Chris wrote:
Counting the wider family also no changes over a similar time period and
eight devices. We're mostly on our second phone having had the first for
3-4 years.
The problem is it's a fact iPhone batteries age below minimum sooner than Android phone batteries do. That's just a fact backed up by physics.
However, my immediate family has one Apple holdout, but _everyone_ in the immediate family has _both_ an iPad and either an Android or an iPhone. <https://i.postimg.cc/nhpbcP50/tmopromo04.jpg> $100 for six lines + $16 tax
Not only do the iPhones always cost more to purchase and equip than the Android phones, the laughably puny batteries on iPhones are a huge problem.
The problem with the iPhones, in terms of the inevitable need for battery replacement is that iPhones are designed to die sooner than Android phones.
Given the fact all iPHones have laughably puny batteries, and given that
the aging process of all similar batteries (regardless of capacity) is the same, then it's just a fact that iPhones age faster than do Android phones.
The only way an iPhone in typical use would not die sooner than an Android phone is if you replace the laughably puny iPhone batteries sooner.
It's basic physics, which I'm sure iKooks don't understand but will deny.
And yet, it's a fact.
The smaller the battery capacity, the sooner it ages below minimum.
Apple puts in smaller batteries which always age sooner than larger ones.
Counting the wider family also no changes over a similar time period and eight devices. We're mostly on our second phone having had the first for
3-4 years.
On 2023-01-05 15:25, Andy Burnelli wrote:
Chris wrote:
Counting the wider family also no changes over a similar time period and >>> eight devices. We're mostly on our second phone having had the first for >>> 3-4 years.
The problem is it's a fact iPhone batteries age below minimum sooner than
Android phone batteries do. That's just a fact backed up by physics.
And then you fail to back it up.
However, my immediate family has one Apple holdout, but _everyone_ in the
immediate family has _both_ an iPad and either an Android or an iPhone.
<https://i.postimg.cc/nhpbcP50/tmopromo04.jpg> $100 for six lines + $16 tax >>
Not only do the iPhones always cost more to purchase and equip than the
Android phones, the laughably puny batteries on iPhones are a huge problem. >>
The problem with the iPhones, in terms of the inevitable need for battery
replacement is that iPhones are designed to die sooner than Android phones. >>
Given the fact all iPHones have laughably puny batteries, and given that
the aging process of all similar batteries (regardless of capacity) is the >> same, then it's just a fact that iPhones age faster than do Android phones. >>
The only way an iPhone in typical use would not die sooner than an Android >> phone is if you replace the laughably puny iPhone batteries sooner.
Or if the processors in iPhones used less power than the best processors
in Android phones...
...which they do.
It's basic physics, which I'm sure iKooks don't understand but will deny.
And yet, it's a fact.
The smaller the battery capacity, the sooner it ages below minimum.
Apple puts in smaller batteries which always age sooner than larger ones.
And the load put on the battery doesn't matter?
How are you defining "minimum"?
He's comparing a car's range by only looking
at the size of tank and ignoring its fuel efficiency.
A car with a 10 gallon tank and 30 mpg will need to refuel more often than one with an 8 gallon tank and 40 mpg.
He doesn't. He never does...
Only major version updates are vetted now.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 546 |
Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
Uptime: | 161:41:08 |
Calls: | 10,385 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 14,057 |
Messages: | 6,416,500 |