But mostly he lacks memory as nospam can't keep his excuses straight.
Apple even stated that they made hardware changes
beginning with the iPhone 8, and an entity that does teardowns confirmed
the key change when they compared the iPhone 8 to the iPhone 7.
of course they made hardware changes. every iphone has changes, for all
sorts of reasons.
contrast that to what lg did with their phones,
nospam wrote:
contrast that to what lg did with their phones,
Why is it, nospam
On 2023-01-10, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
nospam wrote:
contrast that to what lg did with their phones,
Why is it, nospam
Because unlike LG, Apple sought to improve the overall user experience
for its customers.
It's pretty incredible that they'd think that they could get away with
the coverup indefinitely, considering the scrutiny that they get.
They did eventually state that they made hardware changes that would
largely eliminate throttling, but it took a company that does tear-downs
to disclose the hardware change: "Power Management ICs: "Compared to the iPhone 7, there is one more PMIC component from Dialog in the iPhone 8
Plus."
The batteries in the iPhone 6, 6s, 7, were never defective.
A
battery replacement mitigated the root cause but it was not a permanent fix.
They were only trying to protect their own privacy by secretly covering up the problem.
They were only trying to protect their own privacy by secretly covering up the problem. If they truly cared about the consumer they would have issued
a bulletin warning them of this problem and offered a discounted battery replacement program right at the start.
In article <tpjh1g$10la$1@gioia.aioe.org>, badgolferman ><REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
They were only trying to protect their own privacy by secretly
covering up the problem.
they didn't cover up anything. the change was disclosed in the release
notes. to be fair, few people read the release notes, but it was
there.
not only that, but nobody noticed any difference until nearly a year
later, when someone ran a benchmark, which by definition runs the
phone at peak demands, where the issue occurs.
again, only peak demands are clipped, not throttling across all tasks.
Chris wrote:
He's comparing a car's range by only lookingChris,
at the size of tank and ignoring its fuel efficiency.
How could you possibly deny that batteries age consistently?
And that they age below a working threshold over time?
And that a smaller capacity battery reaches that threshold sooner?
Do you really believe your own claim Apple has "special" chemistry?
*The smaller battery will always chemically age sooner below threshold.*
A car with a 10 gallon tank and 30 mpg will need to refuel more often than one with an 8 gallon tank and 40 mpg.You're the one who lied about having a PhD in the sciences, and yet you didn't know a single thing about basic chemistry, physics, or calculus.
Unlike you with a fabricated science degree, every scientist and engineer
is well acquainted with basic redox potential chemistry.
What you don't seem to even begin to comprehend is that Apple's (admittedly bogus) _daily_ battery life claims are not what we're talking about here.
What we're discussing, in terms of replacing batteries, is:
*The smaller battery will always chemically age sooner below threshold.*
He doesn't. He never does...What you iKooks seem to believe only in are Apple's advertisements.
Those advertisements are about (admittedly bogus) battery life claims for daily use - but Apple doesn't advertise battery aging for its puny
batteries.
What you're also ignorant of is those cheap iPhone batteries are laughably puny compared to the huge batteries on most modern Android phones today.
What you only know is Apple advertising that they're "more efficient" in daily use, which is bogus but it doesn't even matter for this topic.
What matters is you need to comprehend two things:
a. Battery daily life on a single charge (measured in hours)
b. Battery overall life of a single battery (measured in years)
They're different.
a. One is most greatly affected by charge capacity & current draw.
b. The other is affected by design capacity & chemical aging processes.
You iKooks can't seem to comprehend these are DIFFERENT things:
a. How many hours a battery lasts on a charge, versus
b. How many years a battery lasts before aging below threshold.
It's physics. It's chemistry. It's engineering. It's science.
All stuff none of you uneducated low-IQ iKooks will ever understand.
Put simply...
