No shot at all apple batteries can last 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity. Probably can’t even do 300 in my experience. Sounds like an easy lawsuit.

▲

lsxr 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No doubt they will redefine maximum battery capacity to a figure that does achieve 80% over 1000 cycles. If you under-declare maximum capacity then there is a lot of headroom for actual degradation before you start to show degradation to the user.

▲

floatrock 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

iPhone 17 Pro launch specs:

> Video Playback: Up to 27* hours

> *: 25 hours in the EU

▲

cptskippy 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is what they should have been doing all along. My Pixel tells me that charging above 80% is bad for battery longevity and I should set a charge limit. Well then maybe 80% should be the new 100% and the advertised capacity should be the 80%.

	▲	Aachen 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This balancing act is already happening. If you modify the battery controller, you can totally continue charging beyond the voltage that the phone considers to be 100%. It also increases the risk of damaging the battery (https://www.acebattery.com/blogs/what-will-happen-when-a-lit...). What they define as 100% is already some point on a damage probability curve, and charging to anything below that point will further decrease the amount of battery stress (for li-ion batteries and similar technologies) Fwiw, based on tests I've seen recently such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lj4LMlGr4og, I think limiting to 80% is overblown, but somewhere in the 90%s could be a sweet spot that gives you several hours' longer battery life than with 80% but still has a much reduced chance of significant degradation. I don't understand why they didn't make this configurable

▲

7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

zitterbewegung 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A battery that can support 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity would be a literal brick. For an example the Vision Pro's battery has extreme over-provisioning and limit how long it would last. (note I know it is removable but that isn't the point).

	▲	gf000 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Well, this just incentivized a new battery tech then, what's the problem?

▲

chasil 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I would wager that batteries that powered down at 20% and that halt charging at 80% would be significantly prolonged.

If Apple resorts to those tactics, then there is no limit in moving the goalposts.

▲

nslsm 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

In the meantime, my daily driver here in reality land: https://i.imgur.com/8yEEJVb.png

	▲	protimewaster 7 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		That has not been my experience, at least with Apple laptops. Even when rated for 1000 cycles, I'll get the warning that service is needed (AFAIK that means 80% capacity or lower) well before then. I've seen this on several, but the one I just checked is at just under 670 cycles and has had that warning up for some months already. Maybe iPhones are better about this, though, I don't know. But I definitely don't have a lot of faith in the laptops maintaining 80% for 1000 cycles.
	▲	fainpul 7 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		212 cycles, still 100% capacity (maybe 99.5 rounded up) "relative to when it was new". Doesn't that seem a bit dodgy to you?