Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,uk.telecom.mobile
Subject: Re: The long-awaited EU battery-lifetime standards kick in on June
 20, 2025
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 19:18:43 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <10424u3$392hf$2@dont-email.me>
References: <100tcf5$1i7g$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <1014i5n$2lff0$3@dont-email.me>
 <1041kv9$u53$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2025 04:18:44 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d78f3e7432b2a2c583225c5e2befef3b";
	logging-data="3443247"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18ilp3uVd5TmDnQOHJxlhBxVMv3DgHFmts="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:84hQaynkj7VUx5P8B0HyezC9iEc=
In-Reply-To: <1041kv9$u53$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
Content-Language: en-CA

On 2025-07-01 14:46, 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.
> 
>>> 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.

And the lying continues.

A "B" score on an A-G scale...

....isn't dismal.