I dared you to post that information on the android ng
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Tom Elam wrote:
Have you ever admitted that Samsung's OS updates are a scam?
Why are you snipping context? You very loudly expressed on the Android ng
how you cannot do that here. lol.
CrudeSausage wrote:
What part of this accurate summary are you claiming is an "empty promise"? >>>
iPhone 15(+) === Minimum 5 years from the first supply date
Which is and was respected. An iPhone user can expect to continue
receiving updates up to seven years after release.
Hi Crude Sausage,
One of my goals on this ng is to face your propaganda with actual facts.
The fact you really *believe* that propaganda is a problem, CrudeSausage.
FACT:
6.99 years of full support happened once in the entire history of Apple.
The average is 5.01 years for full iPhone support.
The fact you really *believe* otherwise is a problem, CrudeSausage.
Your propaganda-based belief system calls your credibility into question.
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops >>I have no idea whether Google actually provides the updates for seven
years or not. However, being the owner of two Android TVs whose
interface is so awful that I just connected an AppleTV to one of them
instead (I already had the unit, my wife would rather suffer than spend
another $200 on a new AppleTV), I don't think I'd want to find out.
Your credibility is in question since you already spewed propaganda above.
FACT:
Google is legally obligated to supply "security updates" for 7 years
on the Pixel 8 and up, where at least Google defines what an update is.
1. Pixel updates include all issues listed in the corresponding
month's Android Security Bulletin.
2. Google also includes Pixel-specific patches not in the ASB,
grouped by subsystem (modem, baseband, bootloader, GPU, etc.).
3. Each CVE entry includes severity, type, subsystem, and references
to AOSP changes when applicable .
Galaxy S(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
He is suggesting that Samsung is _not_ providing those updates despite
promising them. My experience with Android in general is that he is
probably telling the truth. This is empty promise I am referring to.
Again and again you are desperate to feed us made-up propaganda.
Your propaganda works fine on most Apple users but it won't work on me.
FACT:
Samsung is legally obligated to supply "security updates" for 7 years
on the S series from the 24 & up where at least Samsung defines what an update is.
1. Samsung updates all CVEs from the Android Security Bulletin
2. Samsung-specific SVEs (Knox, One UI, Exynos, Samsung services)
3. Plus chipset-vendor CVEs when applicable
All prioritized by severity, with Critical and High addressed first.
Chris wrote:
I dared you to post that information on the android ng
Hi Chris,
You are desperate to attack me via your incessant whataboutism insults.
This thread is about proof that Apple batteries are made cheaply.
CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-15 6:27 p.m., badgolferman wrote:
Tom Elam <[email protected]> wrote:
Have you ever admitted that Samsung's OS updates are a scam?
Wait, isn¢t this an Apple product newsgroup?
He's merely pointing out what many of us have known for a while: Samsung
makes empty promises in the hope of fooling potential iPhone or iPad
switchers.
What part of this accurate summary are you claiming is an "empty promise"?
iPhone 15(+) === Minimum 5 years from the first supply date
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops
Galaxy S(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
Chris wrote:
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Tom Elam wrote:
Have you ever admitted that Samsung's OS updates are a scam?
Why are you snipping context? You very loudly expressed on the Android ng
how you cannot do that here. lol.
Hi Chris,
Stop it with the incessant whataboutism ad hominem personal attacks, Chris.
This thread is about documented proof Apple purposefully cheapens out on iPhone battery-related technology,
Years ago I reported that Apple puts purposefully cheap components in their crappy iPhone batteries, but iPhone enthusiasts have denied that for years.
Kuo says that the cost cuts on internal parts will have almost no
noticeable effect on user experience.
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Years ago I reported that Apple puts purposefully cheap components in their >> crappy iPhone batteries, but iPhone enthusiasts have denied that for years. >>
I doubt this happened. I suspect tube only just found it now and want to claim it six years later.
Why do you even think it's relevant?
Kuo says that the cost cuts on internal parts will have almost no
noticeable effect on user experience.
So a nothing burger. Apple was simply optimising its supply chain. Just
like any other multi-national global entity would do when updating the product line.
Despite years of attempts, you have yet to prove iphone batteries are "crappy". Has Apple changed out some components? Yes. Are iphone batteries smaller than some competitors? Yes. Do either "prove" that the batteries
are crap? Nope.
I have a $30 MacBook Air from 2013 who has about 950 battery cycles. Shockingly enough, it still holds a charge, and the battery hasn't
inflated. I have yet to see a PC whose battery lasted that long and
didn't turn into a potential weapon to be used by low-IQ Haitian street
gang members.
This thread is about documented proof Apple purposefully cheapens out on
iPhone battery-related technology,
There's no "proof" here. It's a six year old story which may or may not be accurate.
One of my goals on this ng is to face your propaganda with actual facts.
The fact you really *believe* that propaganda is a problem, CrudeSausage.
It's not propagada, it's experience. Android's been around for decades
now. We have had a long time to test Google and the manufacturers using
its operating system on our mobile devices. In every possible way, the product has been disappointing compared to what Apple has produced.
FACT:
6.99 years of full support happened once in the entire history of Apple.
The average is 5.01 years for full iPhone support.
This is no one's experience. Just about everyone who has a device that
is seven years-old is able to continue receiving updates, and it has
been this way for a long time.
The fact you really *believe* otherwise is a problem, CrudeSausage.
Your propaganda-based belief system calls your credibility into question.
The fact that you are telling me that I should be doubting the veracity
of my own experience makes you sound like someone with a serious desire
for a deserved beating.
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops >>>I have no idea whether Google actually provides the updates for seven
years or not. However, being the owner of two Android TVs whose
interface is so awful that I just connected an AppleTV to one of them
instead (I already had the unit, my wife would rather suffer than spend
another $200 on a new AppleTV), I don't think I'd want to find out.
Your credibility is in question since you already spewed propaganda above.
What propaganda? I mentioned that AndroidTV has been absolute shite for
me. This is, once again, experience. I also made it clear that I have no idea how well Google supports its devices since I never bothered to buy
one. By the time they released the Pixel, I was already disheartened
with Android.
FACT:
Google is legally obligated to supply "security updates" for 7 years
on the Pixel 8 and up, where at least Google defines what an update is.
1. Pixel updates include all issues listed in the corresponding
month's Android Security Bulletin.
2. Google also includes Pixel-specific patches not in the ASB,
grouped by subsystem (modem, baseband, bootloader, GPU, etc.).
3. Each CVE entry includes severity, type, subsystem, and references
to AOSP changes when applicable .
Galaxy S(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
That might be true, and I don't really care.
He is suggesting that Samsung is _not_ providing those updates despite
promising them. My experience with Android in general is that he is
probably telling the truth. This is empty promise I am referring to.
Again and again you are desperate to feed us made-up propaganda.
Your propaganda works fine on most Apple users but it won't work on me.
Do you understand the meaning of "probably?"
FACT:
Samsung is legally obligated to supply "security updates" for 7 years
on the S series from the 24 & up where at least Samsung defines what an
update is.
1. Samsung updates all CVEs from the Android Security Bulletin
2. Samsung-specific SVEs (Knox, One UI, Exynos, Samsung services)
3. Plus chipset-vendor CVEs when applicable
All prioritized by severity, with Critical and High addressed first.
I'll finish off by stating that while the company is obligated and
probably does provide the updates, my experience with Android has always been that the updates don't come through to the user because the cell
phone provider doesn't pass the update along or the server only deploys
to this series of serial numbers and on and on. People are often aware
that updates exist, but the users either never benefit from them or have
to jump through hoops and potentially brick their device to get them.
How is this better than getting a device from a company who deploys the updates for its mobile hardware in the same fashion that it does its
desktop hardware? We can count on Apple to provide updates and to do a
good job explaining why they didn't. With the competition, you're often
left wondering why you haven't gotten critical security updates for the
last two or three years.
Enjoy your clunky Android device, either way. Everyone else here has
seen your grass and doesn't like the amount of weeds in it.
What part of this accurate summary are you claiming is an "empty promise"? >>
iPhone 15(+) === Minimum 5 years from the first supply date
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops
Galaxy S(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
Galaxy? Only for selected models, and sometimes over a year after an
Android OS version update.
Chris wrote:
This thread is about documented proof Apple purposefully cheapens out on >>> iPhone battery-related technology,
There's no "proof" here. It's a six year old story which may or may not be >> accurate.
Do you have anyone more compelling outside of Apple than Ming-Chi Kuo?
