Jörg Lorenz, 2023-12-28 17:50:

> Am 28.12.23 um 13:09 schrieb Arno Welzel:
>> Jörg Lorenz, 2023-12-28 08:21:
>>
>>> Am 28.12.23 um 02:00 schrieb Arno Welzel:
>>>> Jörg Lorenz, 2023-12-27 01:45:
>>>>> Wifi 6 is yielding here at least 180 Megabit/s in the 2.4 GHz-band.
>>>>
>>>> Did you confuse megabit and megabyte? Because 180 Megabit/s is also just
>>>> around 18 MB/s - yes, faster than just 2-6 MB/s but still slower than
>>>> USB in many cases.
>>>
>>> 180 Megabit/s are 22 MB/s. 30s for a complete CD or less than 4 minutes
>>> for a DVD.
>>
>> Yes - that's why I said "around 18 MB/s". And 22 is still less than 30.
>
> Klugscheisser.

Same to you.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote

> If the phone uses MTP protocol to transfer a flat folder,
> that's going to "suck like donkey balls". It is a worse
> issue than whether it is a USB2 or USB3 physical layer.

While there are so many ways to copy files back and forth between Android
and Windows it's not funny... mostly I just mount the entire Android phone
as a drive letter on Windows (one for each sdcard) and slide them over.
<https://i.postimg.cc/wM4Z45pN/webdav10.jpg> Free Android WebDAV servers
<https://i.postimg.cc/BQyRxCN9/webdav11.jpg> Mount sdcards read & write
<https://i.postimg.cc/yYWwgGmy/webdav12.jpg> As Windows drive letters
<https://i.postimg.cc/QtbR1GY0/webdav13.jpg> Over Wi-Fi on your home LAN
<https://i.postimg.cc/JhjpnRgh/webdav14.jpg> Mirroring Android on Windows
<https://i.postimg.cc/gcKXV6F7/webdav16.jpg> A third free WebDAV server
etc.

It's fast enough. But I never timed it against the dozen other methods.

For example, most of the time my six inch Android phone is mirrored on
Widnows using adb over Wi-Fi (so the clipboard, mouse & keyboard can be
used and so that the phone becomes almost two feet tall on my screen).
<https://i.postimg.cc/JhjpnRgh/webdav14.jpg> Mirroring Android on Windows
<https://i.postimg.cc/wvsbcNBz/scrcpy05.jpg> Drag APK from Windows

I almost never plug an Android phone into Windows over USB anymore
given that Wi-Fi works as well or better than USB (speed notwithstanding).
--
Usenet is a way to glean over the years tends of scores of useful tricks.

Wally J wrote:

> most of the time my six inch Android phone is mirrored on
> Widnows using adb over Wi-Fi (so the clipboard, mouse & keyboard can be
> used and so that the phone becomes almost two feet tall on my screen).

What's battery life like?

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote

>> most of the time my six inch Android phone is mirrored on
>> Widnows using adb over Wi-Fi (so the clipboard, mouse & keyboard can be
>> used and so that the phone becomes almost two feet tall on my screen).
>
> What's battery life like?

Good question. I don't even know. It's fantastic. But how fantastic?

Once T-Mobile gave me unlimited data, I never bothered to look at how much
data I used (nor how much everyone else in the family plan used) and
likewise, with the huge batteries in Android phones nowadays (which can
almost start your car they're so huge), I never bother to even think about
the Android battery anymore. I charge it when it needs it. Every few days.

Since I don't even _think_ about the battery anymore, all I can say is it's
fantastic - but it has always been fantastic since it's a five amp hour
battery such that I don't even bother charging it on any set schedule.

Plus it came with the fast charger in the box, so if the battery ever does
get low, I pop it in the charger and it's fully charged in an hour or so.

I'm happy. I got, in total, five of those free phones from T-Mobile
and one iPhone (which has, let's face it, a terrible battery life).
<https://i.postimg.cc/YC1B906F/tmopromo01.jpg> A32-5G & iPhone 12 contract
<https://i.postimg.cc/Xq5SpS4D/tmopromo02.jpg> $15/mo iPhone,$0/mo Android
<https://i.postimg.cc/nhpbcP50/tmopromo04.jpg> $100 for 6 lines + $16 fees

I don't even charge the phone overnight anymore, so when I woke up this
morning, it was sitting by the bed all night when I saw your query where it
has been unplugged for 14 hours and 19 minutes apparently (see images).

