Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: uk.telecom.mobile,comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone
Subject: Re: The long-awaited EU battery-lifetime standards kick in on June
 20, 2025
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 11:58:57 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <101521h$2n1p2$2@dont-email.me>
References: <100tcf5$1i7g$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <1012kg2$26fdt$2@dont-email.me> <1012kn9$3qrm0$1@news.usenet.ovh>
 <m9lk4oF8shpU1@mid.individual.net> <1014m50$15v3$1@news.usenet.ovh>
 <1015174$2otaf$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 20:58:58 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c13c9451ee966f02e6e7acd561d150b4";
	logging-data="2852642"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/gDqdJIGOYfhSu6PqLPskiVck0oc2qy+M="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:G2inelDN3YhONcnF4ncCIxpXeCU=
In-Reply-To: <1015174$2otaf$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-CA

On 2025-05-27 11:44, Chris wrote:
> Hank <hankrobins@notspam.uk> wrote:
>> Carlos E. R. wrote to us on Tue, 27 May 2025 12:57:28 +0200:
>>
>>> On 2025-05-26 22:59, Hank wrote:
>>>> On 5/26/2025 10:55 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> But when examining how long a battery's life will be, you need to
>>>>> examine both the battery's capacity...
>>>>
>>>> All iphones failed the eu's minimum battery life test when first proposed.
>>>> Take it up with the eu if you want them to change the test just for apple.
>>>
>>> Source? Post a credible link, and not a link to an Arlen post in Usenet.
>>> An article by the BBC, Le Monde, would be perfect.
>>>
>>> If you post a link to an Usenet post by Arlen, then you are another
>>> Arlen alias, and thus ignored.
>>
>> Given Apple published their response to the EU rules
> 
> When was that and where?
> 
>> and knowing those
>> rules go into effect on June 20th, you'll find your answer simply by
>> waiting
> 
> This is the future. You claimed Apple had failed in the past. Where's your
> evidence?
> 
> until then and watch every Apple iPhone being forbidden for sale in
>> the EU after that date except for two models.
>>
>> Two models.
>> And only two models.
> 
> You make it sound like it's a huge attrition. Apple only sells four models
> in total and three of which there are less than a year old. I'd be very
> surprised.
> 
>> Since you can't find the answer now, try to buy an iPhone 14 in the EU
>> after that date and you'll find your answer out.
> 
> You can't buy one anywhere in the world from Apple! That model was
> discontinued in February 2025. It was also removed from sale in December
> 2024 in the EU because it didn't have a USB-C port.
> 
>> Even the iPhone 15 only met the rules because Apple changed the algorithm.
>> https://www.fudzilla.com/news/mobile/58502-apple-fiddles-with-its-battery-lifespan-adverts-to-dodge-eu-rules
> 
> Ignoring your choice of "source" for the time being, there can be perfectly
> valid reasons for the update.
> 
> For example, there could have been a draft spec which stated the limit was
> 500 cycles and so Apple declares that they meet it. Even if they know their
> phones can last much longer (i.e. >1000). Then, the spec is finalised at
> 1000 so Apple update their declaration to state that they *also* meet that
> spec.
> 
> Another, could be purely commercial. At 500 cycles they know they'll have a
> 0.01% failure rate which will likely cost them $X million in warrantee
> returns. At 1000 cycles it may be a 0.03% failure rate which will cost them
> $Y million. They simply accept the $Y or $X as a cost to the business.
> 
> Finally, it's also possible the testing criteria by the EU were less
> stringent than Apple's when finalised and so the numbers were updated
> accordingly.
> 
>> I'm surprised the EU allowed Apple that subterfuge, but if Apple didn't
>> change the algorithm, it would have only been one model allowed for sale.
> 
> Note: the above article is from Feb 2024. 3/4 currently available iphones
> were released since then. In full knowledge of the requirements coming in
> next month.
> 
>> No need to respond now.
>> Wait and see what Apple can no longer sell after June 20th, 2025.
> 
> I predict no change.
> 
>> This is good for the consumer. Bad for Apple.
>> People can now keep their phones longer before the batteries die.
> 
> Apple phones are already supported for longer and have been for years than
> other manufacturers. So Apple customers will likely experience very little
> change.
> 
> That isn't to say that these regulations - for batteries for a wide range
> of consumer items - are not welcome. It'll get rid of all cheap tat
> flooding the market and ending up in landfill within a year or two.
> 
> Much to yours and Arlen's dismay, Apple isn't the bad guy that the EU is
> targeting.
> 

You're assuming that "Hank" is a distinct person from Arlen...