<https://9to5mac.com/2024/09/27/ifixit-iphone-16-pro-teardown-new-battery-camera-control-compromise-much-more-repairable/>

Apple is still the only one using such laughably puny el cheapo batteries,
but they're encased in metal now, and they removed the 5G mmWave antennae
to create space for the Camera Control button (which iFixit considered a
fair loss of the 5G antenna traded for the gain of the camera button).

On 2024-09-27 20:20, Andrew wrote:
> <https://9to5mac.com/2024/09/27/ifixit-iphone-16-pro-teardown-new-
> battery-camera-control-compromise-much-more-repairable/>
>
> Apple is still the only one using such laughably puny el cheapo batteries,
> but they're encased in metal now, and they removed the 5G mmWave antennae
> to create space for the Camera Control button (which iFixit considered a
> fair loss of the 5G antenna traded for the gain of the camera button).

Apple's batteries seem to work fine...

'The middle child of this year’s iPhones, the iPhone 16 Pro lasted 14
hours and 7 minutes on a single charge.'

<https://www.tomsguide.com/phones/iphones/iphone-16-battery-life-results-are-in-and-we-can-hardly-believe-our-eyes#section-iphone-16-pro-battery-life>

How many phones best that life in their testing?

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

Not many.

:-)

On 2024-09-28, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-09-27 20:20, Andrew wrote:
>> <https://9to5mac.com/2024/09/27/ifixit-iphone-16-pro-teardown-new-
>> battery-camera-control-compromise-much-more-repairable/>
>>
>> Apple is still the only one using such laughably puny el cheapo batteries,
>> but they're encased in metal now, and they removed the 5G mmWave antennae
>> to create space for the Camera Control button (which iFixit considered a
>> fair loss of the 5G antenna traded for the gain of the camera button).
>
> Apple's batteries seem to work fine...
>
> 'The middle child of this year’s iPhones, the iPhone 16 Pro lasted 14
> hours and 7 minutes on a single charge.'
>
><https://www.tomsguide.com/phones/iphones/iphone-16-battery-life-results-are-in-and-we-can-hardly-believe-our-eyes#section-iphone-16-pro-battery-life>
>
> How many phones best that life in their testing?
>
><https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>
>
> Not many.
>
>:-)

Huh... Only a dozen non-Apple phones outlast Apple's "laughably puny el
cheapo battery" in the iPhone 16 Pro? But we've been told over and over
by Arlen and his little anti-Apple trollboi gang of losers that Apple's
batteries are complete shit! How can this be?

--
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

Jolly Roger wrote on 28 Sep 2024 21:18:44 GMT :

> Huh... Only a dozen non-Apple phones outlast Apple's "laughably puny el
> cheapo battery" in the iPhone 16 Pro? But we've been told over and over
> by Arlen and his little anti-Apple trollboi gang of losers that Apple's
> batteries are complete shit! How can this be?

What none of the zealots understand is basic math, chemistry and physics,
which the Apple zealots repeatedly claim doesn't apply to Apple products.

According to the zealots, basic math & physics doesn't apply to Apple
batteries, which last forever (they never die in decades of use).

To ignore lifetime (which is measured in years, lest they keep talking
about hours alone) and to ignore that the battery capacity is a key
determinant of that lifetime (where capacity is measured in amp hours),
is how I can tell these zealots are claiming Apple batteries last forever.

They don't.
They're just batteries.

Apple batteries follow all the laws of physics that other batteries follow.
And the capacity is a critical determinant of the number of charge cycles.

Notice these Apple zealots only talk about hours, instead of charge cycles?
That's because they're claiming Apple batteries = infinite charge cycles.

Anyone who talks only of hours of life without mentioning charge cycles, is
claiming Apple batteries last forever since charge cycles don't matter.

They do.

Any discussion of "hours of use" without "charge cycles" is meaningless.

