Posted on 10/03/2016 5:34:22 PM PDT by Swordmaker
How would an iPhone with half the battery of competing smartphones ever have won the test, and why didnt Which test a similar device?
Which? is getting lots of attention today on strength of its report that claims smaller batteries dont last as long as larger batteries. Thats the only logical discovery the organization made in a flawed-by-design smartphone battery life test thats being widely reported.
What the reports headline doesnt make clear is that the iPhone 7 in the test has a 4.7-inch display, while all three of the other smartphone models tested are larger (5.1-inches, or more), and equipped with larger batteries. The iPhone could never have won this unequal comparison.
In other words, the larger the battery the longer the battery life. Which? even admits this, saying, it should hardly be surprising that one battery nearly half the size of another offers roughly half as much charge.
Its easy to imagine the test was set up precisely to deliver the conclusion the magazine chose to run as its headline. After all, if Which had really wanted to run a truly comparative test, it would have tested the larger alternatives against iPhone 7 Plus, a 5.5-inch display device with a Li-Ion 2900 mAh battery. Thats a fair test.
The test it ran is an unfair test, a perfect example of selective testing
Accepting Which? chose not to review a comparative device in a comparative review, then how can it possibly justify a conclusion that could never have gone in Apples direction?
Im declaring the report to be yet more of the FUD and nonsense that passes for Apple coverage these days. Cheap and tawdry sensationalist clicktivism from an organization I expect much more from. In my opinion, at its best the test is flawed, at worst, unethical.
No link provided as none is deserved.
Since the other components of these phones are essentially the same size, or close to the same size, in all four tested phonesexcept for the iPhone 7 with its new haptic engine, which none of the others havethe only component that can take up more space IS THE BATTERY, and each of the competitors' phones has a large amount of extra volume to put in a much larger battery!
I did the engineering for you earlier in the thread. I know you hate facts and all (you are, after all, an Apple cultist), but the facts are clearly and unequivocally laid out - the difference in phone size CANNOT account for the extra battery.
Samsung (and, apparently Huawei who did the 6P and now Google) can package a phone more efficiently than Apple.
The iPhone 7 has lower battery life, in this set of tests, than the Samsung, LG, and HTC units.
Facts are always - ALWAYS - terrible things for religious adherents. Think about THAT one for a while. If you have the "courage" to do so, that is...
Look DAN. . . there is no "posse", only the people who have been participating on the two threads on this topic. Get off that idiotic meme. i am not in any trouble with YOU on the ropes. YOU are wrong. YOU are the one who's slinging insults because you are WRONG! Batteries are not fitted by AREA, Dan. The VOLUME of the two phones can be easily checked by anyone and here you are DANcing all over the place hoping no one will notice that the volume of the iPhone is approximately 95% of the Google Pixel XL.
You can keep screaming that the iPhone 7 has a lower capacity battery all you want, but you have to ignore the cubic capacity of the phones that it was compared against. . . and you just don't want to admit they were far larger! 18.8% to 43% larger! Give it up. YOU LOST!
This was my source of the dimensions of the Google Pixel XL. . . And was accurate as of the date of my posting.
The Google Pixel XL is 99,541.751 cubic millimeters.
That's a difference of 9,578.121 cubic millimeters.
So you found a newer article published ONE HOUR AGO with a new spec sheet and come on here to attack me. Good form. So HTC, who is building the Pixel for Google has somehow thinned down the spec a bit. Good for them! Whoopee Duck, thinner plastic.
No, I posted my source for my data well before your response. YOU went and found an alternate, incorrect source. And somehow that's on me. YOU chose to find an alternate source that was wrong, and didn't check the original source.
THAT is poor form. You screwed up, and once again you refuse to take responsibility or own up to YOUR mistake.
Oh, and the Pixel XL? It's an aluminum body, not plastic. So again - you're wrong.
Or, I can pull a Swordmaker and shout "LIAR" and call in a dozen other people to act as a posse...
Show your math. Show your sources. You refuse to do so. Because it shows you're wrong.
I put up links where the dimensions are listed. I did the math and showed the physics that unequivocally states the difference in volume CANNOT account for all the difference in battery size.
FACT: the iPhone 7, in this test, does not last as long as the other phones.
FACT: the other phones pack more mWh of battery per cc than the iPhone.
FACT: You are wrong about the dimensions of the Pixel and Pixel XL. You are wrong about the materials of the Pixel and Pixel XL. You were wrong about your claim that all the battery difference was due to the difference in sizes. Three strikes - you're out!
Sucks to be you, doesn't it?
I already have. Go away, Shanghai Kaine.
Why? This is my thread, Swordmaker Clinton.
The fact remains, Svartalfiar, that your phone is still 11.5% larger than the iPhone with essentially the same volume taken by the electronic boards. That means the 11.5% extra volume can be dedicated to extra battery capacity. If the battery took 15% of the space available inside the Xperia compared to the same 15% in the iPhone, then the battery can be 50% larger. because that extra space is 7,583 mm^3, all of which can be added to the already existing battery size in your phone! Ergo, it can easily be 2700 mAh in capacity because there is that much extra space available inside your phone.
Also, you're quite the one to talk considering your iPhone has a completely non-mainstream resolution of 750x1334!
No, there is very little fragmentation that iOS developers have to worry about. There are a very limited number of screen resolutions they have to program their screens to fit, unlike Android. It is much easier. Sorry, it is not as easy as auto-scaling to different size screens because that leads to ugly appearances and touch buttons that don't work properly.
I posted this thread, Dan. Look at the name of the poster on the original posted article. It says "Swordmaker" not "Shanghai Dan".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.