Tom Elam wrote:
What part of this accurate summary are you claiming is an "empty promise"? >>>
iPhone 15(+) === Minimum 5 years from the first supply date
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops >>> Galaxy S(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
Galaxy? Only for selected models, and sometimes over a year after an
Android OS version update.
Hi Tom,
Let me give you just a little bit of heart-felt advice, Tom Elam. OK?
If you can't answer the question, then attacking the person who asked the question is not going to go over well with educated intelligent people.
What part of this accurate summary are you claiming is an "empty promise"?
iPhone 15(+) === Minimum 5 years from the first supply date
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops
Galaxy S(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Years ago I reported that Apple puts purposefully cheap components in their >> crappy iPhone batteries, but iPhone enthusiasts have denied that for years. >>
I doubt this happened. I suspect tube only just found it now and want to claim it six years later.
Why do you even think it's relevant?
Kuo says that the cost cuts on internal parts will have almost no
noticeable effect on user experience.
So a nothing burger. Apple was simply optimising its supply chain. Just
like any other multi-national global entity would do when updating the product line.
Despite years of attempts, you have yet to prove iphone batteries are "crappy". Has Apple changed out some components? Yes. Are iphone batteries smaller than some competitors? Yes. Do either "prove" that the batteries
are crap? Nope.
On 2026-04-16 1:41 p.m., Chris wrote:
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Years ago I reported that Apple puts purposefully cheap components in their >>> crappy iPhone batteries, but iPhone enthusiasts have denied that for years. >>>
I doubt this happened. I suspect tube only just found it now and want to
claim it six years later.
Why do you even think it's relevant?
Kuo says that the cost cuts on internal parts will have almost no
noticeable effect on user experience.
So a nothing burger. Apple was simply optimising its supply chain. Just
like any other multi-national global entity would do when updating the
product line.
Despite years of attempts, you have yet to prove iphone batteries are
"crappy". Has Apple changed out some components? Yes. Are iphone batteries >> smaller than some competitors? Yes. Do either "prove" that the batteries
are crap? Nope.
The fact that Apple uses smaller batteries is irrelevant since its
hardware manages to last longer despite the small size. I have a
Zephyrus G14 with a battery that holds 76 Wh (or whatever the measure
is). Meanwhile, this MacBook Air M4 has 54 Wh or so. I get good battery
life from the G14 at around 8 hours with a 80% charge, but the M4 gets double with a smaller battery. Is it because the ARM platform is more efficient? Yes. Is it because Apple optimized the operating system to
the specific hardware? Absolutely. Is it that Apple is using higher
quality metal (lithium-polymer vs lithium-ion)? I'm sure that it plays a role. The idea that it uses _worse_ batteries is foreign to me. I'm sure that if you replaced the battery Apple gave you by default with some $30
one you got from Chink-O-Matic, you'll be disappointed by the quality of what was shipped to you. However, Apple's own stuff is stellar.
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Chris wrote:
This thread is about documented proof Apple purposefully cheapens out on >>>> iPhone battery-related technology,
There's no "proof" here. It's a six year old story which may or may not be >>> accurate.
Do you have anyone more compelling outside of Apple than Ming-Chi Kuo?
It wouldn't matter if I did. Neither of us would have bona fide "proof".
Chris wrote:
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Chris wrote:
This thread is about documented proof Apple purposefully cheapens out on >>>>> iPhone battery-related technology,
There's no "proof" here. It's a six year old story which may or may not be >>>> accurate.
Do you have anyone more compelling outside of Apple than Ming-Chi Kuo?
It wouldn't matter if I did. Neither of us would have bona fide "proof".
The point, Chris, is we discussed this evidence years ago, and as far as anyone can tell, not a single one of you understood a word Kuo told us.
It's the same with the facts we've discussed for years about how Apple patches releases, where only one person (-hh) has ever shown any comprehension that Apple only fully patches only the latest major release.
I need to be careful here, as I'm trying to be nice, but if it took me that long to learn something that simple, I would never have made it to college.
Chris wrote:
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Years ago I reported that Apple puts purposefully cheap components in their >>> crappy iPhone batteries, but iPhone enthusiasts have denied that for years.
I doubt this happened. I suspect tube only just found it now and want to
claim it six years later.
Why do you even think it's relevant?
The reason it's relevant is you Apple posters deny everything about Apple, and, worse, you can't learn even though you've been informed for 6 years.
It's the same with proving many years ago how Apple supports releases.
Only one Apple poster (-hh) has shown any understanding of those facts.
What's no longer shocking is you're incapable of comprehending facts.
That's why it's still relevant that Ming-Chi Kuo gave us evidence of them.
Kuo says that the cost cuts on internal parts will have almost no
noticeable effect on user experience.
So a nothing burger. Apple was simply optimising its supply chain. Just
like any other multi-national global entity would do when updating the
product line.
Despite years of attempts, you have yet to prove iphone batteries are
"crappy". Has Apple changed out some components? Yes. Are iphone batteries >> smaller than some competitors? Yes. Do either "prove" that the batteries
are crap? Nope.
Stop it Chris.
You, yourself, proved iPhone batteries have low capacity.
So stop telling me that you *hate* Apple for their low-capacity batteries.
I get it you hate that Apple uses crappy batteries, but when you yourself listed the capacities (which we both confirmed) you can't have it both way.
Either iPhone battery capacity is what Apple says it is, or you're calling Apple liars.
Choose one.
CrudeSausage wrote:
I have a $30 MacBook Air from 2013 who has about 950 battery cycles.
Shockingly enough, it still holds a charge, and the battery hasn't
inflated. I have yet to see a PC whose battery lasted that long and
didn't turn into a potential weapon to be used by low-IQ Haitian street
gang members.
That's anecdotal experience, for sure.
Your experience is just as valid as mine is, where my 2021 Android phone
only needs charging once every few days, and even then, for an hour or two.
The point is that Apple puts crappy battery components into the iPhone.
And specifically, since Apple posters deny that fact, Kuo provided evidence (since he's not just some random blogger but very in touch with Apple).
CrudeSausage wrote:
One of my goals on this ng is to face your propaganda with actual facts. >>> The fact you really *believe* that propaganda is a problem, CrudeSausage. >>It's not propagada, it's experience. Android's been around for decades
now. We have had a long time to test Google and the manufacturers using
its operating system on our mobile devices. In every possible way, the
product has been disappointing compared to what Apple has produced.
Hi CrudeSausage,
Nobody on this newsgroup (other than -hh) understands how Apple patches.
By your definition, WinXP was supported for 17 years, 6 months, 19 days.
We're talking FULL support here.
Not a random CVE fixed decades after full support ended.
It's strange that only this Apple newsgroup has trouble with these facts.
a. Longest full iOS support: 6.99 years (iPhone XS / XS Max)
b. Shortest full iOS support: 2.37 years (iPhone 3G)
c. Average full iOS support: 5.10 years (over 20 models)
What you can "expect" from Apple for full support is what Apple documents.
iPhone 15(+) === Minimum 5 years from the first supply date
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops
Galaxy S(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
FACT:
6.99 years of full support happened once in the entire history of Apple. >>> The average is 5.01 years for full iPhone support.
This is no one's experience. Just about everyone who has a device that
is seven years-old is able to continue receiving updates, and it has
been this way for a long time.
It's no longer shocking how little you comprehend the basic facts.
a. Longest full iOS support: 6.99 years (iPhone XS / XS Max)
b. Shortest full iOS support: 2.37 years (iPhone 3G)
c. Average full iOS support: 5.10 years (over 20 models)
Nobody who wants to be taken seriously will dispute the facts.
The fact you really *believe* otherwise is a problem, CrudeSausage.The fact that you are telling me that I should be doubting the veracity
Your propaganda-based belief system calls your credibility into question. >>
of my own experience makes you sound like someone with a serious desire
for a deserved beating.
It's hard for me to respond to you because what you call your "experience"
is the fact that you have no idea there is a difference between full
support, and fixing a random bug decades after full support has ended.
<https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=KB4500331>
Put it this way...
By your "experience" WinXP was 'supported' for 17 years,6 months & 19 days.
What propaganda? I mentioned that AndroidTV has been absolute shite forPixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops
I have no idea whether Google actually provides the updates for seven
years or not. However, being the owner of two Android TVs whose
interface is so awful that I just connected an AppleTV to one of them
instead (I already had the unit, my wife would rather suffer than spend >>>> another $200 on a new AppleTV), I don't think I'd want to find out.
Your credibility is in question since you already spewed propaganda above. >>
me. This is, once again, experience. I also made it clear that I have no
idea how well Google supports its devices since I never bothered to buy
one. By the time they released the Pixel, I was already disheartened
with Android.
