In article <sgtvan$10hf$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

> Name a _single_ SOC Apple has designed that does NOT have unfixable flaws?

nothing is perfect. *all* chips have unfixable flaws, which are
resolved in software.

Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> asked
>>> *How do you charge that crippled iPhone while listening to music?*
>
>> Magsafe.
>
> Or Qi.

Doesn't anyone see what is going on here, where, Apple, one by one,
strangles all functionality out of the ever more crippled iPhone?

Slowly, but surely... every year... another basic functionality is lost.

Soon, Apple will have you to the point of paying for your own breathing air.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> ftfy

See #7.
1. nospam will first brazenly call every fact he hates "false" or "lies";
2. nospam will then fabricate the existence of the imaginary functionality;
3. nospam then blames everyone else but Apple for the missing capability;
4. nospam fabricates that he told you already even though he couldn't have;
5. nospam says you should write your own apps if you want functionality;
6. nospam accuses you of being too stupid to write all your own iOS apps;
*7. nospam finally resorts to an infinity of ftfy & ad hominem deflections;*

These apologists own no shame in defending Apple to the death.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> it doesn't, and the issue is not phones, but *wireless* *headphones*.

You're too tactical; the strategic issue is...
Apple slowly strangles the functionality out of the iPhone, bit by bit.
Almost to the point where you have to buy back the very air you breathe.

RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
> However, a lot of the people I know use iPhone and swear by them.

I own _plenty_ of both Android & iOS devices myself.
<https://i.postimg.cc/YC1B906F/tmopromo01.jpg>

That's how I know almost everything nospam claims is bullshit.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> the signal path is digital from the phone to the d/a in the headset
> itself. bluetooth has zero effect.

You're too tactical; the strategic issue is...
Apple slowly strangles the functionality out of the iPhone, bit by bit.
Almost to the point where you have to buy back the very air you breathe.

On 2021-09-03 1:07 p.m., Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
>> Admittedly, the M1 is absolutely remarkable in terms of its processing
>> power.
>
> Name a _single_ SOC Apple has designed that does NOT have unfixable flaws?
> https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+m1+flaw
>

Name a single SOC from anyone that doesn't have unfixable flaws.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> nothing is perfect. *all* chips have unfixable flaws, which are
> resolved in software.

While Apple did (long ago) design a physical modem, in recent years Apple
can't design a competitive SOC (they had to throttle the Qualcomm chips).

Worse, after Apple surrendered everything to Qualcomm (costing them enough
to buy their own modern full-sized fleet aircraft carrier with planes!)...

(Apple still can't even _integrate_ Qualcomm's modem into their SOC.*
--
Meanwhile, as usual, it's been done long ago on Android phones.

In article <sgu08f$1evh$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

> That's how I know almost everything

keep thinking that.

On 9/3/2021 12:52 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> asked
>> This is complete and utter nonsense and yet another example of your
>> being a complete idiot.
>
> If it wasn't the power control and it's not the battery chemistry,
> then what was it that forced Apple to _secretly slash performance_?

Pretty sure that even Lewis and nospam understand that it was the power
control. Apple said so. Not sure what the upside is for them to
continually lie about this is, but whatever, it's just what they do.

Apple stated: "iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, and iPhone X models include
hardware updates that allow a more advanced performance management
system that more precisely allows iOS to anticipate and avoid an
unexpected shutdown."

"Compared to the iPhone 7, there is one more PMIC component from Dialog
in the iPhone 8 Plus."
<https://9to5mac.com/2018/02/06/iphone-8-iphone-x-throttling/>

"The problem facing the iPhones as Apple explains it is however
two-fold; the issue at hand happens only during load spikes in which the
battery isn’t able to maintain a high enough voltage for the PMIC to
reliably be able to use as a source."

"if this is indeed just a transient load issue why the power delivery
system was not designed sufficiently robust enough to cope with such
loads at more advanced levels of battery wear? While cold temperature
and advanced battery wear are understandable conditions under which a
device might not be able to sustain its normal operating conditions, the
state of charge of a battery under otherwise normal conditions should be
taken into account during the design of a device (Battery, SoC, PMIC,
decoupling capacitors) and its operating tolerances."
<https://mjtsai.com/blog/2017/12/22/apple-confirms-that-it-throttles-iphones-with-degraded-batteries/>.

