Re: Why is overall Apple mobile device battery endurance per cycle 16% less compared to Samsung?

On 2025-07-07 15:05, Marion wrote:

On Sun, 6 Jul 2025 15:40:56 -0400, -hh wrote :
 

Don't you wonder why I said "mobile devices" in the Subject & not phones?

>
The USS Nimitz is a "mobile device".

 It used to be Apple tells the truth only in court.
But even that is no longer the case.
  *Apple lied, yet again, this time, criminally under oath!*
  <https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/30/court-finds-apple-executive-lied-under-oath.html>
 Knowing that Apple never tells the truth, even in court and knowing Apple
spins the most clever of lies, um, er, I mean excuses (e.g., you're holding
it wrong, or Apple battery physics is tied to the iOS version, or it's
"courageous" to remove functionality that works just fine, or it's green to
make you go buy the correct charger for your phone, etc.)...
 It's revealing that Apple lied that they "downgraded" their efficiency.
 Nobody else had to make inanely absurd excuses.
Just Apple.
 Nobody else couldn't earn an A in efficiency either.
Only Apple.
 And, nobody else (to my knowledge) has been touting efficiency for years.
A claimed efficiency that is known that no 3rd party has ever reproduced.
 Hmmm... interesting, isn't it.
 What metric did Apple downgrade?
Apple didn't say.

You're lying or ignorant...
...and probably both:
'As an additional cautionary measure, Apple went one step further and downgraded some of its scores to factor in test method ambiguities and variance. For example, Energy Efficiency Index scores for iPhone models on the EU market in June 2025 all qualified for the highest “A” grade, but Apple chose to voluntarily derate scores to a “B” grade to minimize the probability that a third-party tester interpreting the regulation differently would achieve a lower grade. We also downgraded scores for the Repeated Free Fall Reliability Class for the same reason.'
So Apple absolutely DID say precisely which metrics they downgraded:
"Energy Efficiency Index"
"Repeated Free Fall Reliability Class"

 Hmmm... So Apple was part of the process, and Apple used the same testing
companies everyone else used, and Apple knew about the standards years in
advance, and, only now, when they fail to earn an A, all of a sudden, Apple
casts undeclared aspersions on the entire testing process?

Prove that "Apple was part of the process".
Prove that "Apple used the same testing companies everyone else used"
For once.