Even as Apple has always put the crappiest components into the iPhone, it wasn't the UK or EU this time that forced Apple to use better RAM lately.
It was AI.
The good news is "Last month, Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo said the iPhone 17 Air and both iPhone 17 Pro models will all be equipped with an increased
12GB of RAM. He said that Apple was still deciding on 8GB or 12GB of RAM
for the iPhone 17 base model at that time, and if Pu's information is accurate, the company has settled on 8GB for the device."
<https://www.macrumors.com/2025/05/30/iphone-17-rumored-a18-chip-8gb-ram/>
Finally, the era of pitiful RAM in Apple iPhones is starting to be over.
On 2025-05-31 07:15, Marion wrote:
Even as Apple has always put the crappiest components into the iPhone, it
wasn't the UK or EU this time that forced Apple to use better RAM lately.
It was AI.
The good news is "Last month, Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo said the iPhone 17 >> Air and both iPhone 17 Pro models will all be equipped with an increased
12GB of RAM. He said that Apple was still deciding on 8GB or 12GB of RAM
for the iPhone 17 base model at that time, and if Pu's information is
accurate, the company has settled on 8GB for the device."
<https://www.macrumors.com/2025/05/30/iphone-17-rumored-a18-chip-8gb-ram/> >>
Finally, the era of pitiful RAM in Apple iPhones is starting to be over.
So "less" means "crappy", does it?
Common Knowledge about RAM.
On Sun, 01 Jun 2025 14:36:24 +0000, Tyrone wrote :
Common Knowledge about RAM.
You Apple trolls know absolutely nothing about Apple devices, Tyrone.
What's common knowledge is Apple trolls defended Apple's pitiful RAM for years, when, in fact, most cheap Android's had twice the RAM of iPhones.
While Apple puts the crappiest possible components into the iPhone, slowly but surely the UK & EU are forcing Apple to put in bare-minimum batteries.
Even so, cheap Android's double the battery lifetime of iPhones, but at
least iPhones after June 20th 2025 must meet bare minimum standards.
The good news however, is that even Apple was forced to "upgrade" the
pitiful RAM allotment of iPhones to something bordering modern standards.
Because of AI.
Since an iPhone is a dumb terminal anyway, it never needed much RAM;
but now that it's running real programs on device, it needs modern RAM.
On Sun, 01 Jun 2025 14:36:24 +0000, Tyrone wrote :
Common Knowledge about RAM.
You Apple trolls know absolutely nothing about Apple devices, Tyrone.
What's common knowledge
You are the only Apple troll here.
On Sun, 01 Jun 2025 21:32:26 +0000, Tyrone wrote :
You are the only Apple troll here.
No. You're wrong. People like you are the Apple trolls, Tyrone.
Nobody on the adult OS newsgroups does that you Apple trolls do, Tyrone.
You hate Apple products so much that when I tell you that the batteries of all iPhones below the last two models miserably fail EU minimum specs, you immediately defend Apple's honor to the death - by denying the EU specs exist.
Who does that?
That's not normal behavior, Tyrone.
1. You can look up the battery capacity, Tyrone.
2. And you can look up the EU bare-minimum specs, too.
He is 100% correct. Someone who regularly tops badgolferman's monthly list
by a significant margin can only be a troll.
1. You can look up the battery capacity, Tyrone.
2. And you can look up the EU bare-minimum specs, too.
1 & 2 are unrelated.
On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 10:38:27 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
He is 100% correct. Someone who regularly tops badgolferman's monthly list >> by a significant margin can only be a troll.
Maybe. Or maybe he's refuting the Apple trolls, Chris.
1. You can look up the battery capacity, Tyrone.
2. And you can look up the EU bare-minimum specs, too.
1 & 2 are unrelated.
That is not correct but it would be an interesting discussion in and of itself, Chris, as the primary battery wattage consumers are generally the same across both platforms, given Apple doesn't have special physics like they claimed with their "special" battery chemistry (i.e., Apple lied).
The display is going to be the biggest hog, so if we assume similar
displays in similarly spec'd Android/iOS devices, it's gonna be #1.
Specifically, the larger the screen, the higher the resolution (e.g., Quad
HD vs. Full HD), and the brighter the screen, the more power it consumes. High refresh rates (like 90Hz or 120Hz) also contribute significantly.
The CPU/GPU will use the next most amount of power, where Android's
typically have more cores than Apple CPUs where, of course, what you do
with the device (gaming, streaming, multitasking, AI, etc.) will have to be normalized between the two test devices to make any fair comparison.