Here's a set of battery level screenshots I took just now on that Galaxy
A32-5G which show averages of battery life of 1 day 18.8 hours
(18 hours 28 minutes active) and the screen on average being on for 6 hours
and 6 minutes (8 hours 51 minutes maximum) according GSAM Battery Monitor.
<https://i.postimg.cc/k5X8Ccpx/batterylife01.jpg> Battery Bot Pro
<https://i.postimg.cc/sxRgjfgt/batterylife02.jpg> GSam Battery Monitor

Let me know if you want me to run any tests for you as with data in the
past, we used to husband our battery so I know it's important to some.
--
BTW, if someone tells me they have to charge their new phone each night, I
already know it's an iPhone because Apple put in cheap crappy batteries.

Using <news:ums3uf$1pdup$1@dont-email.me>, Wally J wrote:

> Here's a set of battery level screenshots I took just now on that Galaxy
> A32-5G which show averages of battery life of 1 day 18.8 hours
> (18 hours 28 minutes active) and the screen on average being on for 6 hours
> and 6 minutes (8 hours 51 minutes maximum) according GSAM Battery Monitor.
> <https://i.postimg.cc/k5X8Ccpx/batterylife01.jpg> Battery Bot Pro
> <https://i.postimg.cc/sxRgjfgt/batterylife02.jpg> GSam Battery Monitor

I think you misinterpreted that Battery Bot Pro results as it says you have
4 days and 5 hours to go on your current charge (of 80%) and exchange rate.

On 2023-12-31 08:13, Wally J wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote
>
>>> most of the time my six inch Android phone is mirrored on
>>> Widnows using adb over Wi-Fi (so the clipboard, mouse & keyboard can be
>>> used and so that the phone becomes almost two feet tall on my screen).
>>
>> What's battery life like?
>
> Good question. I don't even know. It's fantastic. But how fantastic?
>
> Once T-Mobile gave me unlimited data, I never bothered to look at how much
> data I used (nor how much everyone else in the family plan used) and
> likewise, with the huge batteries in Android phones nowadays (which can
> almost start your car they're so huge),

You say the most incredibly bullshit things.

You pretend to know about cars (because you know what "beemer" and
"bimmer" mean apparently)...

....and you make a statement THAT ludicrous.

The longest running smartphone on tomsguide.com is the Asus ROG Phone 7
Ultimate at 18:32 and it has a 6,000 milliAmp-hour battery.

<https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>

That's 6 Amp-hours.

An automotive battery for a SMALL car such as a Honda Civic has
something on the order of NINETY Amp-Hours...

....that is 15 TIMES the capacity.

And a car battery will provide Amperage in the HUNDREDS to start the car.

> I never bother to even think

That is quite evident.

>
> Since I don't even _think_ about the battery anymore, all I can say is it's
> fantastic - but it has always been fantastic since it's a five amp hour
> battery such that I don't even bother charging it on any set schedule.

And yet, I bet it doesn't last as long an iPhone 15 Plus.

>
> Plus it came with the fast charger in the box, so if the battery ever does
> get low, I pop it in the charger and it's fully charged in an hour or so.

Great! How many chargers

>
> I'm happy. I got, in total, five of those free phones from T-Mobile
> and one iPhone (which has, let's face it, a terrible battery life).

Now you're just lying.

4 of the top 15 phones by battery life are iPhones:

<https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>

> <https://i.postimg.cc/YC1B906F/tmopromo01.jpg> A32-5G & iPhone 12 contract
> <https://i.postimg.cc/Xq5SpS4D/tmopromo02.jpg> $15/mo iPhone,$0/mo Android
> <https://i.postimg.cc/nhpbcP50/tmopromo04.jpg> $100 for 6 lines + $16 fees
>
> I don't even charge the phone overnight anymore, so when I woke up this
> morning, it was sitting by the bed all night when I saw your query where it
> has been unplugged for 14 hours and 19 minutes apparently (see images).
>
> Here's a set of battery level screenshots I took just now on that Galaxy
> A32-5G which show averages of battery life of 1 day 18.8 hours
> (18 hours 28 minutes active) and the screen on average being on for 6 hours
> and 6 minutes (8 hours 51 minutes maximum) according GSAM Battery Monitor.
> <https://i.postimg.cc/k5X8Ccpx/batterylife01.jpg> Battery Bot Pro
> <https://i.postimg.cc/sxRgjfgt/batterylife02.jpg> GSam Battery Monitor
>
> Let me know if you want me to run any tests for you as with data in the
> past, we used to husband our battery so I know it's important to some.

