Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.advocacy > #149507 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-10-16 08:50 -0700 |
| Last post | 2026-10-23 12:50 -0400 |
| Articles | 19 on this page of 119 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.advocacy
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-16 08:50 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-16 09:40 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-16 18:57 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-16 10:02 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-16 13:56 -0400
Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 14:02 +0200
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 14:10 +0200
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-10-19 11:18 +1300
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-19 19:47 -0400
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 07:16 +0000
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 12:47 -0400
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 09:54 -0700
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-20 10:01 -0700
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 19:10 +0000
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 21:16 +0200
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 15:42 -0400
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-20 13:56 -0700
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 07:20 +0000
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-21 12:48 -0700
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-22 12:02 -0400
Re: Apple iPhone Duo preorder frenzy (was Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster) Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-20 01:01 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 08:43 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-17 13:06 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 21:07 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-17 21:40 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 21:13 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 15:10 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 08:15 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 13:06 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 19:13 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 13:26 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 19:43 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 15:02 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 21:10 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 15:28 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 12:32 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 21:42 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-20 17:33 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 17:45 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-20 14:55 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 07:29 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-21 12:33 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-21 18:47 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-21 13:35 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-21 19:43 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-21 18:55 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-21 13:33 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-21 19:38 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-21 12:30 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 21:36 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-21 18:23 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-22 20:05 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-23 13:26 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-20 10:46 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 19:52 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 19:55 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:36 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 21:05 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 12:18 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Nick Charles <none@none.none> - 2026-10-20 19:11 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 12:17 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 15:11 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 21:21 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 15:36 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 21:54 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 17:55 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 20:10 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 15:19 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-20 21:38 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 17:50 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-20 14:56 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 22:30 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 20:56 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 07:20 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-21 12:44 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 19:06 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-21 17:06 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 20:54 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-20 14:12 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 17:52 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 22:30 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 20:56 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 07:09 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-21 13:04 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-21 19:12 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-21 13:58 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 12:26 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-21 21:56 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-21 17:10 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 15:32 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-22 12:51 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-22 12:00 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-22 18:06 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-23 13:02 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-23 19:15 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-23 13:33 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-23 10:55 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-23 20:16 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-23 11:18 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-24 10:09 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-23 10:55 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 21:21 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-21 17:50 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-22 19:51 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-23 12:58 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2026-10-21 10:47 +1300
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 10:27 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 06:43 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-19 19:32 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 06:31 +0000
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 13:13 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-20 10:18 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-10-18 14:11 -0700
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Tom Elam <thomas.e.elam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:08 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-20 12:03 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-20 13:39 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Tom Elam <thomas.e.elam@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:12 -0400
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2026-10-23 09:50 +0200
Re: Apple's iPhone Duo Repair Prices Are Out, and Dropping This $2,000 Foldable Could Be a Financial Disaster Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> - 2026-10-23 12:50 -0400
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
| From | Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-23 10:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1792778108.B451A476@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #149763 |
On Oct 23, 2026 at 10:02 AM, Maria Sophia wrote in 11bg3vi$1phr$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com: > John Bokma wrote: >> And still wrong. > > Your only argument (to defend Apple to the death) is all facts are > wrong? > > You Apple religious zealot nutcases prove me right about you in every > post. > Notice you feel the need to lie to push a "point". -- It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 21:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11bback$ajai$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #149674 |
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote: > Chris wrote: >>> There is no way to prove anything factual to you religious zealot nutcases. >> >> Projection. You wouldn't recognise a fact if it shat on your bed. > > These are facts using similar phones which we chose blind in April, before > we ran the calculations based only EU specifications, which we agreed on. Problem is this data is out of date. The 17 Pro Max is no longer for sale. Let's compare with the 18 Pro Max > iPhone 17 Pro Max hrs of runtime per charge cycle = 18.87 hours > Samsung S26 Ultra hrs of runtime per charge cycle = 21.82 hours > *Winner = Samsung (+15.6%)* No idea how you got these numbers. That's not EU data. > iPhone 18 Pro Max endurance per charge = 62 hours > Samsung S26 Ultra endurance per charge = 55 hours > *Winner = Apple (+12.7%)* > > iPhone 18 Pro Max efficiency (hrs/Ah) = 11.50 > Samsung S26 Ultra efficiency (hrs/Ah) = 11.33 > *Winner = Apple (+1.5%)* > > iPhone 18 Pro Max calendar life (calculated) = ~7.08 years > Samsung S26 Ultra calendar life (calculated) = ~7.53 years > *Winner (of an unreliable metric) = Samsung (6.3%)* > The 18 Pro Max is clearly the best Flagship model when it comes to battery life and efficiency. The Pixel is pretty bad. https://imgpile.com/p/F4eCpUZ It's possibly the Samsung S27 might leapfrog to the top, or maybe not.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 17:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11bbc3g$e5u$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #149701 |
Chris wrote:
>> These are facts using similar phones which we chose blind in April, before
>> we ran the calculations based only EU specifications, which we agreed on.