I wonder if you realize that you have never stated a single credible fact. And yet, you expect us to believe your fabricated Android "experiences"?
Let me give you some advice, if I may...
Before you palm off your completely absurdly fabricated "experience" on us, try to show at least an understanding of the basic facts about CVE fixes.
He is suggesting that Samsung is _not_ providing those updates despite >>>> promising them. My experience with Android in general is that he is
probably telling the truth. This is empty promise I am referring to.
Again and again you are desperate to feed us made-up propaganda.
Your propaganda works fine on most Apple users but it won't work on me.
Do you understand the meaning of "probably?"
I understand that the UK letters are written legally binding promises.
Do you?
iPhone 15(+) === Minimum 5 years from the first supply date
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops
Galaxy S(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
Note that the average for full support for iPhones has been 5.01 years.
Which means Apple is simply promising a minimum of their current avg.
Big deal.
At least Samsung and Google stepped up to the plate at 7 years.
FACT:
Samsung is legally obligated to supply "security updates" for 7 years
on the S series from the 24 & up where at least Samsung defines what an
update is.
1. Samsung updates all CVEs from the Android Security Bulletin
2. Samsung-specific SVEs (Knox, One UI, Exynos, Samsung services)
3. Plus chipset-vendor CVEs when applicable
All prioritized by severity, with Critical and High addressed first.
I'll finish off by stating that while the company is obligated and
probably does provide the updates, my experience with Android has always
been that the updates don't come through to the user because the cell
phone provider doesn't pass the update along or the server only deploys
to this series of serial numbers and on and on. People are often aware
that updates exist, but the users either never benefit from them or have
to jump through hoops and potentially brick their device to get them.
How is this better than getting a device from a company who deploys the
updates for its mobile hardware in the same fashion that it does its
desktop hardware? We can count on Apple to provide updates and to do a
good job explaining why they didn't. With the competition, you're often
left wondering why you haven't gotten critical security updates for the
last two or three years.
Enjoy your clunky Android device, either way. Everyone else here has
seen your grass and doesn't like the amount of weeds in it.
Thank you for telling me to enjoy my Android where, as you are well aware, there is only one functionality on iOS not already (long ago!) on Android.
As for the "clunky Android", even a $39.99 Android has more functionality than any iPhone ever sold, in addition, typically, toi better batteries.
Which was the point, after all.
Apple puts crappy batteries in the iPhone.
CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-16 1:41 p.m., Chris wrote:
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Years ago I reported that Apple puts purposefully cheap components in their
crappy iPhone batteries, but iPhone enthusiasts have denied that for years.
I doubt this happened. I suspect tube only just found it now and want to >>> claim it six years later.
Why do you even think it's relevant?
Kuo says that the cost cuts on internal parts will have almost no
noticeable effect on user experience.
So a nothing burger. Apple was simply optimising its supply chain. Just
like any other multi-national global entity would do when updating the
product line.
Despite years of attempts, you have yet to prove iphone batteries are
"crappy". Has Apple changed out some components? Yes. Are iphone batteries >>> smaller than some competitors? Yes. Do either "prove" that the batteries >>> are crap? Nope.
The fact that Apple uses smaller batteries is irrelevant since its
hardware manages to last longer despite the small size. I have a
Zephyrus G14 with a battery that holds 76 Wh (or whatever the measure
is). Meanwhile, this MacBook Air M4 has 54 Wh or so. I get good battery
life from the G14 at around 8 hours with a 80% charge, but the M4 gets
double with a smaller battery. Is it because the ARM platform is more
efficient? Yes. Is it because Apple optimized the operating system to
the specific hardware? Absolutely. Is it that Apple is using higher
quality metal (lithium-polymer vs lithium-ion)? I'm sure that it plays a
role. The idea that it uses _worse_ batteries is foreign to me. I'm sure
that if you replaced the battery Apple gave you by default with some $30
one you got from Chink-O-Matic, you'll be disappointed by the quality of
what was shipped to you. However, Apple's own stuff is stellar.
Either iPhone battery capacity is what Apple says it is, or you're calling Apple liars.
Choose one.
top it Chris.
You, yourself, proved iPhone batteries have low capacity.
So stop telling me that you*hate* Apple for their low-capacity batteries.
CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-16 1:41 p.m., Chris wrote:
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Years ago I reported that Apple puts purposefully cheap components in their
crappy iPhone batteries, but iPhone enthusiasts have denied that for years.
I doubt this happened. I suspect tube only just found it now and want to >>> claim it six years later.
Why do you even think it's relevant?
Kuo says that the cost cuts on internal parts will have almost no
noticeable effect on user experience.
So a nothing burger. Apple was simply optimising its supply chain. Just
like any other multi-national global entity would do when updating the
product line.
Despite years of attempts, you have yet to prove iphone batteries are
"crappy". Has Apple changed out some components? Yes. Are iphone batteries >>> smaller than some competitors? Yes. Do either "prove" that the batteries >>> are crap? Nope.
The fact that Apple uses smaller batteries is irrelevant since its
hardware manages to last longer despite the small size. I have a
Zephyrus G14 with a battery that holds 76 Wh (or whatever the measure
is). Meanwhile, this MacBook Air M4 has 54 Wh or so. I get good battery
life from the G14 at around 8 hours with a 80% charge, but the M4 gets
double with a smaller battery. Is it because the ARM platform is more
efficient? Yes. Is it because Apple optimized the operating system to
the specific hardware? Absolutely. Is it that Apple is using higher
quality metal (lithium-polymer vs lithium-ion)? I'm sure that it plays a
role. The idea that it uses _worse_ batteries is foreign to me. I'm sure
that if you replaced the battery Apple gave you by default with some $30
one you got from Chink-O-Matic, you'll be disappointed by the quality of
what was shipped to you. However, Apple's own stuff is stellar.
Either iPhone battery capacity is what Apple says it is, or you're calling Apple liars.
Choose one.
That's anecdotal experience, for sure.
It is no less valid than the experiences of the people cited by others
here who read those official statements from Samsung and other Android manufacturers, yet are still waiting for critical updates because the companies say one thing but do another.
Your experience is just as valid as mine is, where my 2021 Android phone
only needs charging once every few days, and even then, for an hour or two.
I don't believe you. Even on new phones with ARM chips, reviewers have
no choice but to admit that the best Android phones will last a day _at best_. With a 2021 phone, unless you do absolutely nothing on it, you
will not get through the day.
The point is that Apple puts crappy battery components into the iPhone.
Provide evidence. There is otherwise no valid reason to expect that what Apple uses is any worse than what the Android manufacturers do.
And specifically, since Apple posters deny that fact, Kuo provided evidence >> (since he's not just some random blogger but very in touch with Apple).
I was not here when this evidence was posted, but since you are so well acquainted with it, I am sure that you will hastily provide a link
showing this evidence.
The point, Chris, is we discussed this evidence years ago, and as far as
anyone can tell, not a single one of you understood a word Kuo told us.
You mean, no-one agrees with you on your interpretation of the alleged finding.
It's the same with the facts we've discussed for years about how Apple
patches releases, where only one person (-hh) has ever shown any
comprehension that Apple only fully patches only the latest major release.
You mean, only one person agrees with your interpretation of reality.
The facts speak for themselves. You never acknowledge them. I wonder why? https://imgshare.cc/a08v04ce
I need to be careful here, as I'm trying to be nice, but if it took me that >> long to learn something that simple, I would never have made it to college.
I mean, it took you about three years to acknowledge that battery
efficiency matters more than battery size. And then promptly forgot about
it again...
It's strange that only this Apple newsgroup has trouble with these facts.
a. Longest full iOS support: 6.99 years (iPhone XS / XS Max)
b. Shortest full iOS support: 2.37 years (iPhone 3G)
c. Average full iOS support: 5.10 years (over 20 models)
Oh, I have no doubt that you are correct about the 3G support. However,
that device was outdated even a year after its release. As much as I
liked mine, it very quickly got very slow. I can imagine why Apple was
ready to move on.
What you can "expect" from Apple for full support is what Apple documents. >> iPhone 15(+) === Minimum 5 years from the first supply date
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops
Galaxy S(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
For the time being, Apple is delivering on its promise.
Four years into my purchase of the 13, I still get regular updates.
The phone also
performs admirably whereas every Android I've owned, this much time
after release, became a slow and unbearable mess.
I've already said that
I have no idea if Google really supports their Pixels for that long, but
I have no reason to doubt them.