Using <news:umsp4a$1s5oe$1@dont-email.me>, Alan wrote:

> And a car battery will provide Amperage in the HUNDREDS to start the car.

Whoosh.

On 2023-12-31 21:59, david wrote:
> Using <news:umsp4a$1s5oe$1@dont-email.me>, Alan wrote:
>
>> And a car battery will provide Amperage in the HUNDREDS to start the car.
>
> Whoosh.

Really?

Explain.

Alan, 2023-12-31 23:14:

[...]
> The longest running smartphone on tomsguide.com is the Asus ROG Phone 7
> Ultimate at 18:32 and it has a 6,000 milliAmp-hour battery.
>
> <https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>

Well - battery life depends on what you do with the phone. Just saying
"18:32" without specifying the exact test conditions is useless. All
Toms Hardware says at
<https://www.tomsguide.com/reference/how-toms-guide-tests-and-reviews-smartphones>:

"Battery testing: When it's time to test a phone's battery, we turn to
our custom test. Each phone's screen is set to 150 nits of brightness,
and then we have the fully charged phone surf the web over cellular (5G
in the case of 5G-capable devices) until the device runs out of power,
timing how long the phone lasts."

Well "surf the web surf the web over cellular" is not very specific.
What websites? What browsers? How many URLs per hour/minute?

18:32 would mean that the battery is dead at midnight when it was
charged early in the morning about 5:30 or so - or maybe 2 am when you
disconnected the charger at about 7:30.

Under my usage conditions, a Google Pixel 6a usually lasts more than 24
hours with one charge. When I pick it up fully charged at about 7:00 the
battery is often still at about 30% the next morning. Yes, I use it
during the day. But I don't play games or watch videos all the time -
just messaging, e-mails, some audio streaming and maybe do some calls
and web browsing for about 2 hours a day. Having a power bank with me is
helpful sometimes, but usually I can charge it in the office, so it does
not matter, when the battery is nearly empty after about 30-35 hours.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

On 2024-01-01 06:18, Arno Welzel wrote:
> Alan, 2023-12-31 23:14:
>
> [...]
>> The longest running smartphone on tomsguide.com is the Asus ROG Phone 7
>> Ultimate at 18:32 and it has a 6,000 milliAmp-hour battery.
>>
>> <https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>
>
> Well - battery life depends on what you do with the phone. Just saying
> "18:32" without specifying the exact test conditions is useless. All

It provides a common reference.

> Toms Hardware says at
> <https://www.tomsguide.com/reference/how-toms-guide-tests-and-reviews-smartphones>:
>
> "Battery testing: When it's time to test a phone's battery, we turn to
> our custom test. Each phone's screen is set to 150 nits of brightness,
> and then we have the fully charged phone surf the web over cellular (5G
> in the case of 5G-capable devices) until the device runs out of power,
> timing how long the phone lasts."
>
> Well "surf the web surf the web over cellular" is not very specific.
> What websites? What browsers? How many URLs per hour/minute?

What does it matter? It's for COMPARISON.

>
> 18:32 would mean that the battery is dead at midnight when it was
> charged early in the morning about 5:30 or so - or maybe 2 am when you
> disconnected the charger at about 7:30.

If the phone were in use continuously.

>
> Under my usage conditions, a Google Pixel 6a usually lasts more than 24
> hours with one charge. When I pick it up fully charged at about 7:00 the

Because it's not in use continuously.

> battery is often still at about 30% the next morning. Yes, I use it
> during the day. But I don't play games or watch videos all the time -
> just messaging, e-mails, some audio streaming and maybe do some calls
> and web browsing for about 2 hours a day. Having a power bank with me is
> helpful sometimes, but usually I can charge it in the office, so it does
> not matter, when the battery is nearly empty after about 30-35 hours.
>

On Mon, 1 Jan 2024 10:30:12 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote

>> Well - battery life depends on what you do with the phone. Just saying
>> "18:32" without specifying the exact test conditions is useless. All
>
> It provides a common reference.

