From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Thanks to both the EU & UK for forcing Apple to finally tell the truth...

Even though Apple publicly committed to the EU 2023/1669 testing procedures that took effect in June 2025, for the second time, Apple still spins lies.

None of the other major phone OEMs have made public excuses like Apple did. Just Apple.

Notably sans public excuses for poor performance, Samsung, Fairphone,
Google and Xiaomi all complied with the EU's new energy labeling regulation without issuing any statements that resemble Apple's "voluntary downgrade" narrative.

a. Fairphone leaned into the regulation, proudly showcasing their Class A repairability and durability scores as a competitive advantage.
b. Samsung and Google submitted their devices for third-party testing and published results without disclaimers or caveats.
c. Xiaomi quietly complied, focusing more on battery endurance and IP
ratings than spinning the results.

Apple's many excuses for years of lying stand out because Apple's lame
excuses, that nobody else felt were needed, introduced ambiguity where the
EU was trying to create clarity.

The whole point of the efficiency label is to give consumers standardized, independently verified data and not internal non-reproduceable metrics from
a secret lab in Cupertino that nobody can talk to or ask what they do.

Apple is the only OEM that wrapped its scores in a narrative of "caution"
and "internal superiority," while others simply let the numbers speak for themselves.

The reason Apple can't do that is Apple's lawyers have to back up that
Apple brazenly lied about their imaginary efficiency for years & years.

So now, Apple has to back up their lies with excuses nobody else makes.

Apple claims only Unit 404 can test an iPhone to reliably achieve an A.
Unit 404 hidden deep under the Cupertino spaceship is staffed by aliens.
None of them can be asked to produce the testing procedures & test results.

While the Apple trolls claim Apple never claimed they had decent
efficiency, even as the word "efficiency" is used more than a dozen times
in every 9-page Apple product description over the past few years, Gizmodo
says outright the following comments they attribute to Apple management:
"Apple emphasized all the extra work it did to maximize
battery efficiency."
REFERENCE:
*What's the Real Difference Between the iPhone Air and iPhone 16?* <https://gizmodo.com/difference-between-apple-iphone-air-and-iphone-16-2000656101>

Even with all the years of Apple's lies about efficiency, they finally did
it, just as I said they would given I study Apple's marketing strategies.
Model Eff Endur Cycles FallRes Repair
----------------------------------------------------
iPhone 17 A 46h 1000 B(180) C
iPhone 17 Pro A 50h 1000 B(180) C
iPhone 17 ProMx A 53h 1000 B(180) C
iPhone Air A 40h 1000 B(180) C
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

I guess it's time to bone up and do our homework on what Apple's god.

Since no iPhone can compare in functionality to even a $30 Android, the
only sensible comparison is between the Apple iPhones themselves.

Which this article tries to do:
*All of the iPhone 17 models compared*
<https://techcrunch.com/2025/09/12/all-of-the-iphone-17-models-compared/>

| Model | Display | Processor | Rear Camera | Battery | Resolution | Weight | Price |
|----------------|-------------|-------------|-------------------------------------|----------|--------------------|---------|--------|
| iPhone 17 | 6.3" XDR | A19 | 48MP Main + 48MP Ultra Wide | 3,692 mAh| 2622x1206 (460 ppi)| 177g | $799 |
| iPhone 17 Air | 6.5" XDR | A19 Pro | 48MP Main | 3,149 mAh| 2736x1260 (460 ppi)| 165g | $999 |
| iPhone 17 Pro | 6.3" XDR | A19 Pro | 48MP Main + Ultra Wide + Telephoto | 4,262 mAh| 2622x1206 (460 ppi)| 206g | $1,099 |
| iPhone 17 Pro Max| 6.9" XDR | A19 Pro | 48MP Main + Ultra Wide + Telephoto | 5,088 mAh| 2868x1320 (460 ppi)| 233g | $1,199 |

Notice that Apple, for the first time in its history, put a 5AH battery
into the iPhone, which equals that of my free el-cheapo 2021 Samsung.

I had predicted way back in 2021 that it would be years before Apple put a decent battery in the iPhone, and it was years - but it finally happened.

I also said years ago that Apple's efficiency was a lie, which it was.

And I said earlier this year when we found out Apple iPhones sucked at efficiency that Apple would sure as hell do something about that.

And they did!
All the iPhones released this week earned an A in efficiency for once.

It was only after a shit ton of effort on Apple's part to do that though.
*What's the Real Difference Between the iPhone Air and iPhone 16?*

<https://gizmodo.com/difference-between-apple-iphone-air-and-iphone-16-2000656101>
"Apple emphasized all the extra work it did
to maximize battery efficiency."

Even Apple knows they can't fuck up the iPhone forever before people notice (where it's funny that the Apple trolls never notice anything important).

This is all good.
a. Apple finally made the latest iPhones efficient
b. And Apple finally put a decent battery in one of them.

At this point, instead of me saying that no iPhone ever sold has anything
other than a piece-of-shit battery, I can finally claim there is one that doesn't.

And that's a step in the right direction for Apple.
Kudos to Apple for selling one iPhone that does not have a crappy battery!
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2