With either them or Samsung though, I
don't care: Android just sucks.
I hated it when it was Android 2.x, I
hate it when it was Android 7.x and I absolutely despite whatever
version my Android TVs use.
The phones left me high and dry with updates
in 2021, and my televisions, if I don't use an AppleTV and circumvent
the interface altogether, would have been unbearable to use prompting a
new television purchase. The experience is _that_ bad.
With that in mind, I don't care what these companies *say* anymore; what they deliver is rotten.
Nobody who wants to be taken seriously will dispute the facts.
Will your repetition of the same information remedy my terrible
experience with Android?
It doesn't even matter how long the
manufacturer will support the product if it's already slower than
molasses and crashing on you during the second year. Apple users benefit from seven years, but even if they didn't, they'd still buy an Apple
device to replace their previous Apple device because the experience is stellar.
Put it this way...
By your "experience" WinXP was 'supported' for 17 years,6 months & 19 days.
So, you're admitting that even Microsoft will fix a bug after support
has ended, but Android won't. Thanks for that.
Before you palm off your completely absurdly fabricated "experience" on us, >> try to show at least an understanding of the basic facts about CVE fixes.
I'll do so when you stop posting impertinent information about Android devices to counter the fact that Apple users actually enjoy what they
buy and do, in fact, get a full seven years of support in practise
whereas Android manufacturers only deliver more than two years in _theory_.
Big deal.
At least Samsung and Google stepped up to the plate at 7 years.
So Android users with six-year-old devices should be expecting an update
any day now. Good for them that their manufacturer might eventually
update their Android OS 9.0 with 9.0.1. As long as they continue eating their prayers and saying their vitamins, or something of the sort.
Apple puts crappy batteries in the iPhone.
Meanwhile, I still don't believe you because even my 13-year-old $30
MacBook Air starts, holds a charge and allows you to work for about two hours on its original battery.
But you're right, maybe they should invest in some of those inflatable batteries that are all the rage nowadays in Android devices and a
variety of expensive Razer laptops.
Either iPhone battery capacity is what Apple says it is, or you're calling >> Apple liars.
Choose one.
I have no reason to doubt Apple.
Either iPhone battery capacity is what Apple says it is, or you're calling >> Apple liars.
Choose one.
My Dell 2022 XPS had a ~100 Wh battery and ran 3-4 hours on it. My 2016
13" M4 MacBook Air has a ~55 Wh battery and gets up to 14 hours from it. Capacity is not and indication of quality or run-time.
Get over it dumbass.
On 4/16/26 4:40 PM, Maria Sophia wrote:
top it Chris.
You, yourself, proved iPhone batteries have low capacity.
So stop telling me that you*hate* Apple for their low-capacity batteries.
Capacity is not equal to quality.
Why do you even think it's relevant?
The reason it's relevant is you Apple posters deny everything about Apple, >> and, worse, you can't learn even though you've been informed for 6 years.
I'm denying that you *reported* in this six years ago. Not the claims the report makes itself.
It's the same with proving many years ago how Apple supports releases.
You've proved nothing beyond your incapacity to absorb new information.
Only one Apple poster (-hh) has shown any understanding of those facts.
What's no longer shocking is you're incapable of comprehending facts.
That's why it's still relevant that Ming-Chi Kuo gave us evidence of them.
Kuo revels in rumour not facts.
You, yourself, proved iPhone batteries have low capacity.
I literally wrote just that, above.
So stop telling me that you *hate* Apple for their low-capacity batteries.
I do not. I do like their high efficiency batteries.
Do you know who has really inefficient batteries? Samsung. Motorola is amongst the best, but I have a theory about that.
I get it you hate that Apple uses crappy batteries, but when you yourself
listed the capacities (which we both confirmed) you can't have it both way.
I did not list their capacities. I simply corrected your tedious claim that your 5 yo samsung has a better [sic] battery than any iphone ever.
Either iPhone battery capacity is what Apple says it is, or you're calling >> Apple liars.
Choose one.
That's not in question.
Chris wrote:
I'm denying that you *reported* in this six years ago. Not the claims theWhy do you even think it's relevant?
The reason it's relevant is you Apple posters deny everything about Apple, >>> and, worse, you can't learn even though you've been informed for 6 years. >>
report makes itself.
Chris,
May I give you some adult advice please? Seriously. Man to man.
Just because you can't defend against facts in your attempt to defend Apple to the death, no matter what, don't think that denying all facts will work.
Denying all facts will work with many others on this Apple ng.
But denying all facts you simply don't like won't work with smart people.
Sep 4, 2018
*44% of iPhone users pine for expandable storage while 75% want longer battery life*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/FR0c0d3IFLY/m/b5MgLzIeBgAJ>
That's only one hit of many.
Chris wrote:
The facts speak for themselves. You never acknowledge them. I wonder why?
https://imgshare.cc/a08v04ce
I have acknowledged many times that the iPhone battery capacity is crap.
I need to be careful here, as I'm trying to be nice, but if it took me that >>> long to learn something that simple, I would never have made it to college. >>I mean, it took you about three years to acknowledge that battery
efficiency matters more than battery size. And then promptly forgot about
it again...
Never forget that Apple's 9-page description of every iPhone for years has used the word "efficiency" a dozen times, and yet, there was no efficiency.
On 4/16/26 4:40 PM, Maria Sophia wrote:
top it Chris.
You, yourself, proved iPhone batteries have low capacity.
So stop telling me that you*hate* Apple for their low-capacity batteries.
Capacity is not equal to quality.
On 4/16/26 4:42 PM, Maria Sophia wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-04-16 1:41 p.m., Chris wrote:
Maria Sophia <[email protected]> wrote:
Years ago I reported that Apple puts purposefully cheap components
in their
crappy iPhone batteries, but iPhone enthusiasts have denied that
for years.
I doubt this happened. I suspect tube only just found it now and
want to
claim it six years later.
Why do you even think it's relevant?
Kuo says that the cost cuts on internal parts will have almost no
noticeable effect on user experience.
So a nothing burger. Apple was simply optimising its supply chain. Just >>>> like any other multi-national global entity would do when updating the >>>> product line.
Despite years of attempts, you have yet to prove iphone batteries are
"crappy". Has Apple changed out some components? Yes. Are iphone
batteries
smaller than some competitors? Yes. Do either "prove" that the
batteries
are crap? Nope.
The fact that Apple uses smaller batteries is irrelevant since its
hardware manages to last longer despite the small size. I have a
Zephyrus G14 with a battery that holds 76 Wh (or whatever the measure
is). Meanwhile, this MacBook Air M4 has 54 Wh or so. I get good battery
life from the G14 at around 8 hours with a 80% charge, but the M4 gets
double with a smaller battery. Is it because the ARM platform is more
efficient? Yes. Is it because Apple optimized the operating system to
the specific hardware? Absolutely. Is it that Apple is using higher
quality metal (lithium-polymer vs lithium-ion)? I'm sure that it plays a >>> role. The idea that it uses _worse_ batteries is foreign to me. I'm sure >>> that if you replaced the battery Apple gave you by default with some $30 >>> one you got from Chink-O-Matic, you'll be disappointed by the quality of >>> what was shipped to you. However, Apple's own stuff is stellar.
Either iPhone battery capacity is what Apple says it is, or you're
calling
Apple liars.
Choose one.
My Dell 2022 XPS had a ~100 Wh battery and ran 3-4 hours on it. My 2016
13" M4 MacBook Air has a ~55 Wh battery and gets up to 14 hours from it. Capacity is not and indication of quality or run-time.
Get over it dumbass.
CrudeSausage wrote:
That's anecdotal experience, for sure.
It is no less valid than the experiences of the people cited by others
here who read those official statements from Samsung and other Android
manufacturers, yet are still waiting for critical updates because the
companies say one thing but do another.
Hi Crude Sausage,
I guess you didn't get my point
CrudeSausage wrote:
It's strange that only this Apple newsgroup has trouble with these facts. >>> a. Longest full iOS support: 6.99 years (iPhone XS / XS Max)
b. Shortest full iOS support: 2.37 years (iPhone 3G)
c. Average full iOS support: 5.10 years (over 20 models)
Oh, I have no doubt that you are correct about the 3G support. However,
that device was outdated even a year after its release. As much as I
liked mine, it very quickly got very slow. I can imagine why Apple was
ready to move on.
Actually, since I speak facts, I do agree that we can cherry pick (as Chris is desperate to do) in order to claim longer averages, but to your point of "expecting" 7 years, that's absurd simply because only one iPhone ever did.