>
> Problem is this data is out of date. The 17 Pro Max is no longer for sale.
> Let's compare with the 18 Pro Max
Do it.
I'd love to see the results. I'm sure all of us would love to see them.
As before with the iPhone 17 Pro Max, I have no idea how it will turn out.
I suspect the iPhone will suck, but Apple got a bruising with the first EU
benchmarks proving the crappy batteries, so maybe Apple fixed that problem?
I don't know if Apple learned anything from being shown to be liars all
these years about their supposed "efficiency", so maybe they fixed it?
Dunno.
Like any normal person, I WELCOME you calculating & reporting the result.
To help you, I provided a working template on the bottom of this article.
>
>> iPhone 17 Pro Max hrs of runtime per charge cycle = 18.87 hours
>> Samsung S26 Ultra hrs of runtime per charge cycle = 21.82 hours
>> *Winner = Samsung (+15.6%)*
>
> No idea how you got these numbers. That's not EU data.
We explained in gory detail many times EXACTLY how we got those numbers.
Stop using the first absurd excuse you can think of because you hate 'em.
The explanation is provided for you in the bottom of this article.
>> iPhone 18 Pro Max endurance per charge = 62 hours
>> Samsung S26 Ultra endurance per charge = 55 hours
>> *Winner = Apple (+12.7%)*
>>
>> iPhone 18 Pro Max efficiency (hrs/Ah) = 11.50
>> Samsung S26 Ultra efficiency (hrs/Ah) = 11.33
>> *Winner = Apple (+1.5%)*
>>
>> iPhone 18 Pro Max calendar life (calculated) = ~7.08 years
>> Samsung S26 Ultra calendar life (calculated) = ~7.53 years
>> *Winner (of an unreliable metric) = Samsung (6.3%)*
>>
>
> The 18 Pro Max is clearly the best Flagship model when it comes to battery
> life and efficiency. The Pixel is pretty bad.
> https://imgpile.com/p/F4eCpUZ
> It's possibly the Samsung S27 might leapfrog to the top, or maybe not.
Unlike you Apple nutcases, Chris, normal people, like those on the Android
newsgroup, don't defend any mothership to the death. Just you do it.
So we WELCOME your comparison of the total battery life (in years, not
in daily hours) between the top-of-the-line Samsung and iPhone.
The Pixel isn't generally considered fair competition to either, but if you
want to add the Pixel, nobody on the Android newsgroup will complain.
Here is the template for the comparison you will be making for the team.
1. The specifications (EU certified)
A. Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max
a. Capacity: 4800 mAh
b. EU Endurance (Single Charge): 53 hours
c. EU Cycle Rating (to 80%): 1,000 cycles
d. Daily Cycles (24h/53h): 0.45283 cycles/day
B. Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra
a. Capacity: 4855 mAh
b. EU Endurance (Single Charge): 55 hours
c. EU Cycle Rating (to 80%): 1,200 cycles
d. Daily Cycles (24h/55h): 0.43636 cycles/day
2. 'Kill Time' = Total Life Cycles / Daily Cycles
A. Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max:
1,000 / ~0.453 = 2,208.33 days (approx 6.05 years)
B. Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra:
1,200 / ~0.436 = 2,750 days (approx 7.53 years)
3. Analysis of the data
A. Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max
Total Life: 2,208 days (approx 6.05 years)
Efficiency Calculation: 53 hours / 4.8 Ah = 11.04 hours per Ah
Efficiency: 11.04 hours per Ah
B. Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra
Total Life: 2,750 days (approx 7.53 years)
Efficiency Calculation: 55 hours / 4.855 Ah = 11.33 hours per Ah
Efficiency: 11.33 hours per Ah
Margin: 542 Days (approx 1.49 years)
Lifespan Advantage: +24.5%
4. Summary of the facts:
a. Efficiency:
Samsung wins. It gets 55 hours out of 4.855Ah,
while Apple gets 53 hours out of 4.8Ah.
b. Capacity:
Samsung wins, though Apple has finally started closing the
historic battery-capacity gap (but only recently).
c. Durability:
Samsung wins. The 1,200 cycle rating on Samsung's 2026 chemistry
provides the Kill-Time victory despite the claimed iPhone efficiency.
