On 9/2/2021 6:47 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>>> The Google Pixel 5a with 5G isn't courageous; it's downright cowardly!
>>
>> the pixel 5a also overheats and throttles down to where it stops
>> working in as little as a half-hour.
>
> You always blame everyone you can for Apple's lack of a headphone jack.
>
> I've noticed your sleazy tactics are similar to Apple's sleazy tactics.
> Blame _secret_ throttling (& backdated release notes) on battery chemistry.
>
> What's _different_ is the iOS customer is not like Windows/Android people.
> The iOS customer is like you: _Desperate_ to be told "good things" by Apple.

The Pixel overheating issue appears to be real. I suspect that the
processor is running flat out when recording 4K video and causing the
problem. It's using a Snapdragon 765 processor and that processor is
likely not fast enough for sustained 4K video recording.

Some apps are just not appropriate for some phones. My son's iPhone X
will shut down if he runs Waze for more than around 20 minutes, and
that's with the phone mounted on one of those vent phone holders with
cold are blowing on it. I've gotten the over-heating warning "iPad has
to cool down before you can use it" on my iPad Pro occasionally.

In article <sgs9vb$enk$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Some apps are just not appropriate for some phones. My son's iPhone X
> will shut down if he runs Waze for more than around 20 minutes,

bullshit.

if that's even slightly true, the phone is defective or there's a *lot*
of details you're leaving out, or it's just flat out false.

> and
> that's with the phone mounted on one of those vent phone holders with
> cold are blowing on it. I've gotten the over-heating warning "iPad has
> to cool down before you can use it" on my iPad Pro occasionally.

waze does not cause the device to get hot.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> Then why did Apple admit guilt for purposefully _shortening_ iPhone life?
>
> they didn't.

*Nobody lies like Apple lies*
*Nobody laughs at their customers more than does Apple*

You can't pay the criminal fine without admitting to the criminal guilt.
https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+fined+paris+prosecutors+throttling+admit+guilt

>> And why was Apple's throttling _secret_ by trying to not get caught?
>
> they weren't.

*Nobody lies like Apple lies*
*Nobody fools their customers more than does Apple*

Apple kept throttling a secret because they didn't want to get caught.
https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+caught+secret+throttling

>> And, why did Apple also secretly _backdate_ all the iPhone release notes?
>
> they didn't.

*Nobody lies like Apple lies*
*Nobody fucks their customers more than does Apple*

Apple paid $113M alone for getting caught for lies of the secret backdating.
https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+caught+backdating+release+notes+throttling

> the real question is why do you lie so much?

*Nobody lies like Apple lies*
*Nobody betrays their customers more than does Apple*

Apple paid over a billion dollars last year alone for their lies.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/batterygate-apple-betrayed-its-customers-and-now-it-faces-a-world-of-hurt/

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> except it stops working after a half-hour, a rather important detail
> you are ignoring.

Every excuse you come up with is because *you _hate_ the iPhone is crippled*

It's a consumer operating system that can't do the _simplest_ of things.
Like WiFi debugging.
Like Cellular debugging.
Like TOR browsing.
Like Automatic Call Recording.
Like System Wide Firewalls.
Like System Wide Ad Blocking.
Like default GPS Spoofing.
Like portable Encryption Containers.
etc.

You _hate_ that to own an iPhone is to own a crippled operating system.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> *How do you charge that crippled iPhone while listening to music?*
>
> when using wired headphones, put it on any standard qi pad.

Hehhehheh....

One by one, *Apple removes functionality so you have to _buy_ it back*.

Apple is one of the smartest marketing organizations in the world.

Apple smart; customer stupid.

On 2021-09-02 7:44 p.m., nospam wrote:
> In article <RRcYI.12501$tA2.5848@fx02.iad>, RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar>
> wrote:
>
>> Apple's excuse gave me the impression that they
>> were going to sell music where the recording and everything between was
>> completely digital.
>
> a fully digital path has been the case since shortly after cds came
> out, more than 30 years ago. that's what the ddd means.
>
> not long after that, people had hi-resolution encodings (96khz &
> 192khz, 24 & 32 bit), with various justifications for doing so (none
> credible).
>
> nevertheless, the only way to benefit from hi-res audio on a phone is
> an external d/a, *not* an analog headphone jack.
>
> another feature that's not possible with an analog headphone jack is
> spatial audio.

