Re: What's the actual *advantage* of not having an sd slot?

On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:59:00 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :

I'm trying to search for "run time" and not finding it. What is the
correct key word for searching the articles to find that data?

Carlos,

I've studied the inefficiency of iPhones for years compared to Android.

Every OEM has a way to fudge the numbers to make their products look good.
It's an age-old marketing trick that works on people without introspection.

Nobody is better than Apple in claiming an efficiency that is a brazen lie.
Nobody can ever reproduce Apple's "efficiency" claims in the real world.

The only fair test is a universal test that all OEMs already agree to.
In some ways that already exists in the EU's new EPREL of June 20th, 2025.

Apple, Samsung, Google and all the others agreed to the testing standards.
Years ago.

Here's a quick summary, but you can look up the details in the EU database.

Energy Efficiency Index (EEI):
This is the underlying numerical calculation that determines the Energy
Efficiency Class. The lower the EEI, the more energy-efficient the device.

Energy Efficiency Class (EEC):
This is the letter grade (A to G, where A is the most efficient and G is
the least efficient) that is assigned based on the calculated EEI. This is
the prominent letter you see on the EU energy label.

All the OEMs had *years* to meet the known deadline of June 20th, 2025.
Every OEM paid an independent testing agency to calculate their scores.

Most OEMs used the same agency that was part of making the standards.
Guess what Energy Efficiency Class scores were for phones sold in the EU?

The Energy Efficiency Class (EEI - Energy Efficiency Index) on the EPREL
label is primarily based on the battery endurance per charge cycle. This is
measured using a standardized "Day of Use Simulation" test.

The testing methodology is designed to mimic real-world smartphone usage. A
company called SmartViser played a key role in developing this testing
methodology and their "viSer EEI" application is used for these tests. The
process typically involves:

Standardized Activities Loop: The device is put through a continuous loop
of various activities that simulate a typical user's day, from 100% battery
charge down to power off. For smartphones, this loop includes:

Phone call (4 min)
Idle (30 min)
Web Browse (9 min)
Idle (30 min)
Video streaming (4 min)
Gaming (1 min)
Idle (30 min)
Data transfer: HTTP upload and download (8 min)
Idle (30 min)
Video playback (4 min)

Controlled Environment:
The testing is conducted in a controlled environment using a network
simulator to ensure repeatability and reliability. Factors like ventilation
and temperature are specified to maintain consistent conditions.

Measurement and Calculation:
The viSer EEI application measures the energy consumption during these
activities and calculates the Energy Efficiency Index (EEI). This index is
then translated into the A-G energy efficiency class.

Every Apple troll is shocked that Apple scored so badly.
Especially when Apple marketing touts their (bogus) efficiency.

Yet I wasn't shocked in the least.
You know that because I telegraphed weeks ago what results would be.

Here are a sample of results.
 No Apple iPhone received any rating better than a "B" EEC.
 The ASUS ASUSAI2501H EEC rating is "A"
 The Fairphone (Gen.6) FP6 EEC rating is "A"
 The Google GUR25 (Pixel) EEC rating is "A"
 The Honor DNP-NX9 EEC rating is "A"
 The Motorola g86 5G (XT2527-2) EEC rating is "A"
 The Nokia (HMD) TA-1600 EEC rating is "A"
 The Nothing cmf A001 EEC rating is "A"
 The Oppo CPH2695 EEC rating is "A"
 The Samsung SM-S937B/DS S25 EEC rating is "A"
 The Xiaomi 24129PN74G EEC rating is "A"

Of all the OEMs, only Apple's iPhones could not achieve an A EEC.
Apple spent pages crafting (brilliant) excuses - but they're all lies.

The reason they're lies is nobody else needed those excuses; just Apple.
And yet, everyone used the same tests reported by the same agencies.

Which they *agreed* to using, years ago.
Which puts Apple's myriad excuses for lousy efficiency to shame.