Of course it's correct. The number of cycles a battery can manage is unrelated to its capacity. It's a design feature. Doesn't matter whether
it's 10,000 or 1,000 mAh. It's simply that the 80% threshold differs.
but it would be an interesting discussion in and of
itself, Chris
Not with you, it wouldn't.
On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 19:23:03 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
Of course it's correct. The number of cycles a battery can manage is
unrelated to its capacity. It's a design feature. Doesn't matter whether
it's 10,000 or 1,000 mAh. It's simply that the 80% threshold differs.
but it would be an interesting discussion in and of
itself, Chris
Not with you, it wouldn't.
Chris,
Maybe you need a refresher course in arithmetic.
Take two similar phones, where one has a cheap battery (obviously that's
the iPhone) and the other has a battery double its size.
Which smartphones have a 7,122 mAh battery?
Maybe you need a refresher course in arithmetic.
Doubtful. From you? Impossible.
Which phone is *always* going to reach the degradation point first in time?
Irrelevant. You're letting your bias cloud your judgement, yet again.
The EU regs require that a battery retains a minimum 80% of its capacity
for at least 1000 cycles. It doesn't matter whether that 80% is 8000 or 800 mAh nor that the 1000 cycles take two years or two weeks of typical usage.
All scenarios are equally compliant.
On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 23:55:39 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
Which smartphones have a 7,122 mAh battery?
The Vivo T4 5G / iQOO Z10 has a 7,300 mAh battery.
While the REDMI Turbo 4 Pro, Honor 400 series, iQOO Neo 11, Realme Neo 7
SE, and the Nubia Red Magic 10 have only a 7,000 mAh battery, the Honor
Power has an 8,000 mAh battery as do Oukitel phones. Ulefone, Doogee, Oukitel, Realme and Cubot phones are well over 10,000 mAh, some even
reaching 15,000 mAh or more such as Ulefone Armor 26 Ultra with 15,600 mAh and the Blackview BV9300 Pro with a 15,080 mAh battery.
On the lower end, itel P40 Plus, iQOO Neo 10, Oppo K13 5G, Tecno Pova 6 Neo
/ Pova Neo 3 / Pova 3 & the Realme GT 7 / GT 7T all have a 7000 mAh
battery.
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 07:23:48 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
Maybe you need a refresher course in arithmetic.
Doubtful. From you? Impossible.
You make this mistake of basic arithmetic a lot, Chris, given you claimed
the 30K subunit size of the SARS-COV-2 viral genome was not huge for what
it was. Remember that? I do. You have no idea about mathematical concepts.
You need a basic refresher course in arithmetic.
A 1% increase in efficiency does not overcome a 100% decrease in capacity.
My free (~180MSRP at the time) Samsung Galaxy A32-5G, which was born in
2021, has a battery capacity that dwarfs that of every iPhone ever built.
Given there is no metric more important than battery capacity for the lifetime of a battery (based on charge cycles to 80%), that's important.
There's a reason my 4-year old Android lasts for days on end, Chris.
While you're frantically charging your cheap-ass iPhone every night.
Apple puts the crappiest batteries they can get away with in the iPhone. Paradoxically, the batteries in the iPads aren't all that bad. Go figure.
Which phone is *always* going to reach the degradation point first in time? >>Irrelevant. You're letting your bias cloud your judgement, yet again.
No Chris. It's simple arithmetic. For you to claim math is bias is what you Apple trolls do because you're desperate to defend Apple to the death.
The EU regs require that a battery retains a minimum 80% of its capacity
for at least 1000 cycles. It doesn't matter whether that 80% is 8000 or 800 >> mAh nor that the 1000 cycles take two years or two weeks of typical usage. >>
All scenarios are equally compliant.
No Chris. You don't understand arithmetic.
I repeat the argument that you do not understand, and if you want to
discuss this mathematical argument, please do so as an adult would Chris.
Take two similar phones, where one has a cheap battery (obviously that's
the iPhone) and the other has a battery double its size.
Use those two phones similarly every day for a couple of years, charging
the iPhone every night (because you have to) and charging the Android when
it needs it (because it doesn't need to be charged overnight like iPhones).
Knowing that a "charge cycle" is not the number of charges, but the number
of 100% charges, add them up.
Which phone is *always* going to reach the degradation point first in time?
You've made no maths argument. Come back with a fully formulated equation.
On Wed, 4 Jun 2025 07:36:16 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
You've made no maths argument. Come back with a fully formulated equation.