*The smaller battery will always chemically age sooner below threshold.*
Especially when that smaller battery is as laughably puny as those cheap pieces of utter crap batteries that Apple puts in all the latest iPhones.
nospam wrote:
In article <tpjh1g$10la$1@gioia.aioe.org>, badgolferman
<REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
They were only trying to protect their own privacy by secretly
covering up the problem.
they didn't cover up anything. the change was disclosed in the release
notes. to be fair, few people read the release notes, but it was
there.
not only that, but nobody noticed any difference until nearly a year
later, when someone ran a benchmark, which by definition runs the
phone at peak demands, where the issue occurs.
again, only peak demands are clipped, not throttling across all tasks.
If someone's car is acting funny they will take it to the mechanic and
get it diagnosed then decide whether to fix it. Apple never gave that
chance to the customer, instead choosing to modify the performance of
the phone so it wouldn't be noticed. Would it be okay with you if your
car was "modified" without your knowledge by the mechanic? This is why Apple's actions were considered "criminal".
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2023-01-10, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
nospam wrote:
contrast that to what lg did with their phones,
Why is it, nospam
Because unlike LG, Apple sought to improve the overall user
experience for its customers.
So much for the consumer privacy aspect they claim to uphold. What
they did was similar to what an unscrupulous car manufacturer would
do. They withhold information about a defect in their vehicle.
Then they tell mechanics to secretly install a patch which covers it
up whenever the customer brings their vehicle in for maintenance.
Then they deny there’s anything wrong when people start noticing it.
And finally when they’re caught, they offer to fix it for a small
price.
They were only trying to protect their own privacy by secretly
covering up the problem.
If they truly cared about the consumer they would have issued a
bulletin warning them of this problem and offered a discounted battery replacement program right at the start.
On 1/10/2023 3:09 AM, badgolferman wrote:
<snip>
They were only trying to protect their own privacy by secretly
covering up the problem. If they truly cared about the consumer they
would have issued a bulletin warning them of this problem and offered
a discounted battery replacement program right at the start.
It's pretty incredible that they'd think that they could get away with
the coverup
They did eventually state that they made hardware changes
I know that this will come as a shock to you...
...but a CAR...
...is not a SMARTPHONE.
nospam wrote:
In article <tpjh1g$10la$1@gioia.aioe.org>, badgolferman ><REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
They were only trying to protect their own privacy by secretly
covering up the problem.
they didn't cover up anything. the change was disclosed in the release >notes. to be fair, few people read the release notes, but it was
there.
not only that, but nobody noticed any difference until nearly a year
later, when someone ran a benchmark, which by definition runs the
phone at peak demands, where the issue occurs.
again, only peak demands are clipped, not throttling across all tasks.
If someone's car is acting funny they will take it to the mechanic and
get it diagnosed then decide whether to fix it.
Apple never gave that
chance to the customer, instead choosing to modify the performance of
the phone so it wouldn't be noticed. Would it be okay with you if your
car was "modified" without your knowledge by the mechanic? This is why Apple's actions were considered "criminal".
nospam wrote:
In article <tpjh1g$10la$1@gioia.aioe.org>, badgolferman >><REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
They were only trying to protect their own privacy by secretly
covering up the problem.
they didn't cover up anything. the change was disclosed in the release >>notes. to be fair, few people read the release notes, but it was
there.
not only that, but nobody noticed any difference until nearly a year
later, when someone ran a benchmark, which by definition runs the
phone at peak demands, where the issue occurs.
again, only peak demands are clipped, not throttling across all tasks.
If someone's car is acting funny they will take it to the mechanic and
get it diagnosed then decide whether to fix it.
Apple never gave that chance to the customer, instead choosing to
modify the performance of the phone so it wouldn't be noticed.
If someone's car is acting funny they will take it to the mechanic and
get it diagnosed then decide whether to fix it. Apple never gave that
chance to the customer, instead choosing to modify the performance of
the phone so it wouldn't be noticed. Would it be okay with you if your
car was "modified" without your knowledge by the mechanic? This is why Apple's actions were considered "criminal".
Replacing the battery allows the phone to operate properly but it
doesn't address the root cause.
Often, addressing the root cause is not practical due to the cost.
Sometimes the manufacturer is required to address the root cause.
Alan wrote:
I know that this will come as a shock to you...
...but a CAR...
...is not a SMARTPHONE.
