Apple Accused of Vastly Exaggerating iPhone Battery Life (hothardware.com) 93
"A new report by Which?, an advocacy group in the United Kingdom, found that Apple and HTC both overstate battery life on smartphones, sometimes 'significantly'..." reports Hot Hardware.
"In stark contrast, Nokia, Samsung, and Sony all underestimate or are conservative about battery life with the phones that were tested, based on the organization's methods." "Which? tested nine iPhone models and found that all of them fell short of Apple's battery time claims. In fact, Apple stated that its batteries lasted between 18 percent and 51 percent longer than the Which? results," Which? said. The biggest discrepancy belonged to the iPhone XR, one of Apple's newest generation handsets... Apple claims that the iPhone XR has a talk time of up to 25 hours. However, Which? found that the battery lasted for 16 hours and 32 minutes during its own talk time tests. Apple's rated metric is 51 percent higher...
It seems clear that Which? is using a different method of testing than the manufacturers, but the disparity does not always work against the phone makers. For example, Which? found that Sony's devices lasted 21 percent longer than the manufacturer's own talk time battery life claims.
HTC cited "differences in setup and testing environments" that could explain "some variation," according to the article, and Apple also said they stand behind their battery life claims.
Apple says that the iPhone "is engineered to intelligently manage power usage to maximize battery life. Our testing methodology reflects that intelligence."
"In stark contrast, Nokia, Samsung, and Sony all underestimate or are conservative about battery life with the phones that were tested, based on the organization's methods." "Which? tested nine iPhone models and found that all of them fell short of Apple's battery time claims. In fact, Apple stated that its batteries lasted between 18 percent and 51 percent longer than the Which? results," Which? said. The biggest discrepancy belonged to the iPhone XR, one of Apple's newest generation handsets... Apple claims that the iPhone XR has a talk time of up to 25 hours. However, Which? found that the battery lasted for 16 hours and 32 minutes during its own talk time tests. Apple's rated metric is 51 percent higher...
It seems clear that Which? is using a different method of testing than the manufacturers, but the disparity does not always work against the phone makers. For example, Which? found that Sony's devices lasted 21 percent longer than the manufacturer's own talk time battery life claims.
HTC cited "differences in setup and testing environments" that could explain "some variation," according to the article, and Apple also said they stand behind their battery life claims.
Apple says that the iPhone "is engineered to intelligently manage power usage to maximize battery life. Our testing methodology reflects that intelligence."
Really?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple lies to its customers? I'm shocked. Shocked! I tell you!
Re: Really?? (Score:5, Funny)
They didn't lie, the users are just talking wrong.
Re: Really?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Really?? (Score:2, Informative)
If you think these tests are done using a WiFi access point you are showing your intense ignorance of the mobile industry. Everything is cables to RF test equipment. Power levels and signal conditions are tightly controlled to simulate specific environments and ensure repeatability.
Re: (Score:1)
The first thing I do on an iPhone is disable push for email and instead set it to check every 30 mins or every hour. That makes a huge difference in battery life.
There is no reason to receive emails instantly, once per hour is fast enough. If it's urgent, they'll call.
Edited the opening line for consistency (Score:5, Funny)
Re: Edited the opening line for consistency (Score:1)
Which? should test battery life under Pop!_OS just to make their report as unintelligible as possible.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"A new report by Which?, an advocacy group in the Which?, found that Which? and Which? both overstate battery life on Which?, sometimes 'significantly'..." reports Which?.
If I recall correctly:
Position: Player
First base: Who
Second base: What
Third base: I Don't Know
Left field: Why
Center field: Because
Pitcher: Tomorrow
Catcher: Today
Shortstop: I Don't Give a Darn or I Don't Care
There doesn't appear to be a Which? in the roster.
From the live reporting on the game:
Costello: Now I throw the ball to first base, whoever it is drops the ball, so the guy runs to second. Who picks up the ball and throws it to What. What throws it to I Don't Know. I Don't Know throws it back to Tomorrow—a triple play.
Abbott: Yeah, it could be.
Costello: Another guy gets up and it's a long fly ball to Because. Why? I don't know. He's on third, and I don't give a darn!
Abbott: What was that?
Costello: I said, I DON'T GIVE A DARN!
Abbott: Oh, that's our shortstop!