It's telling, actually, that both Apple slick advertisements and Apple
zealots ignore that a fundamental determinant of charge cycles is capacity.

And iPhone batteries have the worst capacity of similarly priced phones.

Apple advertises an efficiency that is measured at 1 or 2 percent, which is
great, but a couple of percent can't offset a 200% decrease in capacity.

That's just basic physics.
The same basic physics that the zealots claim doesn't ever apply to Apple.

On 2024-09-29 16:04, Andrew wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 28 Sep 2024 21:18:44 GMT :
>
>> Huh... Only a dozen non-Apple phones outlast Apple's "laughably puny el
>> cheapo battery" in the iPhone 16 Pro? But we've been told over and over
>> by Arlen and his little anti-Apple trollboi gang of losers that Apple's
>> batteries are complete shit! How can this be?
>
> What none of the zealots understand is basic math, chemistry and physics,
> which the Apple zealots repeatedly claim doesn't apply to Apple products.
>
> According to the zealots, basic math & physics doesn't apply to Apple
> batteries, which last forever (they never die in decades of use).
>
> To ignore lifetime (which is measured in years, lest they keep talking
> about hours alone) and to ignore that the battery capacity is a key
> determinant of that lifetime (where capacity is measured in amp hours),
> is how I can tell these zealots are claiming Apple batteries last forever.
>
> They don't.
> They're just batteries.
>
> Apple batteries follow all the laws of physics that other batteries follow.
> And the capacity is a critical determinant of the number of charge cycles.
>
> Notice these Apple zealots only talk about hours, instead of charge cycles?
> That's because they're claiming Apple batteries = infinite charge cycles.
>
> Anyone who talks only of hours of life without mentioning charge cycles, is
> claiming Apple batteries last forever since charge cycles don't matter.
>
> They do.
>
> Any discussion of "hours of use" without "charge cycles" is meaningless.
>
> It's telling, actually, that both Apple slick advertisements and Apple
> zealots ignore that a fundamental determinant of charge cycles is capacity.
>
> And iPhone batteries have the worst capacity of similarly priced phones.
>
> Apple advertises an efficiency that is measured at 1 or 2 percent, which is
> great, but a couple of percent can't offset a 200% decrease in capacity.
>
> That's just basic physics.
> The same basic physics that the zealots claim doesn't ever apply to Apple.

And charge cycles depend entirely on battery life per cycle.

So the phones that have the longest lasting batteries have the fewest
charge cycles in any given time period.

On 2024-09-29, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 28 Sep 2024 21:18:44 GMT :
>
>> Huh... Only a dozen non-Apple phones outlast Apple's "laughably puny
>> el cheapo battery" in the iPhone 16 Pro? But we've been told over and
>> over by Arlen and his little anti-Apple trollboi gang of losers that
>> Apple's batteries are complete shit! How can this be?
>
> Anyone who talks only of hours of life without mentioning charge
> cycles, is claiming Apple batteries last forever since charge cycles
> don't matter.
>
> Any discussion of "hours of use" without "charge cycles" is
> meaningless.

And yet longer run times equate to fewer cycles, little Arlen. You just
can't keep your bullshit story straight, can you?

--
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

Jolly Roger wrote on 30 Sep 2024 02:00:38 GMT :

>> Any discussion of "hours of use" without "charge cycles" is
>> meaningless.
>
> And yet longer run times equate to fewer cycles

The problem with you zealots is you don't understand basic math.
Fewer cycles don't matter if the battery can't handle as many cycles.

There's a reason iPhone batteries need to be replaced more often, JR.
Apple iPhones start with el cheapo laughably puny substandard batteries.

And there's a reason the EU forced Apple to disclose the battery life too.
Notice how pitifully short that disclosed Apple iPhone battery life is.

Why do you think Apple's disclosures shows pitifully few charge cycles?
The most critical determinant of overall battery life, is initial capacity.