The battery amp hour capacity is a common reference.

On 2024-01-01 11:44, Oliver wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jan 2024 10:30:12 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
>
>>> Well - battery life depends on what you do with the phone. Just saying
>>> "18:32" without specifying the exact test conditions is useless. All
>>
>> It provides a common reference.
>
> The battery amp hour capacity is a common reference.

Not to how long a particular phone will operate...

....because it doesn't take into account how much power a particular uses.

On 2024-01-01 11:44, Oliver wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jan 2024 10:30:12 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
>
>>> Well - battery life depends on what you do with the phone. Just saying
>>> "18:32" without specifying the exact test conditions is useless. All
>>
>> It provides a common reference.
>
> The battery amp hour capacity is a common reference.

Apologies for the double reply, but what I SHOULD have said was:

'Not to how long a particular phone will operate...

....because it doesn't take into account how much power a particular uses...

....Arlen'

😉

Alan, 2024-01-01 19:30:

> On 2024-01-01 06:18, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> Alan, 2023-12-31 23:14:
>>
>> [...]
>>> The longest running smartphone on tomsguide.com is the Asus ROG Phone 7
>>> Ultimate at 18:32 and it has a 6,000 milliAmp-hour battery.
>>>
>>> <https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>
>>
>> Well - battery life depends on what you do with the phone. Just saying
>> "18:32" without specifying the exact test conditions is useless. All
>
> It provides a common reference.

Reference for what? A info like the battery capacity is a reference. But
"18:32 without our custom tests" is the exact opposite to "reference".

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

Alan, 2024-01-02 17:48:

> On 2024-01-02 08:46, Arno Welzel wrote:
[...]
>>>>>>> <https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>
[...]
>> Where is the specification of the tests then? "surf the web surf the web
>> over cellular" does not sound very specific.
>>
>> What if I also "surf the web surf the web over cellular" and find out,
>> that the battery of a tested device only lasts 12 hours instead of 18?
>
> Oh, please.
>
> The point is that they did the SAME things on EACH PHONE.

No, not on "each phone", only on the phones they tested. The test is
completely pointless if I want to compare it to *my* device.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

On 2024-01-03 08:50, Arno Welzel wrote:
> Alan, 2024-01-02 17:48:
>
>> On 2024-01-02 08:46, Arno Welzel wrote:
> [...]
>>>>>>>> <https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>
> [...]
>>> Where is the specification of the tests then? "surf the web surf the web
>>> over cellular" does not sound very specific.
>>>
>>> What if I also "surf the web surf the web over cellular" and find out,
>>> that the battery of a tested device only lasts 12 hours instead of 18?
>>
>> Oh, please.
>>
>> The point is that they did the SAME things on EACH PHONE.
>
> No, not on "each phone", only on the phones they tested. The test is
> completely pointless if I want to compare it to *my* device.

And knowing the size of the battery is useless unless you know the power
consumption of the phone.

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 17:50:35 +0100, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote

>> The point is that they did the SAME things on EACH PHONE.
>
> No, not on "each phone", only on the phones they tested. The test is
> completely pointless if I want to compare it to *my* device.

Agree the test results are usually pointless unless you have one of the
exact devices tested and if you use the phone the way they tested it.

As you said, since each battery shootout typically uses DIFFERENT test
criteria, you can't extrapolate the tests from one phone to another.

The ONLY thing you can compare amongst ALL phones is battery capacity.
The bigger the better in every way imaginable (both daily & total life).

A bigger battery capacity means fewer charges which means overall longer
battery life since the nominal 500 charge cycles are reached sooner on
smaller batteries (even if they claim "higher efficiency").

A typical "higher efficiency" claim is in the single digits but let's give
them a whopping 25% higher efficiency to test out the simple math.

Phone A has a 3 amp hour battery with a claimed 25% higher efficiency.
Phone B has a 6 amp hour battery (they don't advertise the efficiency).

Which phone dies soonest in a day (assuming normal use patterns)?
Which phone dies soonest in a few years (due to reaching 500 cycles)?

These are just example numbers which make the point that you can't beat a
bigger battery since it's better in every way that you can do the math.

