From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Tyrone wrote:

c. You and I use different sources for tests of iPhone "efficiency"

Yes, because I use multiple sources that prove the point. You ignore those. iPhones run longer (or the same) than Android phones that have larger batteries. Which is more efficient?

For years, people like Chris have been so confused by "efficiency" claims
that they end up mixing up battery life with efficiency.

They are not the same thing.
<https://regulatoryinfo.apple.com/energylabels>

Battery life is a function of battery capacity, workload, display power, thermal limits, background task policy, and many other factors.

A phone can last a long time simply by being aggressive about throttling or power saving. That does not make the hardware efficient. It just means the phone is tuned to save power.

Efficiency is energy consumed per unit of work.

That is why the EU created a standardized, audited energy label for smartphones. It measures actual energy consumption, not marketing claims.
<https://9to5mac.com/2025/06/20/iphone-and-ipad-now-come-with-eu-energy-labels-heres-what-they-reveal/>

When the EU labels went live on June 20, 2025, every iPhone received a B rating. This is reported by Heise, which states plainly that "the iPhone
gets a B" under the new EU energy label system. Apple did not receive an A rating at launch. Later, Apple published its own methodology and said the phones "qualified" for A, but that was Apple's interpretation, not the EU's rating.
<https://www.heise.de/en/news/New-EU-labels-Apple-criticizes-test-methods-downgrades-iPhone-and-iPad-10455657.html>

Apple used their classic stall-blame-and-deny tactic, which doesn't
surprise anyone, simply because their phones were all less efficient.
<https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-criticizes-EU-Energy-Label-following-poor-ratings-given-for-the-iPhone-and-iPad.1042477.0.html>

Still, Apple's excuses being what Apple does, the fact is that the only regulated, independent efficiency metric we have is the EU label, and that rating was B for all prior iPhones at launch. That is the factual
definition of efficiency in this context.
<https://www.techrepublic.com/article/news-apple-iphone-ipad-eu-energy-labels/>

Battery life is not efficiency.

And, Apple has improved their efficiency rating since then, so you're
trying to argue that Apple realized how bad their efficiency was, so they
took steps only later in this year to rectify that specific deficiency.

Which is true so I agree with you.
Apple got caught with its pants down on efficiency claims.
<https://www.bgr.com/tech/8-things-we-learned-from-the-iphone-energy-labels-apple-was-forced-to-add-in-europe/>

Which I knew was going to happen since I've known it for years.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com> wrote:

Tyrone wrote:

c. You and I use different sources for tests of iPhone "efficiency"

Yes, because I use multiple sources that prove the point. You ignore those. >> iPhones run longer (or the same) than Android phones that have larger
batteries. Which is more efficient?

For years, people like Chris have been so confused by "efficiency" claims that they end up mixing up battery life with efficiency.

Utter rubbish. The only confusion here is with you and your (lack of)
memory.

I explained to you very clearly the maths behind the EU battery measures
via my access to the EU API. You and I identified in the equation begins
their ratings was that the *power* draw by iphones was much *lower* than
other phones. For that reason, iphone batteries last much longer then their
raw capacities would suggest in comparison to flagship androids.

You yourself exclaimed surprise at this finding.

Of course, your dogma wouldn't let you accept it. So here we are back again "discussing" topics that have already been put to bed.

Still, Apple's excuses being what Apple does, the fact is that the only regulated, independent efficiency metric we have is the EU label, and that rating was B for all prior iPhones at launch. That is the factual
definition of efficiency in this context. <https://www.techrepublic.com/article/news-apple-iphone-ipad-eu-energy-labels/>

Battery life is not efficiency.

And, Apple has improved their efficiency rating since then, so you're
trying to argue that Apple realized how bad their efficiency was, so they took steps only later in this year to rectify that specific deficiency.

You'll note that iphones still have smaller batteries than comparable
androids, right? Apple released their first phone with >5000 mAh capacity
in September with the Pro Max (5,088 mAh).

