignorant low-IQ uneducated Apple zealots that!
> <https://support.apple.com/en-us/101575>
>
> No iPhone meets EU lifetime requirements except the latest iPhones, which,
> let's be very clear, barely squeak into the barest minimum lifetime years.
>
> Meanwhile, some Android phones long ago *doubled* EU lifetime requirements!

Cite, please!

On 2024-07-17, Mickey D <mickeydavis078XX@ptd.net> wrote:
> On 17 Jul 2024 16:31:57 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>>>>>> Except that it only affected Apple
>>>>>
>>>>> Liar. Samsung was fined at the same time:
>>>>> https://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-slow-down-fine-2018-917806/
>>>>
>>>> Apple was charged with both criminal and civil crimes, almost all
>>>> of which Apple had to settle for a total of well over 100 times
>>>> that Samsung fine.
>>>
>>> So the size of the fine is important...
>>>
>>> ...why exactly?
>>
>> So he can try to move the goal post.
>
> You're the one who moved the goalpost to Samsung

No, child. You claimed this was an "only Apple" issue, and I showed your
to be wrong. Now you're desperately trying to move the goal post to
"yeah but Apple had more fines". You're a mental midget, little Arlen.

> plonk

By all means, run away! The adults are talking.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2024-07-17, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-16 11:17, Chris wrote:
>>>
>>> None has ever even mentioned issues with the battery.
>>
>> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day
>> battery life as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.
>
> What early "smart phone" had a battery that lasted four or five days?

I guess they are talking about dumb phones. I recall I was lucky to get
5 hours out of my Palm Treo back in the day.

It goes without saying most people would love a smartphone that lasted
several days on a charge - but they almost certainly would hate the
additional weight required with today's technologies.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2024-07-17, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-17 13:03, Andrew wrote:
>> Alan Browne wrote on Wed, 17 Jul 2024 14:40:18 -0400 :
>>
>>>> What early "smart phone" had a battery that lasted four or five days?
>>>
>>> One you charge and leave on the sideboard unused.
>>
>> The iPhone *must* be charged every night because of the crappy battery.
>
> And yet it is among the longest running smartphones...
>
><https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>
>
> 'The 14 Plus is the hardest iPhone 14 model to recommend, but battery
> life is the big thing in its favour. This is a phone that can
> comfortably last two full days of normal use, and potentially stretch to
> three if you only use it occasionally.'

This can't be. Arlen said it *must* be charged every night!

Maybe we should check with badgolferman...

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-16 14:17, Chris wrote:
>> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
>>> On 2024-07-16 08:38, Harry S Robins wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charge cycles are not the number of times a battery has been charged.
>>>
>>> No shit. I've snipped the rest of your post as well trodden ground.
>>>
>>> The fact remains that iPhones are the single most popular family of
>>> smartphones out there. Bar none.
>>
>> Can you back that up?

Noted that you haven't.

>> According to this report Apple only out-shipped Samsung in 2023 for the
>> first time in 12 years. Plus, given 2023 was the worst year for shipments
>> in ten years means that there are more Samsung phones in use than Apple.
>> https://www.ft.com/content/57163469-8682-4897-bbb2-1a200e4711d4
>
>
> If you discount all of the bottom of the barrel crap that Samsung sells

Why? For many parts of the world the top-end phones cost a significant
proportion of a normal salary.

> in price ranges Apple doesn't support, I'll stand by my statement.

Cognitive bias.

> "Phones in use" is a whole other discussion depending on how long people
> keep phones and what secondary market a phone ends up in.

No it isn't. You said "popular", which by definition means those in use.

>>> And that is for a reason and has
>>> pretty much nothing to do with the battery, it's capacity or endurance
>>> over charge cycles.
>>>
>>> Amongst friends and colleagues 90% are iPhone users and this goes back
>>> over 10 years and 3 or more phones per person. Tip: none changed their
>>> phones due to the battery.
>>>
>>> None has ever even mentioned issues with the battery.
>>
>> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery life
>> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.
>
> Which would be a terrible thing for a phone maker to offer. A phone
> that suits a narrow niche of need v. phones that suit the broadest range
> of needs.