Apple fixed the problem by adding another PMIC in the iPhone 8, that was
the hardware change they referred to. It's a good thing, not a bad
thing! It's a common issue with products that you often don't discover
issues until a lot of products have been in the hands of consumers for a
long time. To have found this issue in advance, Apple would have needed
to do stress testing using aged batteries, something that is not easy to do.

The discounted battery replacement program was the best they could do
for owners that had the 6, 6s, and 7. It mitigated the problem well
enough but of course it could not fix the root cause.

In article <sgu3gn$iu6$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Pretty sure that even Lewis and nospam understand that it was the power
> control.

it's not.

the problem is and always will be battery chemistry. as batteries age,
their ability to source high currents deteriorates.

hardware cannot fix that.

> Apple said so.

no they didn't.

> Not sure what the upside is for them to
> continually lie about this is, but whatever, it's just what they do.

that would be you.

you are misinterpreting what they said, quite likely deliberately
because *you* continually lie and try to project that onto others.

> Apple stated: "iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, and iPhone X models include
> hardware updates that allow a more advanced performance management
> system that more precisely allows iOS to anticipate and avoid an
> unexpected shutdown."

the performance management is done in *software*. full stop.

hardware changes are so that the software can work more effectively,
with more precise control.

new hardware by itself does *not* resolve the problem, nor can it.

an aging battery can no longer source peak current demands, no matter
what hardware is used.

the same aging battery issue also affected many android phones, which
did *not* mitigate peak demands, resulting in sudden shutdowns and
bootloops and lawsuits.

it also affects all other devices with batteries.

battery chemistry 101.

On 9/3/2021 1:29 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> nothing is perfect. *all* chips have unfixable flaws, which are
>> resolved in software.
>
> While Apple did (long ago) design a physical modem.

Not sure about that. They resold Novation modems under the Apple brand
for a while. Those were acoustic couplers. they also had a 300 baud
modem and a 300/1200 baud modem, the Apple Modem 300 and 1200 (A9M0304),
and it's possible those were designed in-house, but usually computer
companies sourced modems from US Robotics, Zoom, or 3Com.

Here's a vintage Apple modem <https://www.ebay.com/itm/224311893713>.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> It was and still is the battery chemistry

How exactly does "battery chemistry" force Apple to _secretly backdate_
just that one set of release notes & then publicly _lie_ about doing so?

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
> Pretty sure that even Lewis and nospam understand that it was the power
> control. Apple said so. Not sure what the upside is for them to
> continually lie about this is, but whatever, it's just what they do.

Likewise, I'm pretty sure that Lewis & nospam understand that it wasn't
"battery chemistry" that caused Apple to _secretly_ backdate the release
notes and then to subsequently publicly _lie_ about doing so.

This is a fundamental difference in operating systems newsgroup.

a. The Windows newsgroup doesn't have Microsoft zealots (AFAIK).
When Microsoft pulls a boner, we openly agree and discuss the details.
We learn from the open honest up-front conversation about Microsoft.

b. The Android newsgroup doesn't have Google zealots (AFAIK).
When Google pulls a boner, we openly agree and discuss the details.
We learn from the open honest up-front conversation about Google.

c. The iOS newsgroup is almost completely filled with Apple zealots (AFAIK).
When Apple pulls a boner, they shut down all conversation about it.
They call you a troll for bringing up facts, which they deny out of hand.
They prevent anyone from learning about Apple flaws- as if they are
paid by Apple to do so.

The easiest way to understand these Apple zealots, and to predict almost
anything they'll say (years in advance) is to assume (figuratively) that
Apple pays them to crush dissent on the iOS newsgroups. :)

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> the problem is and always will be battery chemistry.

How does "battery chemistry" force Apple to _secretly_ throttle iPhone CPUs
to a drastic level of far less than half the speed and then to lie about it?

Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> asked
>>> > sms filters out and insults anyone who tells him he's wrong,
>>> false.
>> not false.
> <whoosh>^2. severe case of sarchasm.

Steve appropriately characterized nospam's desperate defense-to-the-death of
all things Apple as "doublespeak", where nospam accuses everyone else of
being exactly what nospam is himself.

On 9/3/2021 4:50 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> It was and still is the battery chemistry
>
> How exactly does "battery chemistry" force Apple to _secretly backdate_
> just that one set of release notes & then publicly _lie_ about doing so?

nospam is wrong of course™. The battery chemistry never changed. There
was never anything wrong with the battery chemistry. Li-Ion batteries
degrade over time. The circuitry in the phone, if designed properly, can
supply sufficient current to the SOC even as the battery ages. Apple
redesigned that circuitry beginning with the iPhone 8. End of story.

