Re: Why is the iPhone so inefficient compared to Android?

On 2025-07-01 16:22, -hh wrote:

On 7/1/25 18:35, Alan wrote:

On 2025-07-01 14:42, Marion wrote:

On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 15:45:35 -0400, -hh wrote :
>
>

Absolutely. I agree. Nothing wrong, per se, with a "B" score.

>
Which means that your claim (still quoted above) that Apple has
"dismally failed in efficiency." is a flat-out lie.

>
You can take it as a lie but I said very clearly the iPhone earned a B.
I said all the Android OEMs earned an A rating. And a G was really bad.

>
You said it...
>
...but you've not supported it, let alone proven it.

 I've not seen a product chart list, have you?

Well there's a website...
...but searching it to show that some OEM or other didn't get a single "A" grade isn't really practical.
:-)

 

Because Apple advertises they're more "efficient".
And yet, they're not.

>
Incorrect:  they've merely not achieved the highest possible score on
this particular benchmark test that happens to be used in the EU.

>
I knew iPhones would fare dismally simply because of the crappy batteries.

>
A B is NOT a fail.

  Arlen's trying to claim it is because its not the highest possible grade.  Too bad he didn't know what you noted later, about how Apple tested as an "A" but decided to report as a "B".
 Plus battery performance are separate tests in the EU series, so trying to claim bad battery isn't relevant to this "efficiency" grade section.
 To use an automotive analogy, efficiency is equivalent to how many MPG a car gets ... which has nothing to do with its gas tank size (battery).

Arlen is convinced that a car with a smaller gas tank must be crappy...
...despite it having a greater range than some other car with a larger tank, but less fuel efficiency.