How is wanting a longer battery life "a narrow niche"? Note to Arlen: this
doesn't necessarily mean a larger battery.

> Most people are perfectly content with the notion of plugging in their
> phone in the evening secure in the knowledge that it will be fully
> charged for the new day.

A longer battery life gives extra confidence that the phone will last a day
even when used extensively.

> And for many people, phones will go 2 days w/o a charge.

I'd like to know who these people are. Do they have the max/plus size
phone, do they not really use them or they sit on wifi all the time?

The last few days I've had a different routine and my phone barely lasts a
day. I don't have as much access to wifi and the mobile signal is
relatively weak which I think is the main culprit. Even on the best of days
two days use is only possible under the best conditions.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-16 11:17, Chris wrote:
>>> None has ever even mentioned issues with the battery.
>> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery life
>> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.
>
> What early "smart phone" had a battery that lasted four or five days?

Pretty sure my HTC Desire (I think it was) lasted far longer longer then my
current iphone. I do distinctly remember the difference when I upgraded at
the time.

On 2024-07-18 00:08, Chris wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-07-16 11:17, Chris wrote:
>>>> None has ever even mentioned issues with the battery.
>>> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery life
>>> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.
>>
>> What early "smart phone" had a battery that lasted four or five days?
>
> Pretty sure my HTC Desire (I think it was) lasted far longer longer then my
> current iphone. I do distinctly remember the difference when I upgraded at
> the time.

Did it last "four or five days"?

Because it seems a lot like you are subtly re-framing your claim.

;-)

On 2024-07-17 12:54, Andrew wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote on Wed, 17 Jul 2024 14:24:55 -0400 :
>
>>> According to this report Apple only out-shipped Samsung in 2023 for the
>>> first time in 12 years. Plus, given 2023 was the worst year for shipments
>>> in ten years means that there are more Samsung phones in use than Apple.
>>> https://www.ft.com/content/57163469-8682-4897-bbb2-1a200e4711d4
>>
>> If you discount all of the bottom of the barrel crap that Samsung sells
>> in price ranges Apple doesn't support, I'll stand by my statement.
>
> While I don't disparage anyone who loves their phone

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOOLOLOLOL!

Chris wrote on Thu, 18 Jul 2024 07:03:52 -0000 (UTC) :

>>>> The fact remains that iPhones are the single most popular family of
>>>> smartphones out there. Bar none.
>>>
>>> Can you back that up?
>
> Noted that you haven't.

Notice the cognitive bias of Alan Browne where he insisted the iPhone
outsold Samsung when the fact is that this happened 1 month in 12 years.

>
>>> According to this report Apple only out-shipped Samsung in 2023 for the
>>> first time in 12 years. Plus, given 2023 was the worst year for shipments
>>> in ten years means that there are more Samsung phones in use than Apple.
>>> https://www.ft.com/content/57163469-8682-4897-bbb2-1a200e4711d4
>>
>> If you discount all of the bottom of the barrel crap that Samsung sells
>
> Why? For many parts of the world the top-end phones cost a significant
> proportion of a normal salary.

Clearly two facts elude Alan Browne. One of which is Samsung alone outsells
the iPhone. The other is Android has most of the world market for a reason.
>
>> in price ranges Apple doesn't support, I'll stand by my statement.
>
> Cognitive bias.

Given the iPhone is a designed from the start to be a dumb terminal
tethered 24/7/365 to Cupertino's servers, it's no wonder Alan Browne
claims that what works in the rich USA will work everywhere in the world.

>> "Phones in use" is a whole other discussion depending on how long people
>> keep phones and what secondary market a phone ends up in.
>
> No it isn't. You said "popular", which by definition means those in use.