SUMMARY:
iPhone 17 Pro Max hrs of runtime per charge cycle = 18.87 hours
Samsung S26 Ultra hrs of runtime per charge cycle = 21.82 hours
*Winner = Samsung (+15.6%)*
iPhone 17 Pro Max endurance per charge = 53 hours
Samsung S26 Ultra endurance per charge = 55 hours
*Winner = Samsung (+3.8%)*
iPhone 17 Pro Max efficiency (hrs/Ah) = 11.04
Samsung S26 Ultra efficiency (hrs/Ah) = 11.33
*Winner = Samsung (+2.6%)*
iPhone 17 Pro Max calendar life (calculated) = ~6.05 years
Samsung S26 Ultra calendar life (calculated) = ~7.53 years
*Winner = Samsung (24.5%)*
REFERENCES:
a. EU Regulation 2023/1670 (Ecodesign requirements)
<https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1670/oj>
b. EU Regulation 2023/1669 (Energy Labeling)
<https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1669/oj>
c. EPREL (European Product Registry for Energy Labeling)
<https://eprel.ec.europa.eu/screen/product/smartphonestablets20231669>
d. Bitkom Compliance (June 2025 Implementation Details)
<https://bitkom-compliance-solutions.com/en/news/new-eu-requirements-ecodesign-and-energy-labelling-smartphones-and-tablets-june-2025>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 19:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11bdpgm$15tqs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #149704 |
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote: > Chris wrote: >>> These are facts using similar phones which we chose blind in April, before >>> we ran the calculations based only EU specifications, which we agreed on. >> >> Problem is this data is out of date. The 17 Pro Max is no longer for sale. >> Let's compare with the 18 Pro Max > > Do it. > I'd love to see the results. I'm sure all of us would love to see them. > > As before with the iPhone 17 Pro Max, I have no idea how it will turn out. > > I suspect the iPhone will suck, but Apple got a bruising with the first EU > benchmarks proving the crappy batteries, so maybe Apple fixed that problem? > > I don't know if Apple learned anything from being shown to be liars all > these years about their supposed "efficiency", so maybe they fixed it? > > Dunno. > Like any normal person, I WELCOME you calculating & reporting the result. > To help you, I provided a working template on the bottom of this article. Check the numbers below. I've already done the calculations. >> >>> iPhone 17 Pro Max hrs of runtime per charge cycle = 18.87 hours >>> Samsung S26 Ultra hrs of runtime per charge cycle = 21.82 hours >>> *Winner = Samsung (+15.6%)* >> >> No idea how you got these numbers. That's not EU data. > > We explained in gory detail many times EXACTLY how we got those numbers. > Stop using the first absurd excuse you can think of because you hate 'em. > > The explanation is provided for you in the bottom of this article. Not the run times above. There's no explanation of them. >>> iPhone 18 Pro Max endurance per charge = 62 hours >>> Samsung S26 Ultra endurance per charge = 55 hours >>> *Winner = Apple (+12.7%)* >>> >>> iPhone 18 Pro Max efficiency (hrs/Ah) = 11.50 >>> Samsung S26 Ultra efficiency (hrs/Ah) = 11.33 >>> *Winner = Apple (+1.5%)* >>> >>> iPhone 18 Pro Max calendar life (calculated) = ~7.08 years >>> Samsung S26 Ultra calendar life (calculated) = ~7.53 years >>> *Winner (of an unreliable metric) = Samsung (6.3%)* >>> >> >> The 18 Pro Max is clearly the best Flagship model when it comes to battery >> life and efficiency. The Pixel is pretty bad. >> https://imgpile.com/p/F4eCpUZ >> It's possibly the Samsung S27 might leapfrog to the top, or maybe not. > > Unlike you Apple nutcases, Chris, normal people, like those on the Android > newsgroup, don't defend any mothership to the death. Just you do it. > > So we WELCOME your comparison of the total battery life (in years, not > in daily hours) between the top-of-the-line Samsung and iPhone. > > The Pixel isn't generally considered fair competition to either, Why not? You included it in comparison to the Duo.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-23 12:58 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11bg3n4$ggi$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #149741 |