I guess it comes down to whether you believe the phone belongs to you
or whether it belongs to Apple. I happen to belong in the former. And
as the owner of the device such modifications done on the sly don't sit
well with me. I'm guessing all the government institutions which hand
out iPhones to their employees for classified business don't appreciate software changes without explicit notice beforehand. I know my
employer takes months to vet OS changes to our computers and phones
before forced upgrades.
The same goes for my car...
Alan wrote:
I know that this will come as a shock to you...
...but a CAR...
...is not a SMARTPHONE.
I guess it comes down to whether you believe the phone belongs to you
or whether it belongs to Apple. I happen to belong in the former. And
as the owner of the device such modifications done on the sly don't sit
well with me. I'm guessing all the government institutions which hand
out iPhones to their employees for classified business don't appreciate software changes without explicit notice beforehand. I know my
employer takes months to vet OS changes to our computers and phones
before forced upgrades.
The same goes for my car...
It's pretty incredible that they'd think that they could get away with
the coverup indefinitely, considering the scrutiny that they get.
there was no cover up.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 8:14:44 AM, nospam wrote:
It's pretty incredible that they'd think that they could get away with
the coverup indefinitely, considering the scrutiny that they get.
there was no cover up.
How you can say that is the same as when Jolly Roger just said repeatedly that there was never a related criminal case that Apple pleaded guilty to.
They did eventually state that they made hardware changes
False. You think by repeating this lie, it will magically become true, because you assume the rest of u are just as gullible as you are. Not happening.
I guess it comes down to whether you believe the phone belongs to you
or whether it belongs to Apple. I happen to belong in the former.
They were only trying to protect their own privacy by secretly covering up >> the problem.
they didn't cover up anything. the change was disclosed in the release
notes. to be fair, few people read the release notes, but it was there.
In fact, Apple stated that the feature was
added in the iOS 10.2.1 release notes.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:35:29 PM, badgolferman wrote:
I guess it comes down to whether you believe the phone belongs to
you or whether it belongs to Apple. I happen to belong in the
former.
Are you aware Apple CHANGED the release notes long AFTER the release? >https://www.idownloadblog.com/2018/02/06/apple-on-ios-10-2-1-throttling-disclosure/
What do you think about that?
What do you think Jolly Roger & nospam think about that?
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 11:14:42 AM, nospam wrote:
They were only trying to protect their own privacy by secretly
covering up the problem.
they didn't cover up anything. the change was disclosed in the
release notes. to be fair, few people read the release notes, but it
was there.
Are you not aware that Apple was caught saying what you said when the
truth was that Apple subtlety CHANGED the release notes long AFTER the release?
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 9:13:32 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
They did eventually state that they made hardware changes
False. You think by repeating this lie, it will magically become
true, because you assume the rest of u are just as gullible as you
are. Not happening.
You are the one who called me a "dumb fuck"
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 8:14:44 AM, nospam wrote:
It's pretty incredible that they'd think that they could get away
with the coverup indefinitely, considering the scrutiny that they
get.
there was no cover up.
How you can say that is the same as when Jolly Roger just said
repeatedly that there was never a related criminal case that Apple
pleaded guilty to.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:35:29 PM, badgolferman wrote:
I guess it comes down to whether you believe the phone belongs to you
or whether it belongs to Apple. I happen to belong in the former.
Are you aware Apple CHANGED the release notes long AFTER the release?
Thomas wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:35:29 PM, badgolferman wrote:
I guess it comes down to whether you believe the phone belongs to
you or whether it belongs to Apple. I happen to belong in the
former.
Are you aware Apple CHANGED the release notes long AFTER the release? >>https://www.idownloadblog.com/2018/02/06/apple-on-ios-10-2-1-throttling-disclosure/
What do you think about that?
What do you think Jolly Roger & nospam think about that?
Oh, I don't know. Maybe they will say it was for your own good and
that Apple knows best.
------
Apple’s lack of transparency around iPhone throttling has backfired spectacularly as the firm finds itself in an uncomfortable position of
having to explain why the original iOS 10.2.1 changelog didn’t
immediately disclose the controversial performance management feature.
iOS 10.2.1 was the very first iOS release with CPU throttling targeting
older iPhones with worn-out batteries. The original releases notes,
displayed on customers’ devices and published on Apple’s website, made
no mention of this whatsoever.