Even though iPhones have the shortest lifespan of all phones (note that
every iPhone except the latest miserably fails EU longevity standards!),
the fact Android is most of the world market shows Alan Browne to be wrong.

>>> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery life
>>> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.
>>
>> Which would be a terrible thing for a phone maker to offer. A phone
>> that suits a narrow niche of need v. phones that suit the broadest range
>> of needs.
>
> How is wanting a longer battery life "a narrow niche"? Note to Arlen: this
> doesn't necessarily mean a larger battery.

Just as the power of a gun or the power of a rocket or the power of an
airplane or the power of a vehicle, etc., has fundamentally everything to
do with size - it's the same with electronics - where battery size is key.

>> Most people are perfectly content with the notion of plugging in their
>> phone in the evening secure in the knowledge that it will be fully
>> charged for the new day.
>
> A longer battery life gives extra confidence that the phone will last a day
> even when used extensively.

Apple claims 2% efficiency but Android batteries are more than 100% larger.
Ignorant Apple zealots think 2% is 200% because none of them know any math.

>> And for many people, phones will go 2 days w/o a charge.
>
> I'd like to know who these people are. Do they have the max/plus size
> phone, do they not really use them or they sit on wifi all the time?

Only the current iPhone 15's meet the EU minimum lifetime for batteries.
Every iPhone before the iPhone 15 miserably fails EU lifetime minimums.

You'd be hard pressed to find an Android that isn't *double* the lifetime.
> The last few days I've had a different routine and my phone barely lasts a
> day. I don't have as much access to wifi and the mobile signal is
> relatively weak which I think is the main culprit. Even on the best of days
> two days use is only possible under the best conditions.

My 2021 (free T-Mobile) Samsung Galaxy A32-5G 5Amp-hour battery lasts days,
where the largest most expensive iPhone has nothing even close to that
quality - which is why I only charge the phone when it needs to be charged.

On 2024-07-18 17:19, Andrew wrote:
> Chris wrote on Thu, 18 Jul 2024 07:03:52 -0000 (UTC) :
>
>>>>> The fact remains that iPhones are the single most popular family of
>>>>> smartphones out there. Bar none.
>>>>
>>>> Can you back that up?
>>
>> Noted that you haven't.
>
> Notice the cognitive bias of Alan Browne where he insisted the iPhone
> outsold Samsung when the fact is that this happened 1 month in 12 years.
>
>>
>>>> According to this report Apple only out-shipped Samsung in 2023 for the
>>>> first time in 12 years. Plus, given 2023 was the worst year for shipments
>>>> in ten years means that there are more Samsung phones in use than Apple.
>>>> https://www.ft.com/content/57163469-8682-4897-bbb2-1a200e4711d4
>>>
>>> If you discount all of the bottom of the barrel crap that Samsung sells
>>
>> Why? For many parts of the world the top-end phones cost a significant
>> proportion of a normal salary.
>
> Clearly two facts elude Alan Browne. One of which is Samsung alone outsells
> the iPhone. The other is Android has most of the world market for a reason.

The same reason for both:

Samsung and other Android makers make low-end "smart" phones.

>>
>>> in price ranges Apple doesn't support, I'll stand by my statement.
>>
>> Cognitive bias.
>
> Given the iPhone is a designed from the start to be a dumb terminal
> tethered 24/7/365 to Cupertino's servers, it's no wonder Alan Browne
> claims that what works in the rich USA will work everywhere in the world.

That's simply false, liar.

>
>>> "Phones in use" is a whole other discussion depending on how long people
>>> keep phones and what secondary market a phone ends up in.
>>
>> No it isn't. You said "popular", which by definition means those in use.
>
> Even though iPhones have the shortest lifespan of all phones (note that
> every iPhone except the latest miserably fails EU longevity standards!),
> the fact Android is most of the world market shows Alan Browne to be wrong.