CrudeSausage wrote:
Either iPhone battery capacity is what Apple says it is, or you're calling >>> Apple liars.
Choose one.
I have no reason to doubt Apple.
Hi Crude Sausage,
Now you're being reasonable.
I never disagree with any logically sensible statement.
I agree with you.
Based on Apple's own specs, only one iPhone in Apple's entire history has ever broken the "manual choke" 5AH barrier Android's surpassed in 2014.
CrudeSausage wrote:
It's strange that only this Apple newsgroup has trouble with these facts. >>> a. Longest full iOS support: 6.99 years (iPhone XS / XS Max)
b. Shortest full iOS support: 2.37 years (iPhone 3G)
c. Average full iOS support: 5.10 years (over 20 models)
Oh, I have no doubt that you are correct about the 3G support. However,
that device was outdated even a year after its release. As much as I
liked mine, it very quickly got very slow. I can imagine why Apple was
ready to move on.
Actually, since I speak facts, I do agree that we can cherry pick (as Chris is desperate to do)
in order to claim longer averages, but to your point of
"expecting" 7 years, that's absurd simply because only one iPhone ever did.
Even if Chris cherry picks, the average is limited to between 5 & 7 years.
What you can "expect" from Apple for full support is what Apple documents. >>> iPhone 15(+) === Minimum 5 years from the first supply date
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops
Galaxy S(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
For the time being, Apple is delivering on its promise.
I wonder if you noticed how weak Apple's written letter is compared to that of both Google and Samsung? Apple's promise is almost pure meaningless.
Look at the differences:
iPhone 15(+) === Minimum 5 years from the first supply date
Pixel 8(+) === 7 years of Security Updates, OS Updates & Feature Drops
Galaxy S24(+) === 7 years of Security Updates & Android OS Upgrades
How many OS updates does Apple promise compared to Google/Samsung?
Four years into my purchase of the 13, I still get regular updates.
FACT:
The iPhone 13 debuted on September 24, 2021 with a comically laughable
3.2 Ah battery capacity for the standard iPhone 13 model.
2022 -> major update #1
2023 -> major update #2
2024 -> major update #3
2025 -> major update #4
2026 -> major update #5 (final expected perhaps)
What's going to kill that iPhone is the laughably puny battery capacity.
The phone also
performs admirably whereas every Android I've owned, this much time
after release, became a slow and unbearable mess.
I wonder if it sank in yet that even a $39.99 Android has far more app functionality than any iPhone ever sold in Apple's entire history...
I've already said that
I have no idea if Google really supports their Pixels for that long, but
I have no reason to doubt them.
We have to trust that even Apple will follow the UK law
With either them or Samsung though, I
don't care: Android just sucks.
This thread is about batteries.
Specifically that iPhone batteries suck.
Do the batteries in the Android iPhone competition suck?
I hated it when it was Android 2.x, I
hate it when it was Android 7.x and I absolutely despite whatever
version my Android TVs use.
It has been a loooooooooooooooooooooooong time since Android 7 debuted.
The phones left me high and dry with updates
in 2021, and my televisions, if I don't use an AppleTV and circumvent
the interface altogether, would have been unbearable to use prompting a
new television purchase. The experience is _that_ bad.
No doubt about it Android has made great strides since Android 7.
With that in mind, I don't care what these companies *say* anymore; what
they deliver is rotten.
I agree with you that no matter what Apple says, what they deliver is
rotten given the absurdly laughably puny battery capacities in iPhones.
Nobody who wants to be taken seriously will dispute the facts.
Will your repetition of the same information remedy my terrible
experience with Android?
My first car was a used 1955 Volkswagen Beetle with a manual choke. Paradoxically, my first airplane also had a manual choke, years later.
Will the experience of a modern vehicle remedy my terrible experiences?
It doesn't even matter how long the
manufacturer will support the product if it's already slower than
molasses and crashing on you during the second year. Apple users benefit
from seven years, but even if they didn't, they'd still buy an Apple
device to replace their previous Apple device because the experience is
stellar.
Why do you insist on spouting bullshit about the 7 years?
What's with that?
You've been shown the proof that the average is 5.01 years.
Nobody disputes that proof.
Just you.
Do you realize how much you are influenced solely by marketing propaganda? Facts can't penetrate.
Put it this way...So, you're admitting that even Microsoft will fix a bug after support
By your "experience" WinXP was 'supported' for 17 years,6 months & 19 days. >>
has ended, but Android won't. Thanks for that.
Huh?
WTF?
Nobody said that.
Your brain.
It's broken.
Fix it.
Before you palm off your completely absurdly fabricated "experience" on us, >>> try to show at least an understanding of the basic facts about CVE fixes. >>I'll do so when you stop posting impertinent information about Android
devices to counter the fact that Apple users actually enjoy what they
buy and do, in fact, get a full seven years of support in practise
whereas Android manufacturers only deliver more than two years in _theory_.
First off, this is a thread about crappy iPhone batteries.
I didn't bring up Android.
Android was brought up because people like you *hate* Apple batteries.
You're *desperate* to change the subject away from iPhone crappy batteries.
Big deal.
At least Samsung and Google stepped up to the plate at 7 years.
So Android users with six-year-old devices should be expecting an update
any day now. Good for them that their manufacturer might eventually
update their Android OS 9.0 with 9.0.1. As long as they continue eating
their prayers and saying their vitamins, or something of the sort.
Just as they don't make cars with manual chokes anymore, you need to judge the iPhone against its Android completion by today's modern standards.
Historically, iPhone battery capacity has always been crap.
Even today, iPhone battery capacities are still crap.
Well, Chris kindly proved that only one iPhone variant finally broke what Android did in 2014, which is commendable that the iPhone is improving.
Don't you think the fact no iPhone could earn an A in efficiency when the results were first published had an effect on Apple in improving that?
Apple puts crappy batteries in the iPhone.
Meanwhile, I still don't believe you because even my 13-year-old $30
MacBook Air starts, holds a charge and allows you to work for about two
hours on its original battery.
But you're right, maybe they should invest in some of those inflatable
batteries that are all the rage nowadays in Android devices and a
variety of expensive Razer laptops.
The fact remains, only one iPhone in Apple's entire history has ever broken the "manual choke" 5AH barrier that Android phones long ago passed in 2014.
On 2026-04-17 12:10 a.m., Maria Sophia wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
That's anecdotal experience, for sure.
It is no less valid than the experiences of the people cited by others
here who read those official statements from Samsung and other Android
manufacturers, yet are still waiting for critical updates because the
companies say one thing but do another.
Hi Crude Sausage,
I guess you didn't get my point
That's because whatever "point" you claim to make has no link whatsoever
to what you post. I'm not bothering with the rest. I've had enough of
this kind of circus stupidity dealing with Mr. Electricity Snit Michael Glasser Prescott Parasite and Computer Guy for all those years.
< snip repetition >
Capacity is not equal to quality.
Not only that, but higher-capacity batteries on Android practically
never results in longer battery life. After all, Android uses Linux at
the core which is absolute garbage for battery life. Anyone who has a Windows PC and suddenly converted to Linux can tell you that the
expectation that Linux uses less power always results in extreme disappointment no matter what hoops you jump through. As a result, a Mac
or an iPhone with a smaller battery manages to get more than a PC or an Android with a larger battery.
Based on Apple's own specs, only one iPhone in Apple's entire history has
ever broken the "manual choke" 5AH barrier Android's surpassed in 2014.
If the goal is to provide users with 15-hour battery life and you can do
it on a 54wH battery, why would you provide a larger battery and charge
the customer the same amount? That's just terrible business.
Get over it dumbass.
On the PC side, you can at least blame the fact that the platform is
x86-64: powerful but energy hungry. Android and iPhone both use ARM yet
have significantly different life from the same size battery. Either the Android hardware is at fault because the manufacturers don't know what they're doing versus Apple, or the fact that Android uses Linux at the
core causes worse drain. Either way, Apple wins.
Never forget that Apple's 9-page description of every iPhone for years has >> used the word "efficiency" a dozen times, and yet, there was no efficiency.
And don't YOU forget that that document refers to the battery *charger*.
Not the phone and not the battery.
For reference for everyone to see as you never provide the genuine sources: https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/iphone/iPhone_14_PER_Sept2022.pdf
I guess you didn't get my point
That's because whatever "point" you claim to make has no link whatsoever
to what you post. I'm not bothering with the rest. I've had enough of
this kind of circus stupidity dealing with Mr. Electricity Snit Michael Glasser Prescott Parasite and Computer Guy for all those years.