It was only after the throttling issue went mainstream that Apple
quietly amended the iOS 10.2.1 release notes on its website to note
that the software update also “improves power management during peak workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone.”
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 9:11:52 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
In fact, Apple stated that the feature was added in the iOS 10.2.1
release notes.
Are you capable of admitting you are wrong?
On 2023-01-10 17:35:29 +0000, badgolferman said:
Alan wrote:
I know that this will come as a shock to you...
...but a CAR...
...is not a SMARTPHONE.
I guess it comes down to whether you believe the phone belongs to you
or whether it belongs to Apple. I happen to belong in the former. And
as the owner of the device such modifications done on the sly don't sit
well with me. I'm guessing all the government institutions which hand
out iPhones to their employees for classified business don't appreciate
software changes without explicit notice beforehand. I know my
employer takes months to vet OS changes to our computers and phones
before forced upgrades.
The same goes for my car...
I haven't checked about the phone itself, but you certainly do NOT own
the OS running on it (like almost every other piece of software you've
ever used). You agree to a license to use the OS when you first turn on
the phone. Since it is only a license, the product is owned by Apple,
so technically they can do whatever they want with it, including
revoking your license to use it.
It was only after the throttling issue went mainstream that Apple
quietly amended the iOS 10.2.1 release notes on its website to note
that the software update also "improves power management during peak
workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone."
More lies.
Thomas wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:35:29 PM, badgolferman wrote:
I guess it comes down to whether you believe the phone belongs to
you or whether it belongs to Apple. I happen to belong in the
former.
Are you aware Apple CHANGED the release notes long AFTER the release?
https://www.idownloadblog.com/2018/02/06/apple-on-ios-10-2-1-throttling-disclosure/
What do you think about that?
What do you think Jolly Roger & nospam think about that?
Oh, I don't know. Maybe they will say it was for your own good and
that Apple knows best.
------
Apple’s lack of transparency around iPhone throttling has backfired spectacularly as the firm finds itself in an uncomfortable position of
having to explain why the original iOS 10.2.1 changelog didn’t
immediately disclose the controversial performance management feature.
iOS 10.2.1 was the very first iOS release with CPU throttling targeting
older iPhones with worn-out batteries. The original releases notes,
displayed on customers’ devices and published on Apple’s website, made
no mention of this whatsoever.
It was only after the throttling issue went mainstream that Apple
quietly amended the iOS 10.2.1 release notes on its website to note
that the software update also “improves power management during peak workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone.”
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 9:11:52 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
In fact, Apple stated that the feature was
added in the iOS 10.2.1 release notes.
Are you capable of admitting you are wrong?
Maybe everyone else reads what maybe you don't know about what Apple did? https://www.idownloadblog.com/2018/02/06/apple-on-ios-10-2-1-throttling-disclosure/
After reading that article (which formed a key basis of the AG USA
lawsuits) are you going to immediately apologize and admit you were wrong?
Are you capable of admitting you know nothing about what Apple did?
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 3:55:16 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
It was only after the throttling issue went mainstream that Apple
quietly amended the iOS 10.2.1 release notes on its website to note
that the software update also "improves power management during peak
workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone."
More lies.
Instead of calling everything you don't know about Apple a lie,
why can't you admit that you didn't know any of this before today?
On 2023-01-10 16:16, Thomas wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 3:55:16 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
It was only after the throttling issue went mainstream that Apple
quietly amended the iOS 10.2.1 release notes on its website to note
that the software update also "improves power management during
peak workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone."
More lies.
Instead of calling everything you don't know about Apple a lie, why
can't you admit that you didn't know any of this before today?
Look up: "irony"
'He also wanted to know why Apple issued the iOS 10.2.1 software
update that slowed iPhones with battery problems in January 2017 but
did not disclose the update’s power management effects until February 2017.'
That's from YOUR source
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 3:55:16 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
It was only after the throttling issue went mainstream that Apple
quietly amended the iOS 10.2.1 release notes on its website to note
that the software update also "improves power management during peak
workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone."