You should make up your mind about "miserably" or "barely" failing, Liar.

>
>>>> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery life
>>>> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.
>>>
>>> Which would be a terrible thing for a phone maker to offer. A phone
>>> that suits a narrow niche of need v. phones that suit the broadest range
>>> of needs.
>>
>> How is wanting a longer battery life "a narrow niche"? Note to Arlen: this
>> doesn't necessarily mean a larger battery.
>
> Just as the power of a gun or the power of a rocket or the power of an
> airplane or the power of a vehicle, etc., has fundamentally everything to
> do with size - it's the same with electronics - where battery size is key.

False.

>
>>> Most people are perfectly content with the notion of plugging in their
>>> phone in the evening secure in the knowledge that it will be fully
>>> charged for the new day.
>>
>> A longer battery life gives extra confidence that the phone will last a day
>> even when used extensively.
>
> Apple claims 2% efficiency but Android batteries are more than 100% larger.
> Ignorant Apple zealots think 2% is 200% because none of them know any math.

Where does Apple make this 2% claim, Liar?

What we do know is that when people measure run-time, iPhones come out
near the top.

>
>>> And for many people, phones will go 2 days w/o a charge.
>>
>> I'd like to know who these people are. Do they have the max/plus size
>> phone, do they not really use them or they sit on wifi all the time?
>
> Only the current iPhone 15's meet the EU minimum lifetime for batteries.
> Every iPhone before the iPhone 15 miserably fails EU lifetime minimums.

Cite, please!

>
> You'd be hard pressed to find an Android that isn't *double* the lifetime.
>
>> The last few days I've had a different routine and my phone barely lasts a
>> day. I don't have as much access to wifi and the mobile signal is
>> relatively weak which I think is the main culprit. Even on the best of days
>> two days use is only possible under the best conditions.

There's not much evidence you actually think.

>
> My 2021 (free T-Mobile) Samsung Galaxy A32-5G 5Amp-hour battery lasts days,
> where the largest most expensive iPhone has nothing even close to that
> quality - which is why I only charge the phone when it needs to be charged.

<https://www.gsmarena.com/battery-test.php3>

Your A32-5G does rank... ...pretty well. 89th at their score of 123h
(which means you'll need to recharge once ever 123 hours apparently).

But that's only barely better than the iPhone 13 Pro Max and iPhone 14
Pro Max at 121h...

....and the 15 Pro Max at 118h...

....and the 15 Plus at 111h.

Do you want to compare performance benchmarks now?

:-)

On 2024-07-18 17:19, Andrew wrote:

>>> And for many people, phones will go 2 days w/o a charge.
>>
>> I'd like to know who these people are. Do they have the max/plus size
>> phone, do they not really use them or they sit on wifi all the time?
>
> Only the current iPhone 15's meet the EU minimum lifetime for batteries.
> Every iPhone before the iPhone 15 miserably fails EU lifetime minimums.
>
> You'd be hard pressed to find an Android that isn't *double* the lifetime.
It probably goes without saying, but with the iPhone, you aren’t just
getting one of the phones with the best battery life, but one of the
best smartphones overall. The unmatched performance and software support
coupled with the excellent cameras make an iPhone an easy recommendation
for anyone looking for more than just all-day endurance.

<https://www.laptopmag.com/best-picks/phones-best-battery-life>

And we can directly test your claim:

iPhone 14 Pro Max 13:07
iPhone 13 Pro Max 12:16
iPhone 13 Pro 12:00
iPhone 11 Pro Max 11:54
iPhone 11 11:16
iPhone 12 Pro Max 10:53
iPhone 13 10:33
iPhone 14 Pro 10:27
iPhone 11 Pro 10:24
iPhone SE (2020) 9:18
iPhone 12 Pro 9:06 (5G), 11:24 (4G)
iPhone 14 9:01
iPhone 13 mini 8:41
iPhone 12 8:25 (5G), 10:23 (4G)
iPhone SE (2022) 7:39
iPhone 12 mini 7:28