Apple CEO Tim Cook is managing insufficiently? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Apple CEO Tim Cook is managing insufficiently? (Score:4, Informative)
Good point, but not fully explained. (Score:2)
He seemed to have caused his own death, because of not getting medical help when he needed it.
However, there were areas in which he was excellent. That's difficult to explain in a short Slashdot comment.
Comparing Apple and Microsoft is not simple. (Score:2)
It is definitely not simple. Be sure to compare Apple software design with Microsoft's [wikipedia.org] at the same time.
Compare Apple hardware with Dell Technologies' [wikipedia.org] at the same time.
Re: (Score:2)
However, there were areas in which he was excellent. That's difficult to explain in a short Slashdot comment.
Then explain in a long Slashdot comment.
Re: (Score:2)
> there are not many people in the world who can do what Steve Jobs did.
But Jobs couldn't do what Woz did and I know who I'd prefer to meet at a bar.
Re:Apple CEO Tim Cook is managing insufficiently? (Score:4)
You've got a good point, but without BOTH of the Apple would never have succeeded. Jobs was good at understanding what people wanted. And he was effective at pushing people around. (I just *can't* say good there.) And he was good at motivating people. That's a very rare combination. I probably wouldn't have liked him, but that doesn't mean he wasn't important to Apple. (You could ask Scully.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Tell me about it. If this were Jobs Apple's response would be:
1. Tell everyone Which did it wrong.
2. Reiterate how awesome the iPhone is.
3. State even if the battery dies you are still better off owning a flat status symbol.
4. Grab a Blackberry with a flat battery and point out that competitors too can suffer from flat batteries.
5. Have your army defend your claims after everyone points out how absurd this entire situation is.
Re: (Score:2)
Who cares? (Score:2)
16 hours of talk time? That is pretty amazing if true.
Re:Who cares? (Score:5, Funny)
16 hours of talk time? That is pretty amazing if true.
Who talks on an iPhone?
Re: (Score:2)
Who talks on an iPhone?
Lonely people who like to hear Siri's voice.
Re: (Score:3)
Is it?
Talk time used to be THE measure of battery life back in the day, because you could only use the phone to do phonecalls and SMS.
Now with the current phones, they do a lot more stuff, so talk time is only partially a measurement of battery life now. Standby of less than 48 hours seem to be common once services that use network data is on.
But i see your point: 16 hours of talk time for something like a Nokia 3550 would mean like 4-5 weeks of standby battery life.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm using a cheap Samsung flip phone with no internet, it is so old the model number is worn off the case, and I still get over a week of standby.
Or about 30 minutes of talk time.
Phone use and internet access are on the same pipe; many phones have short battery life because there is no "standby" mode; the phone is talking all the time, even if the user isn't in a voice call.
Italicize, please! (Score:1)
"They tested it wrong" (Score:3)
... no doubt.
"They read our specs wrong"
They forgot to 'read between the lines' about how the device must be operated in outer space to get the claimed battery life.
"testing methodology reflects that intelligence" (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, but does it reflect real life usage?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, one who wants to intentionally misrepresent what was said could argue something stupid and baseless like that.
Re:"testing methodology reflects that intelligence (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, but does it reflect real life usage?
Does Apple's test methodology reflect real life usage? Don't know. Does Which?'s test methodology reflect real life usage? I don't know either.
Here's an obvious candidate for a difference: When you make a call with your iPhone and hold the phone to your ear, it turns the screen off. If you hold it in your hand, the screen is on. The screen is a major user of battery power. So I would expect that you can make phone calls holding the phone to your ear for a lot longer than holding the phone in your hand.
3G vs 4G might make a difference, I don't know. Having unreliable 4G where the phone switches between 3G and 4G all the time is quite bad for battery life as far as I know. So times can vary quite a bit. Your "real life usage" may be very different from mine.
Re: (Score:2)
Whose real life usage?
I have spend a good chunk of my career working on battery life for embedded and mobile devices (including phones). Herein lies the problem, different people use the phone differently. Real life usage is a combination of talk time, quick screen glance to check messages, web browsing, message reading, message writing, social media activities, gaming, notifications, etc, etc. Different people use their phones differently. Even something as simple as one component use-case, cellular talk-t
Which? (Score:5, Informative)
Hm, Apple's detailed published methodology (https://www.apple.com/iphone/battery.html), and all the other sites on the internet which have pointed out how good the XR's battery life is, versus a publication with secret methodology who is suddenly getting a lot of publicity for making these accusations. I know it's popular to bash Apple, but this smells fishy to me.