Which I knew was going to happen since I've known it for years.

You've not been able to evidence any of your so called "knowledge" for
years. Your don't support your exaggerations and extrapolations.

All the benchmarks and various real-world tests provided to you
demonstrated that in spades. You ignored it, of course.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Chris wrote:

Marian <marianjones@helpfulpeople.com> wrote:

Tyrone wrote:

c. You and I use different sources for tests of iPhone "efficiency"

Yes, because I use multiple sources that prove the point. You ignore those.
iPhones run longer (or the same) than Android phones that have larger
batteries. Which is more efficient?

For years, people like Chris have been so confused by "efficiency" claims
that they end up mixing up battery life with efficiency.

Utter rubbish. The only confusion here is with you and your (lack of)
memory.

I explained to you very clearly the maths behind the EU battery measures
via my access to the EU API. You and I identified in the equation begins their ratings was that the *power* draw by iphones was much *lower* than other phones. For that reason, iphone batteries last much longer then their raw capacities would suggest in comparison to flagship androids.

You yourself exclaimed surprise at this finding.

Of course, your dogma wouldn't let you accept it. So here we are back again "discussing" topics that have already been put to bed.

Still, Apple's excuses being what Apple does, the fact is that the only
regulated, independent efficiency metric we have is the EU label, and that >> rating was B for all prior iPhones at launch. That is the factual
definition of efficiency in this context.
<https://www.techrepublic.com/article/news-apple-iphone-ipad-eu-energy-labels/>

Battery life is not efficiency.

And, Apple has improved their efficiency rating since then, so you're
trying to argue that Apple realized how bad their efficiency was, so they
took steps only later in this year to rectify that specific deficiency.

You'll note that iphones still have smaller batteries than comparable androids, right? Apple released their first phone with >5000 mAh capacity
in September with the Pro Max (5,088 mAh).

Which I knew was going to happen since I've known it for years.

You've not been able to evidence any of your so called "knowledge" for
years. Your don't support your exaggerations and extrapolations.

All the benchmarks and various real-world tests provided to you
demonstrated that in spades. You ignored it, of course.

Chris, you are shifting the discussion away from the actual point.
Which is fine, if the topic were "battery life" and not "efficiency".

But the topic is efficiency.

The question here is not whether iPhones have good battery life.
a. The question is how "efficiency" is defined and measured.
b. And, when defined & measured, how Apple's iPhones fared.

This is not a discussion of the wondrously creative ways Apple manages to
throw the word "efficient" 12 times in the 9-page iPhone data pages.

Using that word 12 times in a 9-page document is no accident, right?
For years, Apple was claiming their iPhones are efficient.

And yet, when they reported the efficiency for iPhones earlier this year,
only Apple was unable to certify even a single model as an A in efficiency.

That's telling.
a. It's not about the battery size, voltage, or capacity.
b. It's about how that iPhone fares in an efficiency benchmark.

There is only one regulated, independent efficiency metric for smartphones:
the EU energy label.
A. That metric does not measure battery size or battery life.
B. It measures energy efficiency under standardized test conditions.

When the EU labels were first published earlier this year, every iPhone
model at launch received a B in efficiency. Meanwhile, every major Android manufacturer had at least one model that earned an A. That is simply what
the EU data shows. It is not an opinion, and it is not "dogma."

It is the only standardized efficiency benchmark we have.
Battery life is not efficiency.

A device can have excellent battery life because of usage patterns, display choices, or thermal limits, while still scoring lower on a regulated
efficiency test.

You are free to argue that the EU metric is flawed or incomplete,
but you cannot replace a regulated efficiency standard with your own
definition and then claim that others are confused.

If you want to discuss efficiency as defined by the EU, we can do that.

If you want to discuss battery life, that is a very different topic.

But treating them as the same thing is not accurate and does not move the conversation forward in a manner that is conducive to adult discourse.

Your call if you wish to remain civil and discuss this at an adult level.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2