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra 13:09 (60Hz); 12:22 (120Hz)
Samsung Galaxy A52 12:20 (60Hz); 10:19 (120Hz)
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 11:25 (60Hz)
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 10:15 (60Hz); 9:50 (120Hz)
Samsung Galaxy S22+ 10:12 (60Hz); 9:31 (120Hz)
Samsung Galaxy S21 9:53 (60Hz)
Samsung Galaxy S21 Plus 9:52 (60Hz); 9:21 (120Hz)
Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 9:15 (60Hz); 7:47 (120Hz)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 4 9:17/9:06 (60Hz/120Hz, interior screen);
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 4 9:32/7:56 (60Hz/120Hz, front screen)
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 4 8:57 (60Hz); 8:34 (120Hz)
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 3 8:48/7:58 (60Hz/120Hz, front screen);
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 3 7:53/6:36 (60Hz/120Hz, interior screen)
Samsung Galaxy S22 8:15 (60Hz); 7:54 (120Hz)
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 3 6:00 (60Hz); 5:43 (120Hz)

So? Where's that double battery life, Liar?

On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 17:38:53 -0700, Alan wrote:

> Do you want to compare performance benchmarks now?

T-Mobile doesn't charge anything (but tax) for its free 5g phones.
And T-Mobile has no contract either so it's not part of your contract.

All realistic comparisons always take into account price when comparing
performance, so what's the price to performance of the best iPhone you can
find compared against his 5 amp hour free Samsung Galaxy A32-5g?

On 2024-07-18 18:01, Bill Powell wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 17:38:53 -0700, Alan wrote:
>
>> Do you want to compare performance benchmarks now?
>
> T-Mobile doesn't charge anything (but tax) for its free 5g phones.
> And T-Mobile has no contract either so it's not part of your contract.
>
> All realistic comparisons always take into account price when comparing
> performance, so what's the price to performance of the best iPhone you can
> find compared against his 5 amp hour free Samsung Galaxy A32-5g?

Again:

Battery capacity is NOT the metric that matters "Bill".

Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Chris wrote on Thu, 18 Jul 2024 07:03:52 -0000 (UTC) :
>
>>>>> The fact remains that iPhones are the single most popular family of
>>>>> smartphones out there. Bar none.
>>>>
>>>> Can you back that up?
>>
>> Noted that you haven't.
>
> Notice the cognitive bias of Alan Browne where he insisted the iPhone
> outsold Samsung when the fact is that this happened 1 month in 12 years.
>
>>
>>>> According to this report Apple only out-shipped Samsung in 2023 for the
>>>> first time in 12 years. Plus, given 2023 was the worst year for shipments
>>>> in ten years means that there are more Samsung phones in use than Apple.
>>>> https://www.ft.com/content/57163469-8682-4897-bbb2-1a200e4711d4
>>>
>>> If you discount all of the bottom of the barrel crap that Samsung sells
>>
>> Why? For many parts of the world the top-end phones cost a significant
>> proportion of a normal salary.
>
> Clearly two facts elude Alan Browne. One of which is Samsung alone outsells
> the iPhone. The other is Android has most of the world market for a reason.
>>
>>> in price ranges Apple doesn't support, I'll stand by my statement.
>>
>> Cognitive bias.
>
> Given the iPhone is a designed from the start to be a dumb terminal
> tethered 24/7/365 to Cupertino's servers, it's no wonder Alan Browne
> claims that what works in the rich USA will work everywhere in the world.
>
>>> "Phones in use" is a whole other discussion depending on how long people
>>> keep phones and what secondary market a phone ends up in.
>>
>> No it isn't. You said "popular", which by definition means those in use.
>
> Even though iPhones have the shortest lifespan of all phones

This has been debunked so many times. Why do you have keep lying?

> (note that
> every iPhone except the latest miserably fails EU longevity standards!),

Also very debatable.