How long a battery lasts per day is DIFFERENT than the battery's lifetime
because any given battery has a DIFFERENT number of charge cycles in it.

None of your zealot arguments takes into account Apple's deplorable lack of
batteries being able to handle the charge cycles that Android batteries do.

Remember, nobody replaces more batteries yearly than does Apple.
The REASON for Apple's deplorable lack of charge cycles is the capacity.

What nospam used to claim was Apple's well advertised "vaunted efficiency".

However, Apple's admirable 1% to 2% increase in efficiency can never make
up for a 200% decrease in battery capacity, no matter what math you use.

The most critical determinant of overall battery life, is initial capacity.
No amount of slick Apple MARKETING can overcome its lack of charge cycles.

On 2024-09-30, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 30 Sep 2024 02:00:38 GMT :
>
>>> Any discussion of "hours of use" without "charge cycles" is
>>> meaningless.
>>
>> And yet longer run times equate to fewer cycles
>
> The problem with you zealots is you don't understand basic math.

Projection, and ad hominem.

> Fewer cycles don't matter

Nonsense.

--
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 9/30/2024 9:29 AM, Andrew wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 30 Sep 2024 02:00:38 GMT :
>
>>> Any discussion of "hours of use" without "charge cycles" is
>>> meaningless.
>>
>> And yet longer run times equate to fewer cycles
>
> The problem with you zealots is you don't understand basic math.
> Fewer cycles don't matter if the battery can't handle as many cycles.
>
> There's a reason iPhone batteries need to be replaced more often, JR.
> Apple iPhones start with el cheapo laughably puny substandard batteries.
>
> And there's a reason the EU forced Apple to disclose the battery life too.
> Notice how pitifully short that disclosed Apple iPhone battery life is.
>
> Why do you think Apple's disclosures shows pitifully few charge cycles?
> The most critical determinant of overall battery life, is initial capacity.
>
> How long a battery lasts per day is DIFFERENT than the battery's lifetime
> because any given battery has a DIFFERENT number of charge cycles in it.
>
> None of your zealot arguments takes into account Apple's deplorable lack of
> batteries being able to handle the charge cycles that Android batteries do.
>
> Remember, nobody replaces more batteries yearly than does Apple.
> The REASON for Apple's deplorable lack of charge cycles is the capacity.
>
> What nospam used to claim was Apple's well advertised "vaunted efficiency".
>
> However, Apple's admirable 1% to 2% increase in efficiency can never make
> up for a 200% decrease in battery capacity, no matter what math you use.
>
> The most critical determinant of overall battery life, is initial capacity.
> No amount of slick Apple MARKETING can overcome its lack of charge cycles.

REALLY? Can you support that with facts, not unsupported words. Your
words are total bullshit. I'll bet you don't read a word of what follows.

Here are some facts:

https://techinspection.net/iphone-vs-android-battery-life/

Quotes:

"Battery Capacity

The battery capacity, measured in milliamp hours (mAh), gives a basic
indicator of how much juice a phone’s battery can hold. However,
optimization plays a huge role in translating that raw capacity into
real-world usage.

Recent iPhone models have packed in these mAh capacities:

iPhone 14 Pro Max: 4,323 mAh
iPhone 14 Plus: 4,325 mAh
iPhone 14: 3,279 mAh
For Android, flagship capacities include:

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra: 5,000 mAh
Google Pixel 7 Pro: 5,000 mAh
OnePlus 10T: 4,800 mAh

On paper, higher-end Android phones edge out iPhones on battery
capacities. The iPhone 14 Pro Max packs fairly large batteries given its
more compact size. However, Apple’s custom silicon helps enable power
efficiency that closes the usage gap despite lower mAh ratings. Still,
Android makers continue pushing the envelope on sheer battery size to
enable marathon usage times."