I have no doubt that you're right. In my case, other than playing music
in the car where there are about twenty speakers, I'll usually listen to
tunes over headphones so these audio improvements are mostly
useless to me. Kudos to Apple for trying something different which might
appeal to true audiophiles but it probably won't be seen as a killer
feature by the rest.

>> I'm not a fan of Bluetooth speakers since the first unit I bought died
>> on one side and the second has a charging issue on one of the pods (the
>> bud never sits right and thus doesn't make the connection necessary to
>> charge). They're convenient when they work, especially if you work out,
>> but in every other situation the wired kind of best.
>
> you might want to try recent bluetooth headphones, some of which are as
> good or better than many wired headphones.
>
> apple's airpods streams digital music directly to the airpods, where
> it's decoded, which along with accelerometers, allows for spatial
> audio.
>
> original bluetooth implementations would decode mp3/aac locally on the
> device, then re-encode it for bluetooth. not good.
>
> airpods don't fall out very easily, as can be seen in numerous videos
> of people jumping, dancing, head-shaking.
>
> it's the wire that invariably gets caught on something and pulls out
> the earbud.
>
> airpods pro have fitted tips to fit snugly in the ear so that the noise
> cancellation can work and definitely don't fall out, although not
> everyone finds that to be comfortable. it does vent, so that part isn't
> an issue.
>
> other wireless earbuds are similar (galaxy buds, pixel buds, etc.)

The biggest issue I have with Bluetooth buds is not so much the quality
of the audio or how well they stay in the ear as much as the fact that
your investment is generally worthless after a few years when the
batteries inside inevitably die. I know that lots of people don't mind
buying new hardware every two or three years but I've had my Bose
headphones since 2012 or so and they still filter out the outside noise
and provide excellent audio nine years later. Call me frugal, but I
simply can't subscribe to the idea that I must change my equipment that
often. I imagine that I'm in the majority since technology as outdated
as CDs, DVDs and even VHS stuck around for a long time after they were
replaced by something much better.

--
@RabidHussar

On 2021-09-02 9:37 p.m., sms wrote:
> On 9/2/2021 4:10 PM, RabidHussar wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I'm not a fan of Bluetooth speakers since the first unit I bought died
>> on one side and the second has a charging issue on one of the pods
>> (the bud never sits right and thus doesn't make the connection
>> necessary to charge). They're convenient when they work, especially if
>> you work out, but in every other situation the wired kind of best.
>
> An audiophile would not use Bluetooth headphones or speakers because
> technically there can be some degradation.

That's possible, but I can't imagine how a digital connection would
degrade the audio quality any more than an analog connection would. With
analog, degradation is guaranteed whereas with digital, the connection
is either made or isn't. If it is, it operates as well as it should.

> But thw degradation assumes
> that you've stored your music files in a lossless format like FLAC or
> ALAC. If you've stored your music in a lossy format like MP3, AAC, or
> WAV, the quality ship sailed long before the music is sent over Bluetooth.

Agreed. Still, the quality of lossy is high enough that unless you're a
crazed audiophile, you'll consider it fine. I imagine that it sucks if
you have some elaborate speaker set-up at home and want to make sure
that you're getting some sort of surround experience, but for the
majority of us, stereo and a slight muffling of the mostly inaudible
sounds is acceptable.

> Plugging a wire into the USB or Lightning port and then using a dongle
> that converted the sound from digital to analog would be preferable to
> Bluetooth if you're playing music stored in a lossless format. Even
> then, it would be difficult for a non-audiophile to realize the
> difference unless perhaps they were comparing the same music in MP3
> versus ALAC or FLAC, using the same equipment.