More lies. Here are the FACTS you and your little troll gang HATE
with every fiber of your being:
* The initial iOS 10.2.1 release note was posted on January 23, 2017.
* The release note was clarified a few DAYS later in February 2017.
* It wasn't until DECEMBER 2017 that Geekbench first reported seeing
throttling and only while running peak performance benchmark tests.
You have factual discourse. You are only here to lie and disrupt.
Instead of calling everything you don't know about Apple a lie,
why can't you admit that you didn't know any of this before today?
On 2023-01-11, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2023-01-10 16:16, Thomas wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 3:55:16 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
It was only after the throttling issue went mainstream that Apple
quietly amended the iOS 10.2.1 release notes on its website to
note that the software update also "improves power management
during peak workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone."
More lies.
Instead of calling everything you don't know about Apple a lie, why
can't you admit that you didn't know any of this before today?
Look up: "irony"
'He also wanted to know why Apple issued the iOS 10.2.1 software
update that slowed iPhones with battery problems in January 2017 but
did not disclose the update’s power management effects until February
2017.'
That's from YOUR source
And it was the end of January - only a few DAYS had passed. But that
doesn't fit the troll gang's narrative, so they lie about it instead.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:35:29 PM, badgolferman wrote:
I guess it comes down to whether you believe the phone belongs to you
or whether it belongs to Apple. I happen to belong in the former.
Are you aware Apple CHANGED the release notes long AFTER the release? https://www.idownloadblog.com/2018/02/06/apple-on-ios-10-2-1-throttling-disclosure/
You and your little troll gang never admit you are wrong.
Nope, Apple clarified the release note just DAYS after the initial
release.
Are you not aware that Apple was caught saying what you said when the
truth was that Apple subtlety CHANGED the release notes long AFTER the
release?
Another lie.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 3:51:55 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
Nope, Apple clarified the release note just DAYS after the initial
release.
It's obvious to everyone that I'm a lying troll with no life.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 3:55:58 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
You and your little troll gang never admit you are wrong.
Everyone knows our little juvenile gang gets off on lying and
disrupting this news group.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 3:50:55 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
Are you not aware that Apple was caught saying what you said when
the truth was that Apple subtlety CHANGED the release notes long
AFTER the release?
Another lie.
I'll snip the relevant material because it proves me wrong and sealion
a bit now, because that's all I know how to do, y'all.
Everyone knows our little juvenile gang gets off on lying and
disrupting this news group.
Yep.
You're certainly a predictable troll.
It's obvious to everyone that I'm a lying troll with no life.
Yes.
Alan wrote:
I know that this will come as a shock to you...
...but a CAR...
...is not a SMARTPHONE.
I guess it comes down to whether you believe the phone belongs to you
or whether it belongs to Apple. I happen to belong in the former. And
as the owner of the device such modifications done on the sly don't sit
well with me. I'm guessing all the government institutions which hand
out iPhones to their employees for classified business don't appreciate software changes without explicit notice beforehand. I know my
employer takes months to vet OS changes to our computers and phones
before forced upgrades.
You lied about the release note.
You lied about Apple admitting guilt.
Your false narrative has fallen apart under scrutiny.
Why do you continue to lie? Why do you spend every waking moment in news groups for product made by companies you can't stand? Why don't you have
a life, sad, little man?
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 8:39:35 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:...that you are just another "Arlen" sockpuppet.
It's obvious to everyone that I'm a lying troll with no life.
Yes.
At this point, it's clear to everyone...
How can you call someone a "dumb fuck" who claims a company settling a
case without admitting guilt is supposedly "the first time in
history"?
Quite easily and correctly.
Apple admitted no wrongdoing in their settlement.
On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 at 4:18:28 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
You lied about the release note.
You lied about Apple admitting guilt.
Your false narrative has fallen apart under scrutiny.
Why do you continue to lie? Why do you spend every waking moment in news
groups for product made by companies you can't stand? Why don't you have
a life, sad, little man?
Blah blah blah blah blah
Blah blah blah blah blah
Keep going as long as you feel you must, tool.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 62:29:14 |
| Calls: | 6,712 |
| Files: | 12,244 |
| Messages: | 5,355,896 |