"Real-World Battery Life Tests

Lab tests of battery life provide useful comparisons between iPhones and
Android phones under controlled conditions. Reviewers like PhoneBuff run
battery rundown tests for different use cases. In a web browsing test
over 5G networks, the iPhone 14 Pro Max lasted actively for 11 hours 28
minutes, and on standby for 16 hours making it a total of 27 hours 38
minutes. On the other hand, Galaxy S22 Ultra was active for 9 hours 16
minutes, and on standby for 16 hours, making it a total of 25 hours 16
minutes. Clearly, real-world testing indicates iPhones have an advantage
for typical daily use, thanks to the platform’s power efficiency along
with battery capacity. However, results can vary depending on the
individual models tested in each phone generation."

Other tests show iPhones and Android about the same.

Here's the clincher:

"Battery Life Over Time

How well a smartphone battery holds up and maintains its charging
capacity over an extended period is an important consideration for
long-term owners.

Overall, iPhones tend to experience less severe battery degradation than
typical Android phones after 12-24 months of use. Reports indicate most
recent iPhone models still have around 80-85% of their original capacity
after two years. Though there is no way to determine battery health on
Android, but using 3rd party apps like AccuBattery, it has been seen
that many Android phones dip below 70% capacity by the same point as
repeated fast charging takes a toll.

However, Android variety means experiences vary. Since there are
numerous brands, ways to check battery health on Android also varies.
Since Android 13, Google started to offer battery health count from
settings. Although smartphone brands are offering quality batteries,
after a couple of years things like less battery backup and battery
swelling happen in Android. On the other hand, there is no record of
iPhone battery swelling.

This happens because of the extra fast charging facility. Fast charging
the phone every day has an adverse effect on the battery. Currently,
brands offering 65-watt, 85-watt, and even 120-watt adapters on Android
have a high chance of battery damage. iPhones on the other hand are
quite careful with their charging accessories. That’s why they don’t
offer anything extra other than suitable charging power."

On 9/30/2024 10:51 AM, Tom Elam wrote:

<snip>

> This happens because of the extra fast charging facility. Fast charging
> the phone every day has an adverse effect on the battery. Currently,
> brands offering 65-watt, 85-watt, and even 120-watt adapters on Android
> have a high chance of battery damage. iPhones on the other hand are
> quite careful with their charging accessories. That’s why they don’t
> offer anything extra other than suitable charging power."

The teardowns and tests of the iPhone 16 Pro did reveal one major fix
versus the 15 Pro, the 16 Pro has a much better thermal solution and can
run demanding applications without throttling. See
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TLpVtjkTfA&t=391s>.

Jolly Roger wrote on 30 Sep 2024 14:53:51 GMT :

>> Fewer cycles don't matter
>
> Nonsense.

Let's assume you own the mathematical brain of a normal adult, shall we?
The most critical determinant of overall battery life, is initial capacity.

Since you Apple zealots can't handle two-digit math, I'm going to bring
things down to your level to give you an example why the "daily life"
(hours) is meaningless in terms of predicting the "overall life" (years).

Take the example of a battery that can last for, oh, let's say 1 week.
Wow. That's a great battery, right? It's an Apple battery you say. Good.

But since it's an Apple battery, say, oh, it only lasts for 5 charge
cycles. Notice how long the battery lasts given the lack of charge cycles.

Within half a year (or so), that battery will be dead forever.
Because of the lack of charge cycles (due to Apple's poor design).

Yet notice, the advertisements say it lasts for a week on one charge!
*The iPhone lasts the LONGEST of all batteries - one whole week!*

And yet, that "great" Apple iPhone battery fails within six months!
Why?

Because the length of time it lasts on one charge is NOT what determines
the overall battery life - which is something you zealots can't understand.
No amount of slick MARKETING can overcome iPhone lack of charge cycles.

That you think daily life means long life, just shows that you don't
understand even the most basic of the simplest things about batteries.