A lot of people have done the FLAC vs. MP3 vs. OGG vs. AAC test and not
only have they had trouble distinguishing between those formats, but
they had trouble distinguishing between 320kbps vs 96kbps. In some
cases, people preferred the sound of 128kbps as ridiculous as that might
seem. I don't recall the sites that provided these tests since I
ventured to many but a routine search will find a few with similar such
tests. For my tastes, it's OGG Vorbis at 320kbps that does the trick
though the resulting sound file is not that much smaller than FLAC.

--
@RabidHussar

On 2021-09-02 10:14 p.m., nospam wrote:
> In article <sgrurb$10hf$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
> <Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:
>
>>>> The Google Pixel 5a with 5G isn't courageous; it's downright cowardly!
>>>
>>> the pixel 5a also overheats and throttles down to where it stops
>>> working in as little as a half-hour.
>>
>> You always blame everyone you can for Apple's lack of a headphone jack.
>
> i'm not blaming anyone for anything.
>
> i'm simply pointing out that the pixel 5a, which *you* mentioned, has
> significant thermal problems.

Most likely true especially since Pixels are intended to be less
expensive, more accessible hardware. It's guaranteed that Google made a
few compromises along the way to reach their intended price point.

< snip >

--
@RabidHussar

On 2021-09-02 10:14 p.m., nospam wrote:
> In article <sgru8l$p8j$1@dont-email.me>, sms
> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> An audiophile would not use Bluetooth headphones or speakers because
>> technically there can be some degradation.
>
> not due to bluetooth, because the signal path is entirely digital from
> the phone to the headphones, with the d/a in the headphones.
>
> that means that the sound quality is entirely dependent on the quality
> the speaker components, *not* bluetooth.

I have to agree with this.

>> But thw degradation assumes
>> that you've stored your music files in a lossless format like FLAC or
>> ALAC.
>
> nope. it doesn't assume that.
>
>> If you've stored your music in a lossy format like MP3, AAC, or
>> WAV, the quality ship sailed long before the music is sent over Bluetooth.
>
> only if it's a low bitrate.
>
> 256kbps aac is audibly indistinguishable from lossless, something which
> has been repeatedly confirmed in objective double-blind tests, even
> with people who claim to be audiophiles.
>
> any difference might show up on an oscilloscope, but it's not anything
> anyone can hear.

It really depends to be honest but I'll be the first to say that Apple's
AAC encoder is magnificent and provides some excellent sound. For some,
OGG Vorbis is similar and wins merely because it is free of patents but
there is no doubt that AAC is selling an excellent-sounding audio file
in the iTunes store. Where I believe it is easy to distinguish between
an Apple AAC file and a FLAC is in a rock song where there are many
guitars playing simultaneously. A lossy file will muffle the instruments
in such a way that you can't distinguish between them whereas with FLAC,
obviously, the sound is perfect. Otherwise, I haven't seen any
compromise other than, of course, the fact that the lossy format is
stereo and the other permits for a better use of a more elaborate sound
set-up.

>> Plugging a wire into the USB or Lightning port and then using a dongle
>> that converted the sound from digital to analog would be preferable to
>> Bluetooth if you're playing music stored in a lossless format.
>
> even better is to skip the adapter entirely.
>
> high end headphones have a much better d/a than any adapter ever could
> as well as what's internal to the phone.
>
>> Even
>> then, it would be difficult for a non-audiophile to realize the
>> difference unless perhaps they were comparing the same music in MP3
>> versus ALAC or FLAC, using the same equipment.
>
> even audiophiles can't tell the difference between properly encoded
> mp3/aac and lossless, using the same content on the same equipment.
>
> they might think they can, but in objective tests, they do no better
> than chance. they're guessing.

The tests have confirmed this but some people do indeed have a better
ear and can notice the very subtle differences between the formats. It
should be noted that in the case of MP3, people can't tell the
difference if the encoder used is the LAME one; other MP3 encoders do a
very poor job.

