Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #57857

Re: charging policy

From nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.mobile.android
Subject Re: charging policy
Date 2018-11-25 00:42 -0500
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <251120180042495307%nospam@nospam.invalid> (permalink)
References (14 earlier) <ptc05h$qn$1@dont-email.me> <241120181255005123%nospam@nospam.invalid> <ptcb2n$kas$1@dont-email.me> <241120181633272332%nospam@nospam.invalid> <ptcv8a$2vm$2@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

In article <ptcv8a$2vm$2@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12345@12345.com>
wrote:

> >> this IS an Android group after all. But you Apple fanbois are still
> >> (somewhat?) welcome... ;)
> 
> > i use a little of everything, depending on the given task.
> 
> When's the last time you actually criticized an Apple product?? Be
> honest. And I'm certainly not the first to use the F-word (fanboi) on
> you... ;)

i criticize apple all the time, including earlier today. 

i also criticize those who make false statements about apple and any
other company. see the thread about screen protectors for an example.

and calling anyone a fanboi is an ad hominem attack. 

> >> Apple was a little more sneaky. Their updates actually made some
> >> of those old phones slower so people would buy new ones.
> 
> > it's also ludicrous to think that making a phone slower via an
> > update will get someone to buy another device from the same company.
> 
> If people like their iPhone and think it is just getting slower because
> it's getting older, they'll likely refresh it with a new iPhone. That's 
> a real good reason to keep a sneaky secret, don't you think...

there is no sneaky secret and ios 12 made ios devices *faster*.

it's flat out ludicrous to think that making a device slower is going
to motivate people to buy another product from the same company. 

> > the 'battery problem' is *not* nonsense
> 
> It was so not-nonsense that Apple apologized, got fined, got
> investigated, and offered battery discounts.

it is nonsense when it's misrepresented, as you've done.

as batteries age, regardless of battery type, their ability to source
peak demands is reduced and there's no getting around that. 

attempting to draw more current than a battery can source results in a
voltage drop, possibly causing the device to suddenly shut down, which
is about the worst possible user experience, especially if there are
unsaved changes that are lost. 

apple's solution was to limit peak demands to avoid sudden shutdowns,
which *extended* the useful life of the device, but users saw that as a
huge conspiracy for some reason.

apple could have explained what was happening a bit better, but physics
is physics and not even apple can get around it.

the same issue affects many android phones, including the nexus 6p and
5x, which resulted in a lawsuit:
<https://www.androidpolice.com/2017/05/26/amended-complaint-filed-ongoin
g-nexus-6p-early-shutdown-bootloop-lawsuit/>
  ...some Nexus 6P's have been experiencing bootloops, a situation in
  which the phone doesn't correctly start, but sits unresponsively on
  the startup animation. The other battery-related defect manifests
  itself as the phone suddenly shutting down long before the battery
  indicator would predict.

the boot loop is due to high power demands during booting, causing a
shutdown and reboot, which then draws too much power while booting
again, causing another shutdown and reboot cycle...

and it's not just phones. an older car battery can power the headlights
and radio without issue, but will be unable to source enough current to
start the car. in fact, measuring the voltage drop during cranking is
one way to measure battery health.

> > apple's solution was to *extend* the useful life of the device so
> > that users *didn't* have to buy a replacement.
> 
> Of course...wink, wink, wink...

no winking. that's *exactly* what they did.

Back to comp.mobile.android | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

charging policy "Linea Recta" <bleep.bleep@bleep.invalid> - 2018-11-21 18:24 +0100
  Re: charging policy Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-11-21 17:36 +0000
    Re: charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-21 19:02 +0100
      Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-21 15:10 -0500
  Re:charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-21 18:53 +0100
    Re: Re:charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-21 18:42 +0000
    Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-21 15:10 -0500
      Re: charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-22 07:13 +0100
        Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 01:50 -0500
          Re: charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-22 09:15 +0100
            Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 16:09 +0000
            Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 11:57 -0500
          Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 16:18 +0000
            Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 11:57 -0500
              Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 17:26 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 12:54 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 21:26 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 01:14 -0500
                Re: charging policy Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-11-23 09:28 +0000
                "tl; dr" (was: Re: charging policy) "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 15:28 +0000
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 18:39 -0700
            Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 10:22 -0700
              Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-22 18:45 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 13:47 -0500
                Re: charging policy "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-22 20:40 +0000
                Re: charging policy David Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2018-11-22 21:29 +0000
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 18:39 -0700
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 18:39 -0700
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 21:30 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 01:14 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 15:26 +0000
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-23 16:13 +0000
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-23 19:52 +0000
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-23 21:29 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 16:40 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 21:48 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 17:06 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 22:09 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 17:23 -0500
                Re: charging policy The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2018-11-23 21:00 -0800
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 09:05 -0500
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-24 15:46 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 10:51 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 10:01 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 12:55 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 13:07 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 16:33 -0400
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 18:52 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 00:42 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 11:33 -0700
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-25 19:06 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 14:46 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 19:37 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 22:07 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-26 04:46 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-26 00:32 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 22:37 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 14:46 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 19:37 -0700
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-26 15:45 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-26 10:49 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-26 16:04 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-26 19:11 -0500
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-24 20:14 +0000
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 18:52 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 00:42 -0500
    Re: charging policy Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2018-11-26 10:36 +0200
      Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-26 16:37 +0000
  Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-21 15:10 -0500
  Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-21 15:01 -0700

csiph-web