Chris wrote: >> Like any normal person, I WELCOME you calculating & reporting the result. >> To help you, I provided a working template on the bottom of this article. > > Check the numbers below. I've already done the calculations. Interesting your numbers don't add up, Chris, and that you don't cite where you got your numbers from so we can't even check why/how the math is wrong. >> The explanation is provided for you in the bottom of this article. > > Not the run times above. There's no explanation of them. The numbers came from the references quoted below the explanation, Chris. >>>> iPhone 18 Pro Max endurance per charge = 62 hours >>>> Samsung S26 Ultra endurance per charge = 55 hours >>>> *Winner = Apple (+12.7%)* >>>> >>>> iPhone 18 Pro Max efficiency (hrs/Ah) = 11.50 >>>> Samsung S26 Ultra efficiency (hrs/Ah) = 11.33 >>>> *Winner = Apple (+1.5%)* >>>> >>>> iPhone 18 Pro Max calendar life (calculated) = ~7.08 years >>>> Samsung S26 Ultra calendar life (calculated) = ~7.53 years >>>> *Winner (of an unreliable metric) = Samsung (6.3%)* >> The Pixel isn't generally considered fair competition to either, > > Why not? You included it in comparison to the Duo. I've never done a one-to-one comparison of the Pixel to any iPhone in my memory, Chris, like I did with the Samsung (which is the true competitor). If I have done that detailed numerical 1:1 comparison, show me where.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 10:47 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <11b8nhf$3dhmf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #149604 |
On 2026-10-20 17:13:18 +0000, John Bokma said: > On 20/10/2026 19:06, Maria Sophia wrote: >> >> Q: What are the most important top 3 specifications for any battery? >> A: ? > > 1) How safe is it (don't want an exploding battery), > 2) How long it keeps my device up & running during the day, > 3) After how much time do I have to replace it (see 2). 4) How long it takes to recharge it. :-) There's no point in having a battery that lasts six weeks, when it takes two days to charge back up to 10%.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 10:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1792517261.532278BE@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #149602 |
On Oct 20, 2026 at 10:06 AM, Maria Sophia wrote in 11b872b$1qe5$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com: > Chris wrote: >>> Why can't you ever find any of these zealots you talk about? >> >> Oh but he can. They're *everywhere*! I'm one, you're one, everyone >> is! > > Since there are people reading this who are NOT religious zealots, > when you make an absurd excuse for Apple's crappy capacity by saying > one of the most important specifications for a battery is, in your > words "brain dead", that is an indication that you'll defend Apple to > the death, no matter what, using the first absurd inanely idiotic > excuse that pops into your head. > > Snit does it (aka Brock McNuggets). Alan Baker does it. nospam did it. > Lewis did it. Jolly Roger does it. JF Mezei did it. Your Name does it. Why not try to be honest? -- It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 06:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11b1ppk$tfln$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #149529 |
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote: > Chris wrote: >>> By better, I mean higher capacity. >> >> That's a brain dead definition. > > Why do Apple religious zealots defend Apple to the death no matter what, Attack. > using the first absurd excuse that pops into their head, like that, Chris. > > It's one of the most important metrics for overall battery life, Chris. Deny. > In case you're not aware, overall battery life is rated in charge cycles > until the battery capacity drops below 80% where the original capacity is > one of the most important metrics. > > For you to claim it's a "brain dead" specification, is, in a word, > "absurd". > >>> Which means that it will last longer than a lower-capacity battery would. >> >> False. If you look at the EU battery lifetimes for all 5AH batteries you >> see 185 hrs difference between the best and worst. Capacity is a very poor >> metric to use. > > Again, you Apple religious zealots use the first idiotic excuse you can > think of to defend Apple to the death, Chris, as that's DAILY LIFE. > > We're never talking about DAILY LIFE for God's sake. > We're talking about overall life (i.e., charge cycles to below 80%) Chris. Moving goalposts, I see. You're already rowing back your claim. Deflect. True to form; attack, deny, deflect. You have nothing. >>> Which is the point why Apple puts the crappiest batteries that they can get >>> away with into the iPhone (using the cheapest materials they can source). >> >> As you'll see in the analysis you continually ignore, Samsung on average >> has amongst the worst battery endurance in every class. >> https://rpubs.com/ithinkiam/1460398 > > I invested my energy disproving your claim Chris, It's not a claim. It's a bona fide fact. Not one of your opinions dressed up as fact. on 20260424 in the > m.p.m.i newsgroup, so I will simply repeat the research I ran then. > > Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.advocacy > Subject: Re: AppleCare+ basically more than doubles the cost of a typical iPhone. > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2026 15:45:25 -0600 > Message-ID: <10soldk$j39$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> > > Under Regulation (EU) 2023/1670, as I understand it, OEMs must either > a. Make the battery easily replaceable by the owner, or, > b. It must maintain 80% after 1,000 full charge cycles. > <https://hi-tech.ua/en/apple-iphone-17-pro-max-will-retain-its-familiar-design-how-engineers-managed-to-circumvent-eu-laws/> > > You are correct that Samsung "bragged" about much higher cycles. > But under the EU testing scheme, Samsung has claimed 1200 cycles. Correct. It's a claim. None of the claims are verifiable. Samsung are all over the place with them. Some models are 1700+ and some are only 1200. They even change them between updates. > And, the Samsung S26 Ultra is more efficient than the iPhone 17 Pro Max > which belies Apple's claim that they use crappy batteries more efficiently. > > <https://www.androidheadlines.com/2026/02/samsung-galaxy-s26-battery-life-endurance-eu-label-leaks.html> > Samsung isn't just winning because the battery is bigger > (it's only about 1% larger); they are winning because the > Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 (built on the newest 2nm process) > is easily out-pacing the A19 Pro in "perf-per-watt" for > sustained tasks. Samsung's "Privacy Display" and LTPO 4.0 > tech also draw less power at high brightness than Apple's panels. Ok. Now you're talking about battery efficiency, which is a much better metric. And you've moved the goalposts, a second time. Thanks for making my point for me: Battery capacity in its own is meaningless. > Mathematically, if you charge your phone once a day, the Samsung battery is > rated to stay "healthy" (above 80%) for roughly 3.3 years, whereas the > iPhone is rated for 2.7 years. > a. Apple 1,000 cycles / 365.25 days in a year = 3.29 years > b. Samsung 1,200 cycles / 365.25 days in a year = 3.29 years Your maths ain't mathsing, yet again. You're assuming a complete cycle is equal to a day. If a phone at 50% at the end of the day and recharged overnight, only half a cycle. > That extra 200 cycles is a massive 6.5 month buffer for long-term owners. Remember, that cycle count is unverifiable. And samsung already reduced it from 1700+ to 1200. It's just a marketing number. Also remember, Samsung always reports maxima whereas Apple reports minima. If the EU minimum requirement is 1000 (unverifiable) cycles, then there's no incentive to report more. >>> Since all iPhones come with crappy batteries, Apple *knows* that the >>> battery capacity must be kept small in order to induce turnover. >> >> Then why support them for up to eight years if turnover is so high, by your >> account? > > FACT: > OEMs were required to state how long they promise support UK/EU, Chris: > 1. Google promised, in writing, 7 years > 2. Samsung promised, in writing (for the S series), 7 years No samsung/google phone ever has yet received more than 4 years actual support. Plus the promise is only for security updates. > 3. Apple? What did they promise Chris? > HINT: a measly 5 years The average actual full support for all iphones *over the last decade* - not just flagships - is *seven* years. > Why do you think Apple's promised support is so crappy, Chris? > HINT: We covered the average support lifetime for all iPhones Chris. And you're still intentionally lying about what we found.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-19 19:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11b69b9$1vgq$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #149531 |
Chris wrote:
>>> That's a brain dead definition.
>>
>> Why do Apple religious zealots defend Apple to the death no matter what,
>
> Attack.
Chris,
The most important spec for a battery, you call "a brain dead definition".
*What kind of person does that?*
More to the point,
Q: *What kind of religious-zealot nutcase does that?*
A: Only Apple religious zealot nutcases, like you are, would say that.
There's no other way to respond to your claim that the most important
specification there is for a battery, is a "brain dead spec" simply
because Apple batteries historically suck in initial capacity ratings.
The observation remains true that you Apple religious nutcase zealots
respond to facts you don't like with the first absurd excuse that pops into
your head.
Why not just agree, like a normal person would, that the initial capacity
is one of the most important specs that exist for almost any battery?
No INTELLIGENT conversation is possible with someone who, in defending
Apple's choice of using crappy batteries in the iPhone, claims that the
most important specification there is for a battery, is a brain-dead spec.
It's just further evidence to all that you Apple religious zealot nutcases
will defend Apple to the death, no matter what, which is fine, but the way
you defend Apple to the death, no matter what, is to use the first absurd
idiotic excuse that pops into your head.