Re:Which? (Score:5, Insightful)
How close was the phone to the base station when they tested?
Was it a direct line of sight to the base station antenna? Were there buildings in the way? What was the multi-path environment like?
How many other phones were operating in the area? What was the noise floor like?
They say 'carrier' network. Which 'carrier' network? Was it tested over the air, or in the 'carrier's test lab? Qualcom has their own 'carrier' network, does Apple? What are the settings on the carrier network?
Was the phone stationary?
There is a lot of missing information there to be able to reproduce, and Which? could be in a vastly different environment that isn't as forgiving to battery life as the one Apple has detailed.
Re: (Score:2)
versus a publication with secret methodology who is suddenly getting a lot of publicity for making these accusations.
"Which" makes a business out of comparing products. Basically every article they have ever written results in "publicity for making these accusations" as they are always putting manufacturers against each other. How "secret" the methodology is isn't really relevant providing that methodology is applied equally to all devices.
They are a publisher that regularly praises iPhones over the competition, so if you're concerns are that they are doing a "hit piece" then they are misplaced.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think the OP is necessarily accusing them of anti-Apple bias. I think he's just accusing them of applying a questionable methodology because there's really no incentive for them to conduct a truly thorough test. Their only incentive is to churn out an article that will generate clicks. It doesn't matter if Apple or Samsung or whoever comes out looking bad as long as the end result shows a good degree of variance that will demonstrate winners and losers.
Most of the content writers for sites like that
Test Setup Will Definitely Affect Things (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple phones don't have an external antenna connector, so Which? probably had to hook their test base station up to an antenna. Or they tested against a real network.
Apple probably tested their phone in an RF chamber, with minimum noise, and they might have hooked the base station directly up to the antenna port on the board. They might not have had any attenuators between the test BTS and the phone either, so the phone was probably transmitting and minimum power. Which is biasing the test in favor of long battery times, much like how car companies bias their MPG tests for higher numbers.
This test is about talk time, but they can also bias the test for standby time. I'm not familiar with the latest phone protocols, but in the past you configured the base station to tell the phone how often to turn on its radio to look for a paging message. Normally this is about 1.2 seconds so that a call can be connected quickly, but can be set much much longer. Allowing the phone to be in sleep mode for longer periods of time giving a better battery life measurement.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple probably tested their phone in an RF chamber, with minimum noise, and they might have hooked the base station directly up to the antenna port on the board.
Well, if they did that to measure and then advertise battery life, that is blatantly misleading and they should expect a class action lawsuit.
Those are not the conditions that they advertise the phone to be used in, and so it is unquestioningly misleading if it was done the way you suggest.
I suspect instead that they simply modified the base station settings to cause the least power use by the handset while still being within the range that the base station manufacturer recommends. That way they still get m
Re: (Score:2)
Apple probably tested their phone in an RF chamber
Yeah that's where I use my iPhone as well.
Re: (Score:1)
Easy fix (Score:1)
Just replace included iPhone battery with an aftermarket one from Sony or Sanyo.
Problem solved.
"based on the organization's methods" (Score:1)
Considering they recently put out a report slamming the accuracy of health-tracking appliances, that they tested by running on a treadmill, and then claiming that some of the poorly performing devices would have fared better if they used GPS tracking, whilst simultaneously admitting that their test methodology basically precluded the devices that did use GPS from working properly, I'll take Witch?'s reports with a large pinch of salt.
Re: (Score:2)
So them being honest and accurate makes you trust them less? I guess you liked Apples statement then...
It does last for 25 hours talk time (Score:2)
not a believer anyway (Score:2)
I never believed battery claims, no matter the device or company. When shopping, I will estimate the battery live being around 70 percent of what they say for general usage and if planning to do a lot of heavy usage on the new device, around 40-50 percent. Learned my lesson years ago with my first laptop.
Unethical activity (Score:2)
Apple says that the iPhone "is engineered to intelligently manage power usage to maximize battery life. Our testing methodology reflects that intelligence."
That's a pretty darn clear statement of customizing the testing to make the device do better, rather than using real world parameters.
Most of the time these kinds of abuses are found
Screw intelligent testing, provide accurate ones (Score:2)
And? (Score:2)
So has every company that has sold anything battery powered ever...
Re: (Score:2)