Tom Elam wrote on Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:51:56 -0400 :

> REALLY? Can you support that with facts, not unsupported words. Your
> words are total bullshit. I'll bet you don't read a word of what follows.
>
> Here are some facts:
>
> https://techinspection.net/iphone-vs-android-battery-life/
>
> Quotes:
>
> "Battery Capacity
>
> The battery capacity, measured in milliamp hours (mAh), gives a basic
> indicator of how much juice a phone's battery can hold. However,
> optimization plays a huge role in translating that raw capacity into
> real-world usage.
>
> Recent iPhone models have packed in these mAh capacities:
>
> iPhone 14 Pro Max: 4,323 mAh
> iPhone 14 Plus: 4,325 mAh
> iPhone 14: 3,279 mAh
> For Android, flagship capacities include:
>
> Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra: 5,000 mAh
> Google Pixel 7 Pro: 5,000 mAh
> OnePlus 10T: 4,800 mAh
>
> On paper, higher-end Android phones edge out iPhones on battery
> capacities. The iPhone 14 Pro Max packs fairly large batteries given its
> more compact size. However, Apple's custom silicon helps enable power
> efficiency that closes the usage gap despite lower mAh ratings. Still,
> Android makers continue pushing the envelope on sheer battery size to
> enable marathon usage times."
>
> "Real-World Battery Life Tests
>
> Lab tests of battery life provide useful comparisons between iPhones and
> Android phones under controlled conditions. Reviewers like PhoneBuff run
> battery rundown tests for different use cases. In a web browsing test
> over 5G networks, the iPhone 14 Pro Max lasted actively for 11 hours 28
> minutes, and on standby for 16 hours making it a total of 27 hours 38
> minutes. On the other hand, Galaxy S22 Ultra was active for 9 hours 16
> minutes, and on standby for 16 hours, making it a total of 25 hours 16
> minutes. Clearly, real-world testing indicates iPhones have an advantage
> for typical daily use, thanks to the platform's power efficiency along
> with battery capacity. However, results can vary depending on the
> individual models tested in each phone generation."
>
> Other tests show iPhones and Android about the same.
>
> Here's the clincher:
>
> "Battery Life Over Time
>
> How well a smartphone battery holds up and maintains its charging
> capacity over an extended period is an important consideration for
> long-term owners.
>
> Overall, iPhones tend to experience less severe battery degradation than
> typical Android phones after 12-24 months of use. Reports indicate most
> recent iPhone models still have around 80-85% of their original capacity
> after two years. Though there is no way to determine battery health on
> Android, but using 3rd party apps like AccuBattery, it has been seen
> that many Android phones dip below 70% capacity by the same point as
> repeated fast charging takes a toll.
>
> However, Android variety means experiences vary. Since there are
> numerous brands, ways to check battery health on Android also varies.
> Since Android 13, Google started to offer battery health count from
> settings. Although smartphone brands are offering quality batteries,
> after a couple of years things like less battery backup and battery
> swelling happen in Android. On the other hand, there is no record of
> iPhone battery swelling.
>
> This happens because of the extra fast charging facility. Fast charging
> the phone every day has an adverse effect on the battery. Currently,
> brands offering 65-watt, 85-watt, and even 120-watt adapters on Android
> have a high chance of battery damage. iPhones on the other hand are
> quite careful with their charging accessories. That's why they don't
> offer anything extra other than suitable charging power."

You have never read the news, Tom Elam, am I correct?
(You only read Apple's (rather brilliant) advertising, right Tom?)

The fact is the EU told Apple to STOP SELLING el cheap iPhones, Tom Elam.
That's *every* iPhone below the iPhone 15, Tom Elam.

Look it up.

All iPhones miserably failed the EU's *MINIMUM* standards for battery life!
Even the iPhones that passed, *barely* meet EU minimum-life standards.

While some Android phones *DOUBLED* the EU's minimum battery standards!
Think about that.

In addition...

See my response to Jolly Roger where, using simple numbers, if you have a
batter that lasts for an entire week on one charge, but if that battery has
a 5 charge cycle rating, then it won't last more than a few months, Tom.