At least come up with a better excuse for crappy iPhone batteries than
claiming the most important specification is, to you zealots, brain dead.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 06:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11b71rs$2ohqd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #149570 |
Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote: > Chris wrote: >>>> That's a brain dead definition. >>> >>> Why do Apple religious zealots defend Apple to the death no matter what, >> >> Attack. > > Chris, > > The most important spec for a battery, you call "a brain dead definition". > *What kind of person does that?* Someone who can think. It's like arguing that the most important spec for a car is the size of the petrol tank. No one cares about that. They care about mpg and range, especially for EVs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 13:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11b87fe$ck2$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #149576 |
Chris wrote: >> The most important spec for a battery, you call "a brain dead definition". >> *What kind of person does that?* > > Someone who can think. > > It's like arguing that the most important spec for a car is the size of the > petrol tank. No one cares about that. They care about mpg and range, > especially for EVs. Chris, If we said a car was degraded to the point of trade in after 1000 fill cycles, and if most cars get about the same miles per gallon, then the size of the gas tank would be one of the most important related specifications. When overall lifetime is the metric we are discussing, for you to claim that the initial capacity is a "brain dead" specification, is absurd. I get it you defend Apple to the death. I get it you use the first absurd excuse you can think of to do so. But please come up with a better (i.e., more logical) excuse for why Apple puts the crappiest batteries they can get away with in the iPhone.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 10:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <11b87po$37cnj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #149603 |
On 2026-10-20 10:13, Maria Sophia wrote: > Chris wrote: >>> The most important spec for a battery, you call "a brain dead definition". >>> *What kind of person does that?* >> >> Someone who can think. >> >> It's like arguing that the most important spec for a car is the size of the >> petrol tank. No one cares about that. They care about mpg and range, >> especially for EVs. > > Chris, > > If we said a car was degraded to the point of trade in after 1000 fill > cycles, and if most cars get about the same miles per gallon, then the size > of the gas tank would be one of the most important related specifications. Equally important would be the mileage of the car, dimwit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 14:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <11b3cl7$1gn3l$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #149523 |
On 2026-10-17 10:06, Maria Sophia wrote: > Chris wrote: >>> Since Apple historically puts the worst batteries they can get away with >>> into all their iPhones, we'll have to see what kind of rating they get. >> >> Why let facts get in the way of lies, eh, Donald? >> >> The Google Pixel Pro Fold you were espousing above has a Class B battery >> efficiency whereas the iphone Duo is Class A (like the galaxy Z fold). >> >> By your definition the Pixel is a "crap" phone. >> >>> As for AppleCare, the last time we calculated the costs, >> >> We found out that maths isn't a strength of yours. > > Do you always defend Apple to the death, no matter what, using the first > inane excuse that happens to pop into your head? > > I tell the truth about everything, so you "assume" wrong that I extol the > virtues of folding phones, let along a Google or Samsung folding phone. > > FACT: > My phone on my free (~$289 MSRP) 2021 Galaxy A32-5G has a 5AH battery. FACT: What matters is how long the battery a phone has will keep it running.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Elam <thomas.e.elam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 11:08 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11b804k$3460r$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #149536 |
On 10/18/26 5:11 PM, Alan wrote: > On 2026-10-17 10:06, Maria Sophia wrote: >> Chris wrote: >>>> Since Apple historically puts the worst batteries they can get away >>>> with >>>> into all their iPhones, we'll have to see what kind of rating they get. >>> >>> Why let facts get in the way of lies, eh, Donald? >>> >>> The Google Pixel Pro Fold you were espousing above has a Class B battery >>> efficiency whereas the iphone Duo is Class A (like the galaxy Z fold). >>> >>> By your definition the Pixel is a "crap" phone. >>> >>>> As for AppleCare, the last time we calculated the costs, >>> >>> We found out that maths isn't a strength of yours. >> >> Do you always defend Apple to the death, no matter what, using the first >> inane excuse that happens to pop into your head? >> >> I tell the truth about everything, so you "assume" wrong that I extol the >> virtues of folding phones, let along a Google or Samsung folding phone. >> >> FACT: >> My phone on my free (~$289 MSRP) 2021 Galaxy A32-5G has a 5AH battery. > > FACT: > > What matters is how long the battery a phone has will keep it running. I agree with Fakerboy! Some Chinese off-brands now boast 11,000 mAh batteries. But they may struggle to last a full day. Why? They are gaming oriented and contain power hungry chips. https://gizmodo.com/xiaomi-redmi-k100-2000827692