--
@RabidHussar

On 2021-09-02 10:14 p.m., nospam wrote:
> In article <sgrv1l$12c7$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
> <Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:
>
>>>> Not having the annoyance of a wire is nice,
>>>
>>> very much so.
>>
>> Not having the choice is an annoyance.
>
> iphone users have a choice of wired or wireless.
>
> that's *always* been the case.
>
> meanwhile, there are at least two android phones that do not have a usb
> port, forcing wireless for everything. to be fair, neither sells in any
> appreciable quantities.
>
> as usual, you're criticizing the wrong products.

Wireless charging is convenient but slow and I would definitely be upset
to be forced to rely on it.

--
@RabidHussar

On 2021-09-02 10:14 p.m., nospam wrote:
> In article <sgrvd9$15nb$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
> <Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:
>
>> *Apple admitted their _sole_ purpose was to _reduce_ iPhone useful life.*
>
> nope. they did the exact opposite, *extending* the useful life.

I can concur here. I speak and read French naturally and can remember
very distinctly that the company said they reduced the performance of
the iPhone specifically to ensure that long-time users of the hardware
would get the same kind of battery life three years in as they would
when they first purchased the unit. It was the reduced _performance_
people were upset about, not the battery life.

--
@RabidHussar

On 2021-09-03 12:05 a.m., Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> iphone users have a choice of wired or wireless.
>
> Choice?
> You mean juicy Apple profits, right?
>
> For example...
> *How do you charge that crippled iPhone while listening to music?*
>
> How do you charge that iPhone with the charger that came in the box when the
> charger port is used to replace the lost functionality of the headphone jack
> that Apple "courageously" removed so that you'd buy "stuff" to get it back?
>
> Oh wait, you didn't even get a charger in the box?
> Oh my.
>
> And, Apple cheaped out on the batteries too?
> Really?
>
> Oh, I see.
> Cheap batteries. No charger. No headphone port.
>
> [*Apple used extremely cheap battery parts in the iPhone 12*
> 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/
>
> Wow.
> I'm sorry for you.
>
> All that choice Apple exercised to _remove_ functionality.
> Apple sure has done a lot recently to further cripple the iPhone indeed.
>
> But no way is Apple removing functionality one by one.
> Just so that you'd have to buy it back.
>
> Naaaah.
> Apple wouldn't do such a thing.
>
> They earn their profits the non-sleazy way.
> Right?
>
> Let's see...
> a. No charger & no earbuds in the box
> b. Puny and very cheap batteries
> c. No headphone jack
>
> Well then, how do you charge that crippled iPhone while listening to music?
>

Wow, I was unaware that the later iPhones used such awful hardware for
the batteries. Thanks for that.

--
@RabidHussar

In article <I6oYI.58231$Kv2.53503@fx47.iad>, RabidHussar
<rabid@huss.ar> wrote:

>
> The biggest issue I have with Bluetooth buds is not so much the quality
> of the audio or how well they stay in the ear as much as the fact that
> your investment is generally worthless after a few years when the
> batteries inside inevitably die.

that is true, however, some of them are fairly cheap (under $50) so the
net cost per year is almost nothing.

the convenience benefit is *well* worth it, even for the higher end
models.

In article <pdoYI.13289$g81.10961@fx33.iad>, RabidHussar
<rabid@huss.ar> wrote:

> > i'm simply pointing out that the pixel 5a, which *you* mentioned, has
> > significant thermal problems.
>
> Most likely true especially since Pixels are intended to be less
> expensive, more accessible hardware. It's guaranteed that Google made a
> few compromises along the way to reach their intended price point.

the pixel *a series is the budget version.

the standard pixels are google's flagship version, competing directly
with iphones (even at the same price points).

the pixel 6 is rumoured to be an even higher priced phone than the
previous pixels.

regardless, no phone should overheat in a half-hour. that's bad.

In article <3joYI.15695$tG6.11632@fx39.iad>, RabidHussar
<rabid@huss.ar> wrote:

> >> Not having the choice is an annoyance.
> >
> > iphone users have a choice of wired or wireless.
> >
> > that's *always* been the case.
> >
> > meanwhile, there are at least two android phones that do not have a usb
> > port, forcing wireless for everything. to be fair, neither sells in any
> > appreciable quantities.
> >
> > as usual, you're criticizing the wrong products.
>
> Wireless charging is convenient but slow and I would definitely be upset
> to be forced to rely on it.

it's not significantly slower, and since most people charge overnight,
how long it takes doesn't matter.

a portless phone is an interesting idea though. electric toothbrushes
have been doing it since forever. drop the toothbrush into the cradle.