Apple marketing is genius at advertising only half the picture, where
Apple's admirable number of hours on one charge is only one metric.

What you have to look at is Apple's atrocious number of charge cycles
before that battery is considered dead as a doorknob - unchargeable.

To put it bluntly, the main reason the iPhone has the most replaced battery
of all phones in that price range is Apple uses el cheapo battery design.

The EU was so appalled at the extremely short lifetime of Apple batteries,
that the EU recently *forced* Apple to disclose the number of charge
cycles, and the EU forbid Apple to sell every iPhone below the iPHone 15 as
a result of the astoundingly low number of iPhone battery charge cycles.

Look it up as we discussed this topic in great detail only a short while
ago.

You'd be hard pressed to find worse batteries than those in the iPhone.
At least in that price range - there are multiple batteries in Android
phones that last TWICE the charge cycles as the el cheapo iPhones do.

Look that up since charge cycles are the major second-order determinant of
overall battery life, with initial capacity being the first-order
determinant, and the overall daily life being a third-order determinant.

Sorry if this simple math is too much for you brainwashed Apple zealots.

And sorry if the EU directly forced Apple to never again sell a new iPhone
lower than the iPhone 15 because they *all* failed the EU lifetime test.

The fact is Apple batteries must follow the same laws of physics as other
batteries, and the fact is the Apple batteries are of an el cheapo design.

Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>
> The fact is Apple batteries must follow the same laws of physics as other
> batteries, and the fact is the Apple batteries are of an el cheapo design.
>

It’s been exactly two years since I got my iPhone 14. The maximum battery
capacity is now at 86%. The phone still lasts an entire day despite all the
online backgammon that I play. I don’t know if that’s good or bad, but it’s
certainly better than previous iPhones I’ve had.

On 2024-09-30, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 30 Sep 2024 14:53:51 GMT :
>
>>> Fewer cycles don't matter
>>
>> Nonsense.
>
> [Ad hominem and bullshit claims rightfully ignored]
>
> No amount of slick MARKETING can overcome iPhone lack of charge
> cycles.

There is no "lack of charge cycles", and that's a nonsensical phrase on
its own. As usual, you're chock full of bullshit.

> you don't understand even the most basic of the simplest things about
> batteries.

More projection.

--
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

badgolferman wrote on Mon, 30 Sep 2024 22:27:14 -0000 (UTC) :

>> The fact is Apple batteries must follow the same laws of physics as other
>> batteries, and the fact is the Apple batteries are of an el cheapo design.
>>
>
> It's been exactly two years since I got my iPhone 14. The maximum battery
> capacity is now at 86%. The phone still lasts an entire day despite all the
> online backgammon that I play. I don't know if that's good or bad, but it's
> certainly better than previous iPhones I've had.

Hi badgolferman,

Remember I got the free Androids and iPHones from T-Mobile (as you did),
about three and one-half years ago, right? (April 2021).

And while my 5 Amp Hour battery on my free Android is still going strong,
I'm sure what you say is correct, so I believe you, a priori, BECAUSE you
act in good faith, with sincere honest goals, sans hypocrisy or mendacity.

As a result of your straightforwardness, I speak with you quite differently
than I speak with the unscrupulous zealots, whom I have to be explicitly
black and white with - because they're so incredibly deceitful people.

The fact is The iPhone 14 is NOT on the EU listing of acceptable phones by
overall long-term battery life. The iPhone 15 is. As is the iPhone 16.

You can make whatever you want of that information, but Apple sure isn't
advertising that they had to increase the battery (and change the charge
cycle calculation) in order to meet MINIMUM EU battery-life standards.

By battery life I'm not talking about hours per day (which is meaningless);
but in years, which is something the dishonest zealots can't understand.

The point to the zealots is that Apple barely meets the battery longevity
standards (which measures to the 80% loss in 500 charge cycles metric).