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 12:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <6ad790be$0$60995$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> |
| In reply to | #149591 |
On 2026-10-20 11:08 a.m., Tom Elam wrote: > On 10/18/26 5:11 PM, Alan wrote: >> On 2026-10-17 10:06, Maria Sophia wrote: >>> Chris wrote: >>>>> Since Apple historically puts the worst batteries they can get away >>>>> with >>>>> into all their iPhones, we'll have to see what kind of rating they >>>>> get. >>>> >>>> Why let facts get in the way of lies, eh, Donald? >>>> >>>> The Google Pixel Pro Fold you were espousing above has a Class B >>>> battery >>>> efficiency whereas the iphone Duo is Class A (like the galaxy Z fold). >>>> >>>> By your definition the Pixel is a "crap" phone. >>>> >>>>> As for AppleCare, the last time we calculated the costs, >>>> >>>> We found out that maths isn't a strength of yours. >>> >>> Do you always defend Apple to the death, no matter what, using the first >>> inane excuse that happens to pop into your head? >>> >>> I tell the truth about everything, so you "assume" wrong that I extol >>> the >>> virtues of folding phones, let along a Google or Samsung folding phone. >>> >>> FACT: >>> My phone on my free (~$289 MSRP) 2021 Galaxy A32-5G has a 5AH battery. >> >> FACT: >> >> What matters is how long the battery a phone has will keep it running. > > I agree with Fakerboy! > > Some Chinese off-brands now boast 11,000 mAh batteries. But they may > struggle to last a full day. Why? They are gaming oriented and contain > power hungry chips. > > https://gizmodo.com/xiaomi-redmi-k100-2000827692 Additionally, some of those Chinese brands don't exactly use the best quality metal on the batteries they sell you. That's part of why the Apple or ASUS ones wear out a lot more slowly than the ones by brands like MSI. However, even with good quality batteries, x86-64 drains way more than an ARM processor does. From my research, Apple silicon devices use between 3w and 15w under load whereas PCs rarely use less than 9w and usually closer to 25w an hour. -- CrudeSausage MacBook Air M4 Sky Blue iPhone 13 Friendly Apple zealot
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 13:39 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11b890f$1pfg$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #149597 |
CrudeSausage wrote:
> Additionally, some of those Chinese brands don't exactly use the best
> quality metal on the batteries they sell you. That's part of why the
> Apple or ASUS ones wear out a lot more slowly than the ones by brands
> like MSI. However, even with good quality batteries, x86-64 drains way
> more than an ARM processor does. From my research, Apple silicon devices
> use between 3w and 15w under load whereas PCs rarely use less than 9w
> and usually closer to 25w an hour.
You Apple religious zealot nutcases have a very short memory since we
covered the fact Apple puts crappy batteries in the iPhone long ago.
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Did Ming-Chi Kuo ever report Apple puts cheap components in batteries, or not?
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2026 13:04:43 -0700
Message-ID: <10re9gr$2dlv$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
That thread has over 100 posts from (in order of appearance):
Tom Elam
Chris
Crudesausage
Brock McNuggets (aka Snit)
YourName
TheLostPacket@comcast.org
badgolferman
Alan Baker
Jolly Roger
Here is the opening post, to remind you Apple uses crappy materials.
Years ago I reported that Apple puts purposefully cheap components in their
crappy iPhone batteries, but iPhone enthusiasts have denied that for years.
It's not often we get proof of Apple's cost-cutting strategy of putting
crappy batteries in their iPhones, but in this one case, we have it.
FACT:
*Kuo: iPhone 12 5G components will cost Apple around $75-$125 per unit*
<https://9to5mac.com/2020/08/21/kuo-iphone-12-5g-component-cost/>
Benjamin Mayo, Aug 21 2020
SPECIFICALLY:
a. Kuo names the battery printed circuit board as one area where
*Apple is downgrading its specifications*.
b. Kuo says that the *cost cuts on internal parts* will have
*almost* no noticeable effect on user experience.
Obviously I reported that to this Apple newsgroup six years ago, but it
bears repeating this fundamental fact that Apple uses cheap batteries for
reasons that are purely profit oriented, and not for performance reasons.
Here's the full text of that article because the other articles that I
reported along with the original reports six years ago, have gone 404.
1. The Verge: "Apple is reportedly using cheaper battery tech to offset
the cost of 5G in the iPhone 12" (August 21, 2020)
2. 9to5Mac: "Kuo: iPhone 12 5G components will cost Apple around $75-$125
per unit" (August 21, 2020)
3. MacRumors: "Kuo: Apple Slashing iPhone 12 Component Costs to Offset 5G,
Moving to Simpler Battery Board" (August 21, 2020)
-----< begin verbatim article text >-----
In the latest TF Securities report from Ming-Chi Kuo, the Apple analyst
estimates the cost of adding 5G to this year's iPhone. Kuo believes it will
cost Apple about $75 per unit for sub-6GHz 5G support, and up to $125 for
millimeter wave 5G.