Actually, since I speak facts, I do agree that we can cherry pick (as Chris >> is desperate to do) in order to claim longer averages, but to your point of >> "expecting" 7 years, that's absurd simply because only one iPhone ever did.
Let's take a different example then. The M1 MacBook Air released in 2020
and we are currently in 2026. Does that machine still benefit from
regular updates and upgrades?
Why don't you just fuck off you condescending prick?
Just because you can't defend against facts in your attempt to defend Apple >> to the death, no matter what, don't think that denying all facts will work.
You have no facts. Posting a URL to rumour is not a "fact". Lying about posting it six years ago is a fact.
Denying all facts will work with many others on this Apple ng.
But denying all facts you simply don't like won't work with smart people.
Sep 4, 2018
*44% of iPhone users pine for expandable storage while 75% want longer battery life*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/FR0c0d3IFLY/m/b5MgLzIeBgAJ>
That's only one hit of many.
Well done for proving my suspicions: you never reported this rumour six
years ago. You always state it's so easy to identify your posts so the fact you could find it means it never happened.
You're the one starting this whole topic by simply looking at the iphone X. Which by some fluke (lol!) is the phone with the shortest support of the
last 10 years.
in order to claim longer averages, but to your point of
"expecting" 7 years, that's absurd simply because only one iPhone ever did.
Again lies.
Currently, four models are within 7 year support cycles: XS (Max), XR, SE
2nd gen and 11.
Even if Chris cherry picks, the average is limited to between 5 & 7 years.
The only one cherry-picking and intentionally misrepresenting data is you.
The iPhone 13 debuted on September 24, 2021 with a comically laughable
3.2 Ah battery capacity for the standard iPhone 13 model.
2022 -> major update #1
2023 -> major update #2
2024 -> major update #3
2025 -> major update #4
2026 -> major update #5 (final expected perhaps)
Given the 11 is still fully supported I'd expect the 13 to get at least two more *upgrades*. So will be supported at least into iOS 28.
What's going to kill that iPhone is the laughably puny battery capacity.
Which you've never been able to evidence. Your foot stamping is not proof. lol.
We have to trust that even Apple will follow the UK law
No trust required. We have to go all the way back to the iphone 6
(launchedin 2015) to find a model supported for less than 5 years.
We also know that Samsung and Google have *never* supported av phone for
more 3-4 years.
Given the very obvious evidence, it is quite clear who is the most most trustworthy in terms of future delivery.
With either them or Samsung though, I
don't care: Android just sucks.
This thread is about batteries.
Specifically that iPhone batteries suck.
And there it is. The mask drops.
You've been shown the proof that the average is 5.01 years.
Nobody disputes that proof.
Ahem!
I've actually noticed that in your proof you omitted the 6S, which was famously supported for 7 years. So the actual average is going to be >5.5 years.
Well, Chris kindly proved that only one iPhone variant finally broke what
Android did in 2014, which is commendable that the iPhone is improving.
It's notable the Galaxy S-class base and plus models also don't meet your "good" standard for a battery. lol.
Oh, and we see that the S26 ones are getting worse: https://www.tomsguide.com/phones/samsung-phones/samsung-galaxy-s26-leak-reveals-the-batteries-might-be-worse-than-last-year-heres-how
The fact remains, only one iPhone in Apple's entire history has ever broken >> the "manual choke" 5AH barrier that Android phones long ago passed in 2014.
If you look at the EU rated battery capacity, not a single Samsung meets
that standard either. The max is 4905 mAh.
When are you going to post on the Android ng regarding how crap the Samsung batteries are?
There is a thread for every iPhone model ever sold on the Apple ngs.
They were included in the averages.
Chris wrote:
Never forget that Apple's 9-page description of every iPhone for years has >>> used the word "efficiency" a dozen times, and yet, there was no efficiency. >>And don't YOU forget that that document refers to the battery *charger*.
Not the phone and not the battery.
For reference for everyone to see as you never provide the genuine sources: >> https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/iphone/iPhone_14_PER_Sept2022.pdf
Hi Chris,
It's commendable that you decided to look up facts which we've been discussing on this newsgroup for many years, before outright denying them.
That's progress.
However, that's not the PDF that Apple produces for every iPhone, Chris. That's just for the charger.
Look up the PDF that Apple produces for every iPhone like I said to.
Chris wrote:
Why don't you just fuck off you condescending prick?
Just because you can't defend against facts in your attempt to defend Apple >>> to the death, no matter what, don't think that denying all facts will work. >>You have no facts. Posting a URL to rumour is not a "fact". Lying about
posting it six years ago is a fact.
Denying all facts will work with many others on this Apple ng.
But denying all facts you simply don't like won't work with smart people. >>>
Sep 4, 2018
*44% of iPhone users pine for expandable storage while 75% want longer battery life*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/FR0c0d3IFLY/m/b5MgLzIeBgAJ>
That's only one hit of many.
Well done for proving my suspicions: you never reported this rumour six
years ago. You always state it's so easy to identify your posts so the fact >> you could find it means it never happened.
Hi Chris,
Please stop denying threads exist that you, yourself, participated in.
Just stop it.
For God's sake, you even *authored* one of those threads, Chris.
CrudeSausage wrote:
Capacity is not equal to quality.
Not only that, but higher-capacity batteries on Android practically
never results in longer battery life. After all, Android uses Linux at
the core which is absolute garbage for battery life. Anyone who has a
Windows PC and suddenly converted to Linux can tell you that the
expectation that Linux uses less power always results in extreme
disappointment no matter what hoops you jump through. As a result, a Mac
or an iPhone with a smaller battery manages to get more than a PC or an
Android with a larger battery.
Hi Crude Sausage,
I have to give you credit that you're trying to reason this out for
yourself, but you missed the most fundamental point I was making.
CrudeSausage wrote:
Based on Apple's own specs, only one iPhone in Apple's entire history has >>> ever broken the "manual choke" 5AH barrier Android's surpassed in 2014.
If the goal is to provide users with 15-hour battery life and you can do
it on a 54wH battery, why would you provide a larger battery and charge
the customer the same amount? That's just terrible business.
Hi Crude Sausage,
I have to give you credit that you're trying to reason this out for
yourself, but you missed the most fundamental point I was making.
CrudeSausage wrote:
Get over it dumbass.
On the PC side, you can at least blame the fact that the platform is
x86-64: powerful but energy hungry. Android and iPhone both use ARM yet
have significantly different life from the same size battery. Either the
Android hardware is at fault because the manufacturers don't know what
they're doing versus Apple, or the fact that Android uses Linux at the
core causes worse drain. Either way, Apple wins.
Hi CrudeSausage,
Please allow me to help you understand why crappy batteries really matter.
a. It's not about how long a battery lasts, per day.
c. It's about how long a battery lasts, in years.
Specifically in charge cycles before the battery health drops to 80%.
I have run the math for a Samsung Galaxy S26 vs the iPhone 17 Pro Max.
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,uk.telecom.mobile
Subject: EU standards compare Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max & Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra battery lifetime
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2026 23:30:04 -0600
Message-ID: <10rsggs$2vhk$[email protected]>
Guess who has 12% longer lifespan before dropping to 80% in EU benchmarks. C'mon.
Now that you realize it's about how long a phone will last (in years).
Take a guess.
CrudeSausage wrote:
I guess you didn't get my point
That's because whatever "point" you claim to make has no link whatsoever
to what you post. I'm not bothering with the rest. I've had enough of
this kind of circus stupidity dealing with Mr. Electricity Snit Michael
Glasser Prescott Parasite and Computer Guy for all those years.
Hi Crude Sausage,
Calling me a troll because you ignore facts is not how you win arguments.
Allow me to point out what you and Chris are doing because you haven't yet figured out that I don't make anything up. You deny it. But you don't know.
You and Chris call me names because you hate you can't respond to facts.
Chris denied having authored a thread on the topic, which is absurd of him
to do, and Chris denied participating on threads on the topic also.
Think about that verified fact.
What kind of person is so desperate to defend the mothership to the death, that they will go to the length to deny they authored their own thread?
Who does that?
Nobody sensible, right?
And yet, both you and Chris repeatedly deny what you could look up easily. Why?
I get it you're desperate to defend the mothership to the death, no matter what, but I simply ask you to realize that I posted those links many times.
I've even posted these links to threads that Chris participated on and I've posted them to threads that Chris authored, & yet Chris denies that.