On 2024-01-03 16:39, Oliver wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 17:50:35 +0100, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote
>
>>> The point is that they did the SAME things on EACH PHONE.
>>
>> No, not on "each phone", only on the phones they tested. The test is
>> completely pointless if I want to compare it to *my* device.
>
> Agree the test results are usually pointless unless you have one of the
> exact devices tested and if you use the phone the way they tested it.
>
> As you said, since each battery shootout typically uses DIFFERENT test
> criteria, you can't extrapolate the tests from one phone to another.

Unless you find a phone in common on both tests.

>
> The ONLY thing you can compare amongst ALL phones is battery capacity.
> The bigger the better in every way imaginable (both daily & total life).

Other than weight and bulk...

>
> A bigger battery capacity means fewer charges which means overall longer
> battery life since the nominal 500 charge cycles are reached sooner on
> smaller batteries (even if they claim "higher efficiency").

No, the nominal 500 charge cycles are NOT reached sooner if the phone is
more efficient in its power usage.

>
> A typical "higher efficiency" claim is in the single digits but let's give
> them a whopping 25% higher efficiency to test out the simple math.

This is Arlen again, isn't it?

>
> Phone A has a 3 amp hour battery with a claimed 25% higher efficiency.
> Phone B has a 6 amp hour battery (they don't advertise the efficiency).
>
> Which phone dies soonest in a day (assuming normal use patterns)?
> Which phone dies soonest in a few years (due to reaching 500 cycles)?
>
> These are just example numbers which make the point that you can't beat a
> bigger battery since it's better in every way that you can do the math.

If that were true, then lots and lots of phones with beat the iPhones in
battery life...

....but that isn't what happens.

TomsGuide:

5. iPhone 15 Pro Max

<https://www.tomsguide.com/us/smartphones-best-battery-life,review-2857.html>

GSM Arena's Editors' Choice:

iPhone 15 Plus

<https://www.gsmarena.com/phones_best_battery_life_buyers_guide-review-2028.php>

NanoReview:

4. iPhone 15 Pro Max

<https://nanoreview.net/en/phone-list/endurance-rating>

Are you starting to sense a theme, Arlen?

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 17:36:45 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote

> No, the nominal 500 charge cycles are NOT reached sooner if the phone is
> more efficient in its power usage.

Without a cite showing the percentage, your claimed efficiency is BS.

If phone A is 3 amp hours and 25% more efficient than phone B of 6 amp
hours, the total number of charge cycles will always be reached sooner with
the "more efficient" phone because it has a smaller capacity battery
(assuming everything else being equal in terms of daily use & charging).

Worse, I doubt the efficiency you tout is higher than single digits, but
why don't you bring up a cite which shows what the claimed efficiency is?

Specifically, without a cite showing efficiency at least as great as the
lack in capacity, then it stands to basic reason (and simple math) that the
number of charge cycles will always be much higher for the smaller battery.

Even worse, the much smaller battery will likely approach much lower
thresholds, which will also reduce the life of the battery over time.

Hence, lower overall lifetime (since battery life is mostly due to charge
cycles although there are other ways to prematurely degrade a battery).

I won't bother replying to your BS until & unless you provide a cite
backing up your claims with actual percentage numbers that can be trusted.

ciao

On 2024-01-03 21:04, Oliver wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 17:36:45 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
>
>> No, the nominal 500 charge cycles are NOT reached sooner if the phone is
>> more efficient in its power usage.
>
> Without a cite showing the percentage, your claimed efficiency is BS.

I didn't make a claim about efficiency, Arlen.

What I pointed out is that when 500 charge cycles are reached depends on
BOTH the battery's capacity and the phones energy usage.

You agree that's true, right?

>
> If phone A is 3 amp hours and 25% more efficient than phone B of 6 amp
> hours, the total number of charge cycles will always be reached sooner with
> the "more efficient" phone because it has a smaller capacity battery
> (assuming everything else being equal in terms of daily use & charging).

Sure, but you're just making up numbers.

>
> Worse, I doubt the efficiency you tout is higher than single digits, but
> why don't you bring up a cite which shows what the claimed efficiency is?

I'm not required to.

What I make NOTE of is that iPhones regularly rank among the very
highest in run times.

>
> Specifically, without a cite showing efficiency at least as great as the
> lack in capacity, then it stands to basic reason (and simple math) that the
> number of charge cycles will always be much higher for the smaller battery.

Where have YOU show actual cites of energy efficiency?