In article <kkoYI.15696$tG6.4969@fx39.iad>, RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar>
wrote:

> >
> >> *Apple admitted their _sole_ purpose was to _reduce_ iPhone useful life.*
> >
> > nope. they did the exact opposite, *extending* the useful life.
>
> I can concur here. I speak and read French naturally and can remember
> very distinctly that the company said they reduced the performance of
> the iPhone specifically to ensure that long-time users of the hardware
> would get the same kind of battery life three years in as they would
> when they first purchased the unit. It was the reduced _performance_
> people were upset about, not the battery life.

what apple did was clip only peak demands because the battery could no
longer supply the necessary current for such demands as it could when
new.

it was not an overall reduction in performance and it took nearly a
year for anyone to even notice.

the alternative was sudden unexpected shutdowns due to the battery
being pushed past it's limit, which is a *lot* more annoying, risks
data loss, and overall, slows things down a lot more because you have
to wait for the phone to reboot after the shutdown.

their goal was to eliminate the shutdowns and extend the useful life of
the phone. they could have explained it a bit better though.

this is also something that affects all batteries, regardless of
device. older car batteries often have trouble starting a car, which is
a peak demand.

android device makers ignored the issue, which resulted in lawsuits.

in some cases, the sudden shutdown occurred during boot (high cpu
demand) causing a boot loop.

<https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/11/18306552/google-huawei-nexus-6p-clas
s-action-lawsuit-settlement-agreement-compensate>
Google and Huawei have preliminarily agreed to settle a class action
lawsuit from Nexus 6P users who say their devices experienced a
bootlooping issue that caused the phones to shut down randomly,
regardless of the battery level. Pending court approval, the
companies would be liable to a $9.75 million settlement for the
class action that began in April 2017, which may result in payments
of up to $400 for participating plaintiffs.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> what apple did was clip only peak demands because the battery could no
> longer supply the necessary current for such demands as it could when
> new.

Which simply proves how horribly inept Apple is in product design.
Apple thinks its customer is stupid: And they are.
That billion dollars came out of _your_ pocket.

> it was not an overall reduction in performance and it took nearly a
> year for anyone to even notice.

Apologists are _desperate_ to deflect the simple fact: Apple got caught.

There's no way to hide Apple got caught _secretly_ reducing performance.
Apple also got caught _backdating_ the release notes & lying about it.

*Nobody lies like Apple lies*

Apple laughs at you - the customer - whom they have no respect for.
That billion dollars came out of _your_ pocket.

RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
> I can concur here. I speak and read French naturally and can remember
> very distinctly that the company said they reduced the performance of
> the iPhone specifically to ensure that long-time users of the hardware
> would get the same kind of battery life three years in as they would
> when they first purchased the unit. It was the reduced _performance_
> people were upset about, not the battery life.

*Nobody lies like Apple lies*

You think Apple lawyers are stupid?
That's the _best_ settlement Apple could possibly get for their lies.

*The fact is Apple paid the _criminal_ fine for the _criminal_ offense.*

The apologists claim Apple didn't admit to guilt but that's impossible.
Apologists are frantically _desperate_ to claim what happened didn't happen.

RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
> For my tastes, it's OGG Vorbis at 320kbps that does the trick
> though the resulting sound file is not that much smaller than FLAC.

Slowly but surely, Apple _cripples_ the hardware/software in the iPhone.

*Apple removed the basic headphone jack functionality so you'd buy it back.*
It's what Apple does.

RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
> It really depends to be honest but I'll be the first to say that Apple's
> AAC encoder is magnificent and provides some excellent sound.

*Apple _removes_ basic functionality - so that you must buy it back.*
One by one.

It's what Apple does.
(You think those insane profits are because Apple is stupid?)