<https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/21/21394985/apple-iphone-12-battery-cost-5g-kuo>
<https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/08/21/apple-to-offset-cost-of-5g-iphone-components-with-cheaper-battery-tech>
<https://www.maticstoday.com/2020/08/21/why-apple-is-using-cheap-battery-parts-in-iphone-12/>
<https://9to5mac.com/2020/08/21/kuo-iphone-12-5g-component-cost/> <https://www.pcmag.com/news/report-iphone-12-to-use-smaller-cheaper-battery> <https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/20/kuo-iphone-12-battery-board/> <https://www.timesnownews.com/technology-science/article/apple-opting-for-cheaper-battery-parts-to-cut-costs-on-5g-iphone-12-analyst-ming-chi-kuo/640657>
<https://techlog360.com/apple-will-use-cheaper-parts-in-the-iphone-12/> <https://www.phonearena.com/news/apple-to-skimp-on-battery-tech-for-5g-iPhones-says-Kuo_id126708>
If I ever hear you claim again that I didn't post those links multiple
times to this newsgroup, even to threads Chris authored, I will assume that the only reason you're calling me a troll is because YOU hate the facts.
My recommencdation?
When you can't refute the facts, calling someone a troll isn't appropriate.
CrudeSausage wrote:
Actually, since I speak facts, I do agree that we can cherry pick (as Chris >>> is desperate to do) in order to claim longer averages, but to your point of >>> "expecting" 7 years, that's absurd simply because only one iPhone ever did. >>Let's take a different example then. The M1 MacBook Air released in 2020
and we are currently in 2026. Does that machine still benefit from
regular updates and upgrades?
Hi CrudeSausage,
Everything you ask we've already done, where Apple's full support for both iOS & for macOS is far shorter than most of you seem to be claiming it is.
We already covered that, in depth, on the macOS-related threads in this ng.
a. Longest full macOS software support was 2.49 years (OS X 10.4 Tiger)
b. Shortest full macOS software support was 0.51 years (OS X 10.0 Cheetah)
c. Average full macOS software support was 1.18 years (20 versions)
d. Typical full macOS software support was ~1.0-1.5 years
Verbatim:
1. iPhone OS 1 was released on June 29, 2007
2. The last known security update was iPhone OS 1.1.5 on July 15, 2008
3. That is 382 days, or 1.05 years of security updates after release
1. iPhone OS 2 was released on July 11, 2008
2. The last known security update was iPhone OS 2.2.1 on January 27, 2009
3. That is 200 days, or 0.55 years of security updates after release
1. iPhone OS 3 was released on June 17, 2009
2. The last known security update was iPhone OS 3.2.2 on August 11, 2010
3. That is 420 days, or 1.15 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 4 was released on June 21, 2010
2. The last known security update was iOS 4.3.5 released on July 25, 2011
3. That is 399 days, or 1.09 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 5 was released on October 12, 2011
2. The last known security update was iOS 5.1.1 released on May 7, 2012
3. That is 208 days, or 0.57 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 6 was released on September 19, 2012
2. The last known security update was iOS 6.1.6 on February 21, 2014
3. That is 520 days, or 1.42 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 7 was released on September 18, 2013
2. The last known security update was iOS 7.1.2 released on June 30, 2014
3. That is 285 days, or 0.78 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 8 was released on September 17, 2014
2. The last known security update was iOS 8.4.1 released on August 13, 2015 3. That is 330 days, or 0.90 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 9 was released on September 16, 2015
2. The last known security update was iOS 9.3.6 released on July 22, 2019
3. That is 1,406 days, or 3.85 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 10 was released on September 13, 2016
2. The last known security update was iOS 10.3.4 released on July 22, 2019
3. That is 1,042 days, or 2.85 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 11 was released on September 19, 2017
2. The last known security update was iOS 11.4.1 released on July 9, 2018
3. That is 293 days, or 0.80 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 12 was released on September 17, 2018
2. The last known security update was iOS 12.5.7 on January 23, 2023
3. That is 1,589 days, or 4.35 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 13 was released on September 19, 2019
2. The last known security update was iOS 13.7 on September 1, 2020
3. That is 348 days, or 0.95 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 14 was released on September 16, 2020
2. The last known security update was iOS 14.8.1 on October 26, 2021
3. That is 405 days, or 1.11 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 15 was released on September 20, 2021
2. The last known security update was iOS 15.8.2 on January 22, 2024
3. That is 854 days, or 2.34 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 16 was released on September 12, 2022
2. The last known security update was iOS 16.7.10 on January 22, 2024
3. That is 497 days, or 1.36 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 17 was released on September 18, 2023
2. The last known security update was iOS 17.4.1 on March 21, 2024
3. That is 185 days, or 0.51 years of security updates after release
1. iOS 18 was released on September 16, 2024
2. The last known security update was iOS 18.3 on February 12, 2025
3. That is 149 days, or 0.41 years of security updates after release
For macOS, as far as I can tell, here's the data (please doublecheck).
1. Mac OS X 10.0 (Cheetah) was released on March 24, 2001
2. The last security update was Security Update 2002-07-12 on July 12, 2002 3. That is 475 days, or 1.30 years of security updates after release
1. Mac OS X 10.1 (Puma) was released on September 25, 2001
2. The last security update was Security Update 2003-06-09 on June 9, 2003
3. That is 622 days, or 1.70 years of security updates after release
1. Mac OS X 10.2 (Jaguar) was released on August 23, 2002
2. The last security update was Security Update 2004-05-24 on May 24, 2004
3. That is 640 days, or 1.75 years of security updates after release
1. Mac OS X 10.3 (Panther) was released on October 24, 2003
2. The last security update was Security Update 2007-004 on April 19, 2007
3. That is 1,273 days, or 3.49 years of security updates after release
1. Mac OS X 10.4 (Tiger) was released on April 29, 2005
2. The last security update was Security Update 2009-005 on Sept 10, 2009
3. That is 1,596 days, or 4.37 years of security updates after release
1. Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) was released on October 26, 2007
2. The last security update was Security Update 2011-006 on Nov 9, 2011
3. That is 1,475 days, or 4.04 years of security updates after release
1. Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) was released on August 28, 2009
2. The last security update was Security Update 2013-004 on Sept 12, 2013
3. That is 1,477 days, or 4.04 years of security updates after release
1. OS X 10.7 (Lion) was released on July 20, 2011
2. The last security update was Security Update 2014-004 on Aug 13, 2014
3. That is 1,120 days, or 3.07 years of security updates after release
1. OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion) was released on July 25, 2012
2. The last security update was Security Update 2015-006 on August 13, 2015 3. That is 1,114 days, or 3.05 years of security updates after release
1. OS X 10.9 (Mavericks) was released on October 22, 2013
2. The last security update was Security Update 2016-003 on July 18, 2016
3. That is 1,000 days, or 2.74 years of security updates after release
1. OS X 10.10 (Yosemite) was released on October 16, 2014
2. The last security update was Security Update 2017-005 on July 19, 2017
3. That is 1,007 days, or 2.76 years of security updates after release
1. OS X 10.11 (El Capitan) was released on September 30, 2015
2. The last security update was Security Update 2018-003 on July 9, 2018
3. That is 1,013 days, or 2.77 years of security updates after release
1. macOS 10.12 (Sierra) was released on September 20, 2016
2. The last security update was Security Update 2019-004 on July 22, 2019
3. That is 1,035 days, or 2.83 years of security updates after release
1. macOS 10.13 (High Sierra) was released on September 25, 2017
2. The last security update was Security Update 2020-006 on Sept 24, 2020
3. That is 1,095 days, or 3.00 years of security updates after release
1. macOS 10.14 (Mojave) was released on September 24, 2018
2. The last security update was Security Update 2021-005 on July 21, 2021
3. That is 1,031 days, or 2.82 years of security updates after release
1. macOS 10.15 (Catalina) was released on October 7, 2019
2. The last security update was Security Update 2022-005 on July 20, 2022
3. That is 1,017 days, or 2.79 years of security updates after release
1. macOS 11 (Big Sur) was released on November 12, 2020
2. The last security update was Security Update 2023-005 on Sept 11, 2023
3. That is 1,034 days, or 2.83 years of security updates after release
1. macOS 12 (Monterey) was released on October 25, 2021
2. The last security update was Security Update 2024-002 on Jan 22, 2024
3. That is 820 days, or 2.25 years of security updates after release
1. macOS 13 (Ventura) was released on October 24, 2022
2. The last security update was macOS Ventura 13.6.6 on March 25, 2024
3. That is 518 days, or 1.42 years of security updates after release
1. macOS 14 (Sonoma) was released on September 26, 2023
2. The last security update was macOS Sonoma 14.4.1 on March 21, 2024
3. That is 177 days, or 0.49 years of security updates after release
If those numbers are correct, then we can make an educated assessment:
LONGEST:
A. The longest iOS support (but that's not FULL support) = 4.35 years
B. The longest macOS support (but not FULL support) = 4.37 years
SHORTEST:
A. The shortest iOS support (but that's not FULL support) = 0.55 years
B. The shortest macOS support (but not FULL support) = 1.30 years
AVERAGE:
A. The average iOS support (but that's not FULL support)
Sum = 25.52 years (for completed versions)
Count = 16 versions (have completed)
Average = 26.14 / 18 = 1.59 years
B. The average macOS support (but that's not FULL support)
Sum = 53.17 years
Count = 19
Average = 2.80 years
Note that this FACT is likely far shorter than most people think it is.