Your claim is mathematically absurd.
Apple doesn't have their own proprietary laws of physics/chemistry.
Everyone knows that two devices which use equal amounts of power, the Apple device having a battery half the size of the Android, will reach the 80% degradation point from charge cycles at vastly different times (in years).
Your claim that they don't is simply preposterously absurd.
Specifically, you claim that Apple has special physics known only to them. Which is absurd.
But you're an Apple troll.
So you'll believe anything that Apple feeds you to believe.
Even though everything you claim defies physics.
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 07:23:48 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
Maybe you need a refresher course in arithmetic.
Doubtful. From you? Impossible.
You make this mistake of basic arithmetic a lot, Chris, given you claimed
the 30K subunit size of the SARS-COV-2 viral genome was not huge for what
it was. Remember that? I do. You have no idea about mathematical concepts.
You still store about that? Get over it. SARS-CoV-2 isn't even large for an RNA virus. lol.
You've made no maths argument. Come back with a fully formulated equation. >>Your claim is mathematically absurd.
I have made no claim. That might be why.
Apple doesn't have their own proprietary laws of physics/chemistry.
Everyone knows that two devices which use equal amounts of power,
Not necessarily.
the Apple
device having a battery half the size of the Android,
Inaccurate exaggeration.
will reach the 80%
degradation point from charge cycles at vastly different times (in years). >>
Your claim that they don't is simply preposterously absurd.
I have made no such claim.
Specifically, you claim that Apple has special physics known only to them.
I have made no such claim. Why are you lying?
Which is absurd.
But you're an Apple troll.
So you'll believe anything that Apple feeds you to believe.
Even though everything you claim defies physics.
As per above, I have made no claim.
I simply explained to you the EU regulations that you seem so fond of have
no bearing on your absurd obsession on battery capacities.
On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 14:02:41 -0000 (UTC), Marion wrote :
What you don't understand, Chris, is math. Arithmetic in particular.
Given two devices with essentially equal power consumption, the device with >> twice the battery capacity will reach the 80% charge-cycle degradation
point well before the device with double that battery capacity.
This is basic physics, Chris.
For you to deny basic physics means you claim Apple has "special" physics.
Typo...
Given two devices with essentially equal power consumption,
the device with (half) the battery capacity will reach the
80% charge-cycle degradation point well before the device
with double that battery capacity.
What you don't understand, Chris, is math. Arithmetic in particular.
Given two devices with essentially equal power consumption, the device with twice the battery capacity will reach the 80% charge-cycle degradation
point well before the device with double that battery capacity.
This is basic physics, Chris.
For you to deny basic physics means you claim Apple has "special" physics.
Your non-hypothetical scenario claims that Apple use equal amounts of power to android phones. That is clearly not the case given the benchmarks.
Then you agree that battery capacity will be the biggest determinant of the >> life of a mobile device given comparison of two devices of equal output.
I do not.
Specifically, you claim that Apple has special physics known only to them. >>>I have made no such claim. Why are you lying?
If you don't accept the math Chris,
What maths?!
What you don't understand, Chris, is math. Arithmetic in particular.
Given two devices with essentially equal power consumption, the device with >> twice the battery capacity will reach the 80% charge-cycle degradation
point well before the device with double that battery capacity.
There's a whole bunch of other factors involved which may have a
significant impact.
You think the EU makes up these rules just for the fun of it, Chris?
You think almost no iPhone meets the bare minimum by accident, Chris?
You have yet to prove any of that. So no one believes you. Anyone can make
up bullshit.
You think Apple changing the calculations on the iPhone 15 are also by
accident Chris? Or that only the iPhone 15 and up barely meets the EU
minimum spec is by accident, Chris?
Prove this "barely meets" assertion and also show how android phones like yours easily beat the spec as you've previously claimed.
Note for the hard of thinking: referencing yourself making the exact same unsubstantiated claims is not proof.
Your non-hypothetical scenario claims that Apple use equal amounts of power >>> to android phones. That is clearly not the case given the benchmarks.
Huh? Chris, you do not know basic physics.
<snip ravings>
It's funny how any challenge to your one-dimensional opinions just result
in you getting more unhinged.
I suggest you take a break and come back on 26th June as I suspect you'll have plenty to comment on - incorrectly obviously - after that date. We'll see how well your "facts" last.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 148:20:35 |
| Calls: | 10,383 |
| Calls today: | 8 |
| Files: | 14,054 |
| D/L today: |
2 files (1,861K bytes) |
| Messages: | 6,417,740 |