In article <sgui30$4rk$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> sms is wrong of course.

ftfy

> The battery chemistry never changed. There
> was never anything wrong with the battery chemistry.

nobody said it changed or anything was wrong with it.

> Li-Ion batteries
> degrade over time.

that's *exactly* the point, and no hardware can fix that.

as batteries age, they can't provide high current under load as they
could when new. this is not a new concept and has nothing to do with
apple or li-ion batteries either.

> The circuitry in the phone, if designed properly, can
> supply sufficient current to the SOC even as the battery ages.

nope.

there is no hardware that can magically create power from a battery
that cannot provide it.

you are wrong. very wrong.

> Apple
> redesigned that circuitry beginning with the iPhone 8.

there were some hardware changes, as there are with *every* new iphone,
but not for the reasons you think.

> End of story.

if only that were true.

On 2021-09-03 4:07 p.m., Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
>> Admittedly, the M1 is absolutely remarkable in terms of its processing
>> power.
>
> Name a _single_ SOC Apple has designed that does NOT have unfixable flaws?
> https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+m1+flaw

I was focusing on performance, not security.

--
@RabidHussar

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> it was and still is the battery chemistry, as has been explained to you
> and others multiple times.

How exactly are you suggesting battery chemistry backdated release notes?
And how did battery chemistry result in an admission of guilt in French law?

How does battery chemistry force Apple to do all this in secret?
And then to lie about it in public?
--
Where those lies cost Apple over a billion dollars last year alone.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
>> While Apple did (long ago) design a physical modem.
>
> Not sure about that. They resold Novation modems under the Apple brand
> for a while.

Thanks for that information as I was going off of a claim nospam had made.
(Serves me right for believing anything those Apple apologists claim.) :)

If Apple didn't design those physical devices themselves, then it's true
that Apple has never designed a working modem ever - certainly not a chip.

Apple can't even _integrate_ a modem into their SOC (something Android has
had for a while so it's not as hard as it seems to be for Apple to do it).

IMHO, the chance of Apple designing their own modem is zero.

Luckily, Apple paid Qualcomm enough to build an entire aircraft carrier,
complete with all the war-ready electronics & planes with their electronics,
for the use of the Qualcomm modem.

That shows you how desperate Apple was for modern communication technology.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> no system is ideal in every situation.

In what situation is a huge battery & fast charger _not_ ideal?

RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
> Other than having to carry a wire with you, I have trouble finding any
> kind of issue with the fast-charging most Android devices currently
> offer, to be honest.

My free Samsung Galaxy A32 5G came with a 5AH battery & a fast charger.
https://i.postimg.cc/YC1B906F/tmopromo01.jpg

With the random PG&E outages we've been having (two a week for the entire
month of August), which can last from half a day to a day, that's ideal.

The huge battery tides me over and the fast charger catches me up.

Note that I also bought an iPhone 12 mini (at less than half price), but
that damn iPhone is always dead, as it didn't come with _any_ charger (Apple
suggests you use the old charger that came with the iPhone 7 traded in).

Worse, the battery in the iPhone 12 is an expensive piece of crap. It's not
just that iPhone batteries, by design, are crappy on capacity - but it's
also that Apple needs to pay back Qualcomm for the 5G modems so Apple
cheaped out on the expensive Apple battery in _all_ the iPhone 12 models.
--
References on the small _and_ cheap batteries in the iPhone 12 (since
apologists are desperate to refute all facts about Apple they don't like).
*Apple put cheap batteries and boards into the iPhone 12 for profit*
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/

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> keep thinking that.

We can predict your very words years ahead nospam, mainly because you
_always_ will take the side of Apple under every circumstance.

You'll deny all facts about Apple that show Apple in a negative light.
And you'll blame everyone but Apple for everything Apple does that is bad.

Just watch.
You'll defend Apple to the death.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
> nospam is wrong of course™. The battery chemistry never changed. There
> was never anything wrong with the battery chemistry. Li-Ion batteries
> degrade over time. The circuitry in the phone, if designed properly, can
> supply sufficient current to the SOC even as the battery ages. Apple
> redesigned that circuitry beginning with the iPhone 8. End of story.

Absolutely. Everyone agrees with you (except Apple zealots).

*The iPad didn't have the problem of secret throttling & backdating lies.*

And it used the _same_ battery chemistry.