Any phone not meeting those *minimum* EU standards can't be sold, which,
let's be frank, is almost every iPhone out there that Apple has ever sold.

Don't you wonder *WHY* Apple increased the capacity suddenly?
No?

You gotta realize cheap crappy batteries is all part of Apple's strategy.
They only increased battery capacity to the minimum because they had to.

Think of the bad press when word gets out Apple iPhones have such crappy
batteries that they can't be sold in the EU while Android easily can be.

All the Android phones at that price range not only meet the EU's minimum,
but some exceed that minimum battery lifetime by more than double the
charge cycles.

The simple math these Apple zealots can't understand is that a battery that
lasts for a week but which is dead in 5 charge cycles won't last a year.

The zealots only know what Apple advertises, and Apple never advertises
that it has the lowest lifetime of all phone batteries in its class.

That was my main point.

The primary determinant of battery life is charge capacity.
The secondary determinant of battery life is charge cycles to 80%.
And a tertiary determinant is the almost meaningless daily life.

You can understand that concept, I hope.
The ignorant deceitful duplicitous Apple zealots will never get it.

They can't fathom that Apple iPhones don't meet minimum standards.

On 2024-09-30 15:27, badgolferman wrote:
> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>
>> The fact is Apple batteries must follow the same laws of physics as other
>> batteries, and the fact is the Apple batteries are of an el cheapo design.
>>
>
> It’s been exactly two years since I got my iPhone 14. The maximum battery
> capacity is now at 86%. The phone still lasts an entire day despite all the
> online backgammon that I play. I don’t know if that’s good or bad, but it’s
> certainly better than previous iPhones I’ve had.
>

Why don't you ask Arlen/Andrew where these EU standards are that Apple
supposedly failed?

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-09-30 15:27, badgolferman wrote:
>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> The fact is Apple batteries must follow the same laws of physics as other
>>> batteries, and the fact is the Apple batteries are of an el cheapo design.
>>>
>>
>> It’s been exactly two years since I got my iPhone 14. The maximum battery
>> capacity is now at 86%. The phone still lasts an entire day despite all the
>> online backgammon that I play. I don’t know if that’s good or bad, but it’s
>> certainly better than previous iPhones I’ve had.
>>
>
> Why don't you ask Arlen/Andrew where these EU standards are that Apple
> supposedly failed?
>

I’m not interested in being your mouthpiece. If you want to know something
ask him yourself.

On 2024-10-01 11:56, badgolferman wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-09-30 15:27, badgolferman wrote:
>>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The fact is Apple batteries must follow the same laws of physics as other
>>>> batteries, and the fact is the Apple batteries are of an el cheapo design.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It’s been exactly two years since I got my iPhone 14. The maximum battery
>>> capacity is now at 86%. The phone still lasts an entire day despite all the
>>> online backgammon that I play. I don’t know if that’s good or bad, but it’s
>>> certainly better than previous iPhones I’ve had.
>>>
>>
>> Why don't you ask Arlen/Andrew where these EU standards are that Apple
>> supposedly failed?
>>
>
> I’m not interested in being your mouthpiece. If you want to know something
> ask him yourself.
>

You're not interest in what's true in what he says and what's not?

Predictable.

badgolferman wrote on Tue, 1 Oct 2024 18:56:05 -0000 (UTC) :

> If you want to know something ask him yourself.

Even better, since we have entire threads on this topic,
"If you want to know something, look it up yourself".

It can't possibly be that difficult for the Apple zealots to be so dumb
that they can't even look up the well-publicized-for-years EU standards.

You know what's kind'a funny, badgolferman...
They dispute everything that they don't understand; which is everything.

It's no longer shocking how they're twins of the trumpists out there.

