|
| ▲ | latexr 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > Depends on how "cycle" is defined - I'm sure they can finagle it so "any charge added to the battery" counts as a cycle. The definition is pretty well established, and Apple themselves have for years used it consistently. https://www.apple.com/batteries/why-lithium-ion/ > You complete one charge cycle when you’ve used (discharged) an amount that represents 100% of your battery’s capacity* — but not necessarily all from one charge. For instance, you might use 75% of your battery’s capacity one day, then recharge it fully overnight. If you use 25% the next day, you will have discharged a total of 100%, and the two days will add up to one charge cycle. It could take several days to complete a cycle. |
|
| ▲ | john_strinlai 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >Depends on how "cycle" is defined - I'm sure they can finagle it so "any charge added to the battery" counts as a cycle. the definition of a battery cycle is very well established. there isnt really any room to finagle it. |
|
| ▲ | PunchyHamster 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Charging to 80% significantly decreases the wear. Your battery would be way lower if you charged to 100% |
|
| ▲ | close04 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I don’t think “a cycle” is up for redefining. I hope these terms are defined in the law. But that supports my assumption that realistically the batteries don’t last 1000 cycles even when charged conservatively. The last 9% will go faster than the first 11%, the battery already has lower capacity and needs to be charged even more often. On the other hand if I only get to 1000 cycles by charging up to 80% then I’m not getting 100% of the battery, am I? Dieselgate was caught by some dudes with an emissions measuring device. It’s not that extreme to get a number of iPhone batteries, test them to 1000 cycles and see if statistically they still retain 80% capacity. If they don’t Apple could be looking at replacing everyone’s batteries. |
| |
| ▲ | bombcar 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | The obvious solution is underrating - just like a 1 TB SSD actually has more than 1TB of "raw storage" available internally. What is a 100% battery today will be sold as an 80% capacity tomorrow, with 20% "overage" available for wear. | | |
| ▲ | close04 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | That’s fine as long as the battery ends up having 80% real capacity after 1000 cycles and maybe Apple is also transparent about how. A bigger issue which I don’t know if the law covers is with the other battery specs. An 80% battery that can’t handle any spikes (low power mode) is useless. | | |
| ▲ | ApolloFortyNine 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Isn't the most obvious end game just (if using the same packaging) some note on a spec sheet of "12 hours screen on time (10 hours in the EU)"? If it's not configurable people will likely complain battery life is higher on the US's software version, they won't care about the reason. | |
| ▲ | gf000 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Well, Apple was already fined for decreasing the CPU frequency (to avoid spikes on aged batteries), so that's not really an option. (Even though at the time they wasn't doing it out of malice at all, they actually tried to keep old phones usable - their marketing team messed up there big time) | |
| ▲ | bombcar 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The easiest is to just require it be replaced under warranty - if the battery has to be usable to 1000 cycles, and it is at 80% and 999 cycles but doesn't "work" it's a warranty replacement. But that then brings in a "how many years" question. |
|
|
|