Please stop denying threads exist that you, yourself, participated in.
Link or it didn't happen.
Just stop it.
For God's sake, you even *authored* one of those threads, Chris.
Link or it didn't happen.
However, that's not the PDF that Apple produces for every iPhone, Chris.
That's just for the charger.
I know. It's the one that you've shared when finally admitting to do it.
Look up the PDF that Apple produces for every iPhone like I said to.
You're more than welcome to share the link to it.
That is not even remotely what I was saying. Feel free to scroll back up
and re-read what I wrote. I was very clearly saying that _hardware_, in
this case the M1 MacBook Air, gets supported by updates of one sort or another for seven years.
Woe is me!
Which is no different with Apple than it is with other manufacturers and
the inverse. No matter what you say, it is already well known how long lithium batteries will last. You can extend the life by charging no
farther than 80% or by slowing how quickly it charges from 80 to 100%,
but three years and 2,000 full charges will make them useless.
Oh no!
Chris wrote:
However, that's not the PDF that Apple produces for every iPhone, Chris. >>> That's just for the charger.
I know. It's the one that you've shared when finally admitting to do it.
Look up the PDF that Apple produces for every iPhone like I said to.
You're more than welcome to share the link to it.
Chris wrote:
Please stop denying threads exist that you, yourself, participated in.
Link or it didn't happen.
Just stop it.
For God's sake, you even *authored* one of those threads, Chris.
Link or it didn't happen.
Chris,
All intelligent people have excellent memories because you can't absorb
tons of detail about any subject without having an excellent memory.
CrudeSausage wrote:
That is not even remotely what I was saying. Feel free to scroll back up
and re-read what I wrote. I was very clearly saying that _hardware_, in
this case the M1 MacBook Air, gets supported by updates of one sort or
another for seven years.
It's frustrating dealing with you Apple religious zealots because we
covered both the hardware and the software, but you are immune to it.
The very fact you deny we covered the hardware in detail is a problem.
It means there is no hope of you ever learning anything in your life.
You're no different than Snit is.
There is no sense whatsoever in even ATTEMPTING an adult dialog with you.
It's not possible.
You are an Apple religious zealot who denies all facts you don't like.
Which is all facts.
Like these...
< verbatim copy >
Either way, I appreciate you going to such lengths to prove that I was
wrong in stating that Apple hardware gets seven years worth of updates
and showing that, in reality, it only gets 6.97 years.
CrudeSausage <[email protected]> wrote:
Either way, I appreciate you going to such lengths to prove that I was
wrong in stating that Apple hardware gets seven years worth of updates
and showing that, in reality, it only gets 6.97 years.
Lol.
That's surprisingly accurate for him. Usually he's just plain wrong.
All intelligent people have excellent memories because you can't absorb
tons of detail about any subject without having an excellent memory.
Nope. Intelligent people know memory is fallible and rely on reliable and demonstrable evidence. There's a whole literature on how eye-witness
accounts are shockingly bad. What's worse is people think their memory is better then it actually is.
As an octogenarian, you'll know this better than most. And as I've highlighted to you before your memory is poor. From one month to the next you've (chosen to?) forgotten key things.
So again. Link or it didn't happen.
Post it here, as your scattergun approach is impossible to follow.
Your inability to provide it is noted. It's because it doesn't exist.
All intelligent people have excellent memories because you can't absorb
tons of detail about any subject without having an excellent memory.
Nope. Intelligent people know memory is fallible and rely on reliable and demonstrable evidence. There's a whole literature on how eye-witness
accounts are shockingly bad. What's worse is people think their memory is better then it actually is.
As an octogenarian, you'll know this better than most. And as I've highlighted to you before your memory is poor. From one month to the next you've (chosen to?) forgotten key things.
So again. Link or it didn't happen.
Post it here, as your scattergun approach is impossible to follow.
Do you realize how frustrating it is
On 2026-04-17 12:10 a.m., Maria Sophia wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
That's anecdotal experience, for sure.
It is no less valid than the experiences of the people cited by others
here who read those official statements from Samsung and other Android
manufacturers, yet are still waiting for critical updates because the
companies say one thing but do another.
Hi Crude Sausage,
I guess you didn't get my point
That's because whatever "point" you claim to make has no link whatsoever
to what you post. I'm not bothering with the rest. I've had enough of
this kind of circus stupidity dealing with Mr. Electricity Snit Michael Glasser Prescott Parasite and Computer Guy for all those years.
Chris wrote:
All intelligent people have excellent memories because you can't absorb
tons of detail about any subject without having an excellent memory.
Nope. Intelligent people know memory is fallible and rely on reliable and
demonstrable evidence. There's a whole literature on how eye-witness
accounts are shockingly bad. What's worse is people think their memory is
better then it actually is.
As an octogenarian, you'll know this better than most. And as I've
highlighted to you before your memory is poor. From one month to the next
you've (chosen to?) forgotten key things.
So again. Link or it didn't happen.
Post it here, as your scattergun approach is impossible to follow.
4/12/23 on a thread authored by Chris <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/OQk2_G0iYoM/m/aITK_9M-AAAJ>
*Apple put cheap batteries and boards into the iPhone 12 for profit*
Nov 9, 2022 on a thread authored by badgolferman <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/xwGiq6050ls/m/papwYkNGGwAJ>
Sep 15, 2021 on a thread I authored on the horrid Apple iPhone batteries <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/zmumvfSvCUk/m/OgBZYUORBwAJ>
In article <u1qER.69569$[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
On 2026-04-17 12:10 a.m., Maria Sophia wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
That's anecdotal experience, for sure.
It is no less valid than the experiences of the people cited by others >>>> here who read those official statements from Samsung and other Android >>>> manufacturers, yet are still waiting for critical updates because the
companies say one thing but do another.
Hi Crude Sausage,
I guess you didn't get my point
That's because whatever "point" you claim to make has no link whatsoever
to what you post. I'm not bothering with the rest. I've had enough of
this kind of circus stupidity dealing with Mr. Electricity Snit Michael
Glasser Prescott Parasite and Computer Guy for all those years.
Snit? Now there is a blast from the past. Is that pile of
shit still alive?
I haven't seen him posting over in the
handful of groups I sporadically visit. He was a real
freak of a troll! I figured COVID finally put him down for
good.
I am not an Apple zealot.
Let's all shed a silent tear for the old fart!
Nov 9, 2022 on a thread authored by badgolferman
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/xwGiq6050ls/m/papwYkNGGwAJ>
Sep 15, 2021 on a thread I authored on the horrid Apple iPhone batteries
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/zmumvfSvCUk/m/OgBZYUORBwAJ>
See? Wasn't that hard, was it?
Why not just do it,
CrudeSausage wrote:
I am not an Apple zealot.
All I care about are the facts.
Jolly Roger wrote:
Let's all shed a silent tear for the old fart!
Of all people, I read *everything* you post
loser
he posts the same information again, in case we missed it
On 2026-04-18 11:01 p.m., Maria Sophia wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
I am not an Apple zealot.
All I care about are the facts.
... and he posts the same information again, in case we missed it the
first 62 times.
On 2026-04-19 11:02:26 +0000, CrudeSausage said:
On 2026-04-18 11:01 p.m., Maria Sophia wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
I am not an Apple zealot.
All I care about are the facts.
... and he posts the same information again, in case we missed it the
first 62 times.
The know-nothing anti-Apple villiage idiot troll Maria / Arlen / whatever-troll-name wouldn't know an actual fact even if it came up and introduced itself and bit him on the backside. *Everything* the moron
posts is complete and utter crap.
PLEASE STOP REPLYING TO THE MORON!!
Anyone I see who replies to that moron will now also be put in the
killfile.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,114 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 492511:58:45 |
| Calls: | 14,267 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 186,320 |
| D/L today: |
26,243 files (8,505M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,518,394 |