From: RichA <rander3128@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Apple cuts $50 off price for replacment phone batteries,sheepishly offers apology
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.55.158.143 with SMTP id h137mr26991800qke.13.1514571111526;
Fri, 29 Dec 2017 10:11:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.31.165.202 with SMTP id o193mr3251974vke.9.1514571111154;
Fri, 29 Dec 2017 10:11:51 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!m31no3674254qtf.0!news-out.google.com!v55ni1144qtc.0!nntp.google.com!g35no3670603qtk.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 10:11:50 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <291220171009019226%nospam@nospam.invalid>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.95.0.172; posting-account=8Vsz_woAAABQPV3Epo66m_rYvK1EHzOV
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.95.0.172
References: <fa9e920e-9b02-4238-9090-3c1dc47194dd@googlegroups.com>
<p25i69$fbq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <291220171009019226%nospam@nospam.invalid>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <61e967ca-960b-483d-98fa-4d44ebf0197f@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Apple cuts $50 off price for replacment phone batteries,
sheepishly offers apology
From: RichA <rander3128@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 18:11:51 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 37
Print Article
Forward Article
On Friday, 29 December 2017 10:09:09 UTC-5, nospam  wrote:
> In article <p25i69$fbq$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Mayayana
><mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> 
> > | You KNOW they aren't making a loss, even at $29.00 so their margins on the 
> > batteries are HUGE!
> > 
> >   I already explained that in your last thread
> > and it was detailed in the BBC link I posted.
> > Apple may not get caught very often, but you
> > don't have to rub it in. 
> 
> apple didn't 'get caught'. 
> 
> many other products use the same or similar power management for
> exactly the same reasons.
> 
> there is no avoiding the fact that batteries age and their ability to
> source high current loads is reduced over time. 
> 
> android phones:
> <https://source.android.com/devices/tech/power/mgmt>
>   Battery life is a perennial user concern. To extend battery life,
>   Android continually adds new features and optimizations to help the
>   platform optimize the off-charger behavior of applications and
>   devices.
> 
> guess what 'optimize the off-charger behavior' means.
> 
> it's doublespeak for 'reduce performance when on battery power so it
> lasts longer'.

Something about "two wrongs" comes up.
 I presume they do the tests on this?  So, what is the average battery lifespan, what is the decline
in output based on use/time and why not just publish those figures so people would have a reasonable
idea of how long the performance they paid for will work to 100%?