Re: The long-awaited EU battery-lifetime standards kick in on June 20, 2025

On Sat, 5 Jul 2025 11:45:49 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :

I'm always stating facts, and the fact is the iPhone earned a B.
Meanwhile, plenty of Android's earned an A.

 
Many were also graded far lower.

I'm not sure why you're stating the glaringly obvious, Chris.
As if there's some hidden meaning in it that only you get but nobody else.

Is it because you just don't get the point of why a B matters to Apple?

How hard is this for you to understand a fundamental concept, Chris?
1. Apple touted, for years, their supposedly superior efficiency.
2. Even as nobody (yes, nobody) could ever reproduce it, save for Apple.
3. And then, Apple pays a 3rd part to reproduce it (in effect).
   And they can't.

The point, Chris is Apple touted an efficiency that doesn't exist.

Those are just facts.
Apple zealots may dislike those facts, but they're still facts.

 
The facts are no iphone is rated below a B. Plenty of Androids are.

The point isn't that a twenty-dollar Android couldn't earn an A, Chris.
The point is APPLE couldn't earn an A.

When you tie those facts into Apple's advertising,

 
Which you've never substantiated. Like all your other claims.

Jesus Christ Chris. You and Alan Baker must be the only two people on this
planet who have never heard Apple's oft-touted claims of efficiency.

Do you want me to substantiate that the sun comes up in the morning, Chris?

And yet, that efficiency doesn't exist, right?

 
Wrong.

You MAGA zealots (Make Apple Great Again) think that by denying everything,
is a perfectly good rebuttal to facts that everyone can plainly see, Chris.

Go to https://eprel.ec.europa.eu/screen/product/smartphonestablets20231669
 Enter "Apple" in the "Brand or trademark" field.

Look for an efficiency rating of A, Chris.
It doesn't exist.

Certainly the iPhone not more efficient than the Android models that I had
listed, all of which earned an A,

 
You're conflating your obsession of batteries with the overall grading
scheme which covers five aspects. Only two of which relate to the battery.

We recently covered batteries in gory detail in a different thread, Chris.
Specifically daily run time on a perfectly good brand-new battery.
 *Just facts - from EPREL on overall mobile device endurance*
 <https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=60133&group=comp.mobile.android#60133>

Hint: You'll be shocked. Shocked I say. At how well Apple did.
(Which, by the way, proves I'm eminently fair to both sides of the story.)
 

An A vs B comparison may have *nothing* to do with the battery, but
something else completely.

This is very true so it impresses me, Chris, that you understand that.

For those who claim I'm not fair (simply because I state facts about Apple
products that they're unaware of, and which they apparently hate, please
see the aforementioned thread, where Apple does win in some battery areas.