Kuo does not expect Apple to pass on all of the cost increases to the
consumer sale price of the iPhone 12. That means Apple is looking to offset
5G component costs by looking for cost savings elsewhere in the phone. Kuo
names the battery printed circuit board as one area where Apple is
downgrading its specifications.
Kuo says that the cost cuts on internal parts will have almost no
noticeable effect on user experience. Apple is also aggressively applying
price pressure on its suppliers to source the best deals for components.
-----< end verbatim article text >-----
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Elam <thomas.e.elam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 11:12 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11b80c3$346ug$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #149536 |
On 10/18/26 5:11 PM, Alan wrote: > On 2026-10-17 10:06, Maria Sophia wrote: >> Chris wrote: >>>> Since Apple historically puts the worst batteries they can get away >>>> with >>>> into all their iPhones, we'll have to see what kind of rating they get. >>> >>> Why let facts get in the way of lies, eh, Donald? >>> >>> The Google Pixel Pro Fold you were espousing above has a Class B battery >>> efficiency whereas the iphone Duo is Class A (like the galaxy Z fold). >>> >>> By your definition the Pixel is a "crap" phone. >>> >>>> As for AppleCare, the last time we calculated the costs, >>> >>> We found out that maths isn't a strength of yours. >> >> Do you always defend Apple to the death, no matter what, using the first >> inane excuse that happens to pop into your head? >> >> I tell the truth about everything, so you "assume" wrong that I extol the >> virtues of folding phones, let along a Google or Samsung folding phone. >> >> FACT: >> My phone on my free (~$289 MSRP) 2021 Galaxy A32-5G has a 5AH battery. > > FACT: > > What matters is how long the battery a phone has will keep it running. More - this short video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ4ObDnW3jg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-23 09:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <11bf3jk$1j2jq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #149507 |
Maria Sophia, 2026-10-16 17:50: > Chris wrote: >>>> Not to mention that anyone who can afford a $2000+ phone will get the >>>> AppleCare also. So your entire tirade is fairly stupid. >>> >>> Anyone that can afford a $2000+ phone (hell, a $1000+ phone) will >>> likely be replacing as soon as the next model is released anyway. >> >> Clearly not true. Most people change their phones every 3-4 years. Unless >> you're on the Apple phone plan where you can swap your phone every year. >> >>> All these high-end phones that cost more than a desktop computer are >>> aimed at idiots with more money than sense. > > Base Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 and Google Pixel 11 Pro Fold MSRPs for 256GB > are both about $100 less than the Duo, so the Apple Duo is likely > overpriced (IMHO) given it's a new model which has no proven track record. Well - when the total price is around $2000, then $100 is just 5%. You call this "overpriced"? Or is *any* higher price "overpriced" for you, even if it just $1 more? I wouldn't by the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 either or the Google Pixel 11 Fold Pro since I would never spend that much money for a smartphone at all. -- Arno Welzel https://arnowelzel.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-23 12:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <11bg39h$2958$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> |
| In reply to | #149749 |
Arno Welzel wrote: >>>> All these high-end phones that cost more than a desktop computer are >>>> aimed at idiots with more money than sense. >> >> Base Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 and Google Pixel 11 Pro Fold MSRPs for 256GB >> are both about $100 less than the Duo, so the Apple Duo is likely >> overpriced (IMHO) given it's a new model which has no proven track record. > > Well - when the total price is around $2000, then $100 is just 5%. You > call this "overpriced"? Or is *any* higher price "overpriced" for you, > even if it just $1 more? I wouldn't by the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 > either or the Google Pixel 11 Fold Pro since I would never spend that > much money for a smartphone at all. I was responding to the comment from someone else of... (verbatim)... "All these high-end phones that cost more than a desktop computer are aimed at idiots with more money than sense." Just the (California) sales tax alone on those overpriced abominations is more than my perfectly good phone was. Actually, mine was supposedly free from T-Mobile, but I had to pay 10% sales tax on the manufacturer's MSRP. <https://i.postimg.cc/Xq5SpS4D/tmopromo02.jpg> Given a person buying these phones might fall for the insurance trick, that phone will cost roughly around *double* the initial sales price over time. Interestingly, my 2021 Galaxy A32-5G has a better battery then that iPhone which is partly why I can go nearly a week without needing to fast charge. I'll wager those folding phone crap batteries won't last even 3-4 years. -- There's a sucker born every minute said, oh, Bessimer or Hannum or Barnum.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.advocacy
csiph-web