Over time, consistently so, Apple _removes_ more and more functionality.
Like the charger in the box.

Apple smart; customer stupid.

On 2021-09-03 12:57 a.m., sms wrote:
> On 9/2/2021 6:47 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
>> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>>>> The Google Pixel 5a with 5G isn't courageous; it's downright cowardly!
>>>
>>> the pixel 5a also overheats and throttles down to where it stops
>>> working in as little as a half-hour.
>>
>> You always blame everyone you can for Apple's lack of a headphone jack.
>>
>> I've noticed your sleazy tactics are similar to Apple's sleazy tactics.
>> Blame _secret_ throttling (& backdated release notes) on battery
>> chemistry.
>>
>> What's _different_ is the iOS customer is not like Windows/Android
>> people.
>> The iOS customer is like you: _Desperate_ to be told "good things" by
>> Apple.
>
> The Pixel overheating issue appears to be real. I suspect that the
> processor is running flat out when recording 4K video and causing the
> problem. It's using a Snapdragon 765 processor and that processor is
> likely not fast enough for sustained 4K video recording.
>
> Some apps are just not appropriate for some phones. My son's iPhone X
> will shut down if he runs Waze for more than around 20 minutes, and
> that's with the phone mounted on one of those vent phone holders with
> cold are blowing on it. I've gotten the over-heating warning "iPad has
> to cool down before you can use it" on my iPad Pro occasionally.

Funny enough, most of my computing is done on an ASUS Zephyrus G14
nowadays. That thing is as the same size as a Macbook Pro but has a
RTX3060 within it in addition to a Ryzen 9 5900HS. You would expect it
to overheat like crazy but it doesn't. One has to wonder how an _iPad_
manages to overheat with its lack of processing power.

--
@RabidHussar

In article <sgte1f$hlt$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

> Slowly but surely, illicit drugs _cripples_ my brain.

ftfy

RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
> Wow, I was unaware that the later iPhones used such awful hardware for
> the batteries. Thanks for that.

My facts are never wrong because I don't make this shit up.
It's _all_ in the news how Apple cheaped out on iPhone 12 batteries.

Apple _crippled_ the iPhone battery (and they don't even deny doing so).
If you don't know it - then you don't know _anything_ about Apple products.

None of you know anything as the cheap batteries and boards in the iPhone 12
is well publicized as are the _criminal_ offenses Apple admitted guilt on.

On 2021-09-03 1:03 a.m., nospam wrote:
> In article <sgs9vb$enk$1@dont-email.me>, sms
> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Some apps are just not appropriate for some phones. My son's iPhone X
>> will shut down if he runs Waze for more than around 20 minutes,
>
> bullshit.
>
> if that's even slightly true, the phone is defective or there's a *lot*
> of details you're leaving out, or it's just flat out false.
>
>> and
>> that's with the phone mounted on one of those vent phone holders with
>> cold are blowing on it. I've gotten the over-heating warning "iPad has
>> to cool down before you can use it" on my iPad Pro occasionally.
>
> waze does not cause the device to get hot.

I have to agree that it is unlikely for Waze, by itself, to be
responsible for that. However, as far as I know, the application is free
and needs a way to monetize itself so it's possible that it does a lot
of spying in the background to pay for itself. Otherwise, it is
constantly receiving and sending data about wherever you are and that
might require a lot more processing power than the iPhone is capable of.

--
@RabidHussar

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> it's not significantly slower, and since most people charge overnight,
> how long it takes doesn't matter.

Apple always _limits_ your choices by making you purchase them back.
A big battery & a fast charger is very conveniently satisfying indeed.

My free Samsung A32 5G came with a _huge_ battery _and_ a _fast_ charger.
In the box.

> a portless phone is an interesting idea though. electric toothbrushes
> have been doing it since forever. drop the toothbrush into the cradle.

Given the twice weekly PG&E power outages we've been experiencing here in
the Santa Cruz Mountains of California, you'd be surprised at how convenient
a fast charger is.

Apple always _limits_ your choices by making you purchase them back.
Apple smart; customer stupid.