On 2024-10-01 16:03, Andrew wrote:
> badgolferman wrote on Tue, 1 Oct 2024 18:56:05 -0000 (UTC) :
>
>>  If you want to know something ask him yourself.
>
> Even better, since we have entire threads on this topic, "If you want to
> know something, look it up yourself".
>
> It can't possibly be that difficult for the Apple zealots to be so dumb
> that they can't even look up the well-publicized-for-years EU standards.

I'll say it plainly for all the rational people:

There is not EU standard that bans any particular SIZE of battery.

There is a standard not yet in force that will mandate REPLACEABLE
batteries, and that is going to be a problem for MANY smartphone makers.

Do you get it yet, BGM?

On 2024-10-01, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-10-01 11:56, badgolferman wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>> On 2024-09-30 15:27, badgolferman wrote:
>>>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The fact is Apple batteries must follow the same laws of physics
>>>>> as other batteries, and the fact is the Apple batteries are of an
>>>>> el cheapo design.
>>>>
>>>> It’s been exactly two years since I got my iPhone 14. The maximum
>>>> battery capacity is now at 86%. The phone still lasts an entire day
>>>> despite all the online backgammon that I play. I don’t know if
>>>> that’s good or bad, but it’s certainly better than previous iPhones
>>>> I’ve had.
>>>
>>> Why don't you ask Arlen/Andrew where these EU standards are that
>>> Apple supposedly failed?
>>
>> I’m not interested in being your mouthpiece. If you want to know
>> something ask him yourself.
>
> You're not interest in what's true in what he says and what's not?
>
> Predictable.

He enjoys Arlen's juvenile trolls. You'll note he virtually never
questions them.

--
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 10/1/24 6:19 PM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-10-01 16:03, Andrew wrote:
>> badgolferman wrote on Tue, 1 Oct 2024 18:56:05 -0000 (UTC) :
>>
>>>  If you want to know something ask him yourself.
>>
>> Even better, since we have entire threads on this topic, "If you want
>> to know something, look it up yourself".
>>
>> It can't possibly be that difficult for the Apple zealots to be so dumb
>> that they can't even look up the well-publicized-for-years EU standards.
>
> I'll say it plainly for all the rational people:
>
> There is not EU standard that bans any particular SIZE of battery.
>
> There is a standard not yet in force that will mandate REPLACEABLE
> batteries, and that is going to be a problem for MANY smartphone makers.
>
> Do you get it yet, BGM?O

Of course not.....

Jolly Roger wrote on 2 Oct 2024 04:49:01 GMT :

> You'll note he virtually never questions them.

Only you Apple zealots dispute facts that are well publicized.

Such as the fact that Apple's iPhones have smaller batteries than most
Androids of similar size & price range. Far smaller batteries, in fact.

You religious zealots *hate* that fact so you find all sorts of ways to
make lame excuses for the pitifully small laughably tiny iPhone batteries.

Why not just say, "Yeah, Apple iPhone batteries sure are small", but you
can't bring yourself to say that because it's a religious thing with you.

RocketSurgeon wrote on Wed, 2 Oct 2024 10:59:50 -0700 :

>> Do you get it yet, BGM?O
>
> Of course not.....

You do realize that Apple publicized that the only phones that met the EU
standards are the iPhone 15 (and now, the iPhone 16), don't you?

The fact that you don't know what is widely publicized so everyone know is,
is one thing about you religious zealots.

But the fact you also dispute it without even bothering to look it up, is
what sets you strange Apple zealots off from how a normal person would act.

*You zealots dispute everything you don't know; which is everything.*

Worse...

*You zealots dispute everything you don't like; which is everything.*

On 2024-10-02 13:25, Andrew wrote:
> RocketSurgeon wrote on Wed, 2 Oct 2024 10:59:50 -0700 :
>
>>> Do you get it yet, BGM?O
>>
>> Of course not.....
>
> You do realize that Apple publicized that the only phones that met the EU
> standards are the iPhone 15 (and now, the iPhone 16), don't you?

Have they? Really?

Then implicitly, you should have no trouble showing us that.