>
> Even worse, the much smaller battery will likely approach much lower
> thresholds, which will also reduce the life of the battery over time.
>
> Hence, lower overall lifetime (since battery life is mostly due to charge
> cycles although there are other ways to prematurely degrade a battery).
>
> I won't bother replying to your BS until & unless you provide a cite
> backing up your claims with actual percentage numbers that can be trusted.

All based on hypotheticals for which you have not offered any
substantiating evidence.

Basic logic, Arlen. Not your strong suit, but here goes.

Imagine two identical phones except that one has a battery half the size
of the other, but that is so efficient that it gets the same run time as
the phone with the larger battery.

Now:

Will those two phones complete 500 charge cycles in a different amount
of time?

Yes or no?

Alan, 2024-01-03 18:14:

> On 2024-01-03 08:50, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> Alan, 2024-01-02 17:48:
[...]
>>> The point is that they did the SAME things on EACH PHONE.
>>
>> No, not on "each phone", only on the phones they tested. The test is
>> completely pointless if I want to compare it to *my* device.
>
> And knowing the size of the battery is useless unless you know the power
> consumption of the phone.

Well - along with the SoC and the display used you have can an idea if
it might be better or worse. A Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 with an Andreno
320 GPU core speed will always use the same power, regardless in which
device it is built in.

And to compare your own device with other devices, a *defined* test is
important which you can try on your own device as well. But "surfing the
web" is not "defined" since it depends on what websites you visit and
how you interact with the browser.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

On 2024-01-04 00:28, Arno Welzel wrote:
> Alan, 2024-01-03 18:14:
>
>> On 2024-01-03 08:50, Arno Welzel wrote:
>>> Alan, 2024-01-02 17:48:
> [...]
>>>> The point is that they did the SAME things on EACH PHONE.
>>>
>>> No, not on "each phone", only on the phones they tested. The test is
>>> completely pointless if I want to compare it to *my* device.
>>
>> And knowing the size of the battery is useless unless you know the power
>> consumption of the phone.
>
> Well - along with the SoC and the display used you have can an idea if
> it might be better or worse. A Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 with an Andreno
> 320 GPU core speed will always use the same power, regardless in which
> device it is built in.

Yes... ...the SoC CPU/GPU will use the same power.

But a phone is not just a SoC CPU/GPU

>
> And to compare your own device with other devices, a *defined* test is
> important which you can try on your own device as well. But "surfing the
> web" is not "defined" since it depends on what websites you visit and
> how you interact with the browser.

But the point remains that battery size ALONE doesn't tell you how well
your phone will do.

Stop being an Arlen.

On this Thu, 4 Jan 2024 11:48:38 -0800, Alan wrote:

> But the point remains that battery size ALONE doesn't tell you how well
> your phone will do.

There is no substitute for much larger battery capacity no matter how much
you try to argue the iphone's dearth of battery capacity isn't important.

On 2024-01-04 14:01, Larry Wolff wrote:
> On this Thu, 4 Jan 2024 11:48:38 -0800, Alan wrote:
>
>> But the point remains that battery size ALONE doesn't tell you how well
>> your phone will do.
>
> There is no substitute for much larger battery capacity no matter how much
> you try to argue the iphone's dearth of battery capacity isn't important.

The facts show that iPhones DO NOT have a "dearth of battery capacity":

150 phones in this list, the top iPhone is at 4 with 3 places in the top 10
<https://nanoreview.net/en/phone-list/endurance-rating>

How long will you try and maintain your belief in this shibboleth that
battery size is what's important?

Run time is what matters, and it doesn't matter whether you get it by
large battery and with average energy efficiency or small battery with
better than average energy efficiency.

On 1/4/2024 6:06 PM, Alan wrote:

> The facts show that iPhones DO NOT have a "dearth of battery capacity".

Whoosh.
You make lame excuses for all iphones having very low battery capacity.

> 150 phones in this list, the top iPhone is at 4 with 3 places in the top 10
> <https://nanoreview.net/en/phone-list/endurance-rating>

Idiot. I'm talking about overall battery life, as in years. Not hours.

> How long will you try and maintain your belief in this shibboleth that
> battery size is what's important?

Dumbass. A small battery will always reach the 500 charge cycles sooner.

> Run time is what matters, and it doesn't matter whether you get it by
> large battery and with average energy efficiency or small battery with
> better than average energy efficiency.

The smaller the battery, the sooner its life-ending charge cycling occurs.