> the fact Android is most of the world market shows Alan Browne to be wrong.
>
>>>> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery life
>>>> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.
>>>
>>> Which would be a terrible thing for a phone maker to offer. A phone
>>> that suits a narrow niche of need v. phones that suit the broadest range
>>> of needs.
>>
>> How is wanting a longer battery life "a narrow niche"? Note to Arlen: this
>> doesn't necessarily mean a larger battery.
>
> Just as the power of a gun or the power of a rocket or the power of an
> airplane or the power of a vehicle, etc., has fundamentally everything to
> do with size - it's the same with electronics - where battery size is key.

Of course you're wrong again. I even preempted your response.

>>> Most people are perfectly content with the notion of plugging in their
>>> phone in the evening secure in the knowledge that it will be fully
>>> charged for the new day.
>>
>> A longer battery life gives extra confidence that the phone will last a day
>> even when used extensively.
>
> Apple claims 2% efficiency but Android batteries are more than 100% larger.
> Ignorant Apple zealots think 2% is 200% because none of them know any math.
>
>>> And for many people, phones will go 2 days w/o a charge.
>>
>> I'd like to know who these people are. Do they have the max/plus size
>> phone, do they not really use them or they sit on wifi all the time?
>
> Only the current iPhone 15's meet the EU minimum lifetime for batteries.
> Every iPhone before the iPhone 15 miserably fails EU lifetime minimums.
>
> You'd be hard pressed to find an Android that isn't *double* the lifetime.

You have yet to show *any* evidence of that. So you're lying again.

>> The last few days I've had a different routine and my phone barely lasts a
>> day. I don't have as much access to wifi and the mobile signal is
>> relatively weak which I think is the main culprit. Even on the best of days
>> two days use is only possible under the best conditions.
>
> My 2021 (free T-Mobile) Samsung Galaxy A32-5G 5Amp-hour battery lasts days,
> where the largest most expensive iPhone has nothing even close to that
> quality - which is why I only charge the phone when it needs to be charged.

An unused phone on wifi will last days.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-18 00:08, Chris wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>> On 2024-07-16 11:17, Chris wrote:
>>>>> None has ever even mentioned issues with the battery.
>>>> I would absolutely love having a phone with a four or five day battery life
>>>> as we used to get in the early days of smart phones.
>>>
>>> What early "smart phone" had a battery that lasted four or five days?
>>
>> Pretty sure my HTC Desire (I think it was) lasted far longer longer then my
>> current iphone. I do distinctly remember the difference when I upgraded at
>> the time.
>
> Did it last "four or five days"?
>
> Because it seems a lot like you are subtly re-framing your claim.

From memory, yes.

Chris wrote on Fri, 19 Jul 2024 06:58:19 -0000 (UTC) :

>> Even though iPhones have the shortest lifespan of all phones
>
> This has been debunked so many times. Why do you have keep lying?

Did you read Apple's own published cite which says *none* of the iPhones
meet the EU longevity requirement - except the latest iPhone 15, Chris?

>> (note that
>> every iPhone except the latest miserably fails EU longevity standards!),
>
> Also very debatable.

What's no longer shocking is you've been presented many times with Apple's
own published cite for why only the iPhone 15 meets EU longevity standards,
and yet, you're so far to the left of Mount Stupid, you can't remember it?

>> of a gun or the power of a rocket or the power of an
>> airplane or the power of a vehicle, etc., has fundamentally everything to
>> do with size - it's the same with electronics - where battery size is key.
>
> Of course you're wrong again. I even preempted your response.

You're so far to the left of Mount Stupid on your lack of knowledge of
battery chemistry that you don't even realize _why_ the EU made the
lifetime requirements, which, let's face it, every iPhone prior to the
iPhone 15 failed miserably.

Even then, the iPhone 15 *barely* squeaks by EU requirements, while we
already provided reputable cites showing many Android phones *double* them.

>> You'd be hard pressed to find an Android that isn't *double* the lifetime.
>
> You have yet to show *any* evidence of that. So you're lying again.

It's no longer shocking how far to the left of Mount Stupid you are, Chris,
in that the cite was clearly presented multiple times in this thread alone.

>>> The last few days I've had a different routine and my phone barely lasts a
>>> day. I don't have as much access to wifi and the mobile signal is
>>> relatively weak which I think is the main culprit. Even on the best of days
>>> two days use is only possible under the best conditions.
>>
>> My 2021 (free T-Mobile) Samsung Galaxy A32-5G 5Amp-hour battery lasts days,
>> where the largest most expensive iPhone has nothing even close to that
>> quality - which is why I only charge the phone when it needs to be charged.
>
> An unused phone on wifi will last days.

You uneducated ignorant Apple zealots have no idea that battery capacity is
the fundamental determinant of the number of years a phone will last.

Does it ever occur to you to wonder why no iPhone meets EU requirements
(before the iPhone 15, which was designed with the EU requirement in mind)?

On 2024-07-19 08:47, Andrew wrote:
> Chris wrote on Fri, 19 Jul 2024 06:58:19 -0000 (UTC) :
>
>>> Even though iPhones have the shortest lifespan of all phones
>>
>> This has been debunked so many times. Why do you have keep lying?
>
> Did you read Apple's own published cite which says *none* of the iPhones
> meet the EU longevity requirement - except the latest iPhone 15, Chris?

Did you ever produce the results of your non-existent EU "test", Liar?

>
>>> (note that
>>> every iPhone except the latest miserably fails EU longevity standards!),
>>
>> Also very debatable.
>
> What's no longer shocking is you've been presented many times with Apple's
> own published cite for why only the iPhone 15 meets EU longevity standards,
> and yet, you're so far to the left of Mount Stupid, you can't remember it?

Nope. That simply hasn't happened.

>
>>> of a gun or the power of a rocket or the power of an
>>> airplane or the power of a vehicle, etc., has fundamentally everything to
>>> do with size - it's the same with electronics - where battery size is key.
>>
>> Of course you're wrong again. I even preempted your response.
>
> You're so far to the left of Mount Stupid on your lack of knowledge of
> battery chemistry that you don't even realize _why_ the EU made the
> lifetime requirements, which, let's face it, every iPhone prior to the
> iPhone 15 failed miserably.

Is that as accurate as your claim about Samsung phones having "double"
the run time?

>
> Even then, the iPhone 15 *barely* squeaks by EU requirements, while we
> already provided reputable cites showing many Android phones *double* them.

I showed you the figures, Liar.

>
>>> You'd be hard pressed to find an Android that isn't *double* the lifetime.
>>
>> You have yet to show *any* evidence of that. So you're lying again.
>
> It's no longer shocking how far to the left of Mount Stupid you are, Chris,
> in that the cite was clearly presented multiple times in this thread alone.
>
>>>> The last few days I've had a different routine and my phone barely lasts a
>>>> day. I don't have as much access to wifi and the mobile signal is
>>>> relatively weak which I think is the main culprit. Even on the best of days
>>>> two days use is only possible under the best conditions.
>>>
>>> My 2021 (free T-Mobile) Samsung Galaxy A32-5G 5Amp-hour battery lasts days,
>>> where the largest most expensive iPhone has nothing even close to that
>>> quality - which is why I only charge the phone when it needs to be charged.
>>
>> An unused phone on wifi will last days.
>
> You uneducated ignorant Apple zealots have no idea that battery capacity is
> the fundamental determinant of the number of years a phone will last.

You're so ignorant you think that a phone that runs on two AA batteries
but draws twice as much will some how last more years than a device that
runs of one AA battery with half the power draw.

>
> Does it ever occur to you to wonder why no iPhone meets EU requirements
> (before the iPhone 15, which was designed with the EU requirement in mind)?