Given that _every_ phone that lasts long enough exhibits the same "design flaw" (rebooting when drawing too much off a weakened battery or slowing down), it just shows once again that iPhones are used for years longer than Android phones that get tossed before they can generally reach the age where this becomes necessary. But making it so that your android phone is obsolete before it is old enough isn't a design flaw, nope not at all...
Given that there aren't any phones with replaceable batteries with the water resistance of my 7+ (that replaced a drowned 5), it is a very _UN_reasonable expectation to want both.
Those that complain "phones ere too thin. I want a bigger battery" and that do NOT buy a battery case to have exactly what they claim they want are lying about what they want anyway.
Just so that it'd make you feel better is not a sufficient reason. Nor is because otherwise "you'd think the worst of their reasons for doing so" because that's visibly already true.
Batteries don't just have less of a charge when they get older, their peak draw also diminishes. If, when you are using an older battery you need more than the battery can supply, the phone reboots. So Apple is slowing down the CPU on older iPhones so they do not go over the max battery draw available on older batteries.
It is preferable to have a slower iPhone than it is to have it rebooting. If the slowdown is an issue, replace the battery for $75 and the performance will be back to normal. As for those who complain "I want a removable battery", well I much prefer having the water resistance that has saved my phone a few times than a removable battery that I only need after 3 years.
People who consider Gawker to be serious journalism clearly have no standing to make judgments on what serious journalism is/isn't.
Gawkers testament is written in the percentage of muckraking stories on people in the public eye versus non-sexual titillation exposés on the really powerful: 99.99999% to 0.000001%. But then you visibly consider publishing HH's sex tape as "exposing" the RICH AND POWERFUL.
Snort, Gawker didn't target "the powerful", they targeted those in the public eye to sell their trash to the easily titillated.
Of course those with sufficiently dysfunctional sex lives that they are titillated by peeking into the sex lives of others are OK with Gawker doing that.
Cobalt, like just about every heavier element is a toxin when ingested, but even that that doesn't make it a cancer risk.
What makes it even more ridiculous is that iDevice batteries are sealed in & even if zombie idiots were prone to midnight teardowns & subsequent battery gnoshing, they would die from lithium & electrolyte poisoning long before cobalt toxicity became an issue.
When you live beneath a bridge it does tend to limit whet everyone else (besides the putin-bots) can see clearly.
Putin controls anything and everything that he desires in Russia, either overtly or covertly. The day Putin decides that it is better to use this covert weapon of his (privileged access to all the files and data of those who use Kaspersky) _your_ bank accounts will mysteriously transferred elsewhere. Yeah, that's soooo much better...
That's the wrong category Alex, the correct category was: Taxpayer funded boondoggles .
Had the objective been to spend hundreds of billions of dollars with as little as possible to show for it SLS was the champion, closely followed by STS which though it has cost less so far, has achieved even less.
Here's a quandary for you: In 5 years, when Space-X is lofting 150 tons for under $50 million per launch on a 100% reusable BFR with absolutely no heritage from SLS what will SLS's legacy be?
Yup, the less obtuse can already see that it will be "SLS slowed mankind's access to space".
Snort, Sure sport, but what exactly did is it your opinion that I got wrong, hmm? Be precise so that we can all enjoy your antics busily moving goalposts at what you've already admitted was true earlier.
The cost of STS was beyond exorbitant, hobbling NASA's manned missions to low earth orbit by beggaring the rest of NASA's budget and may yet doom NASA unless a stake is at last put into the heart of SLS.
We need to bury that past or kiss another 50 years off mankind's hopes to expand beyond a single planet.
The Space Shuttle you say? That's the program that cost 192 BILLION dollars in 2010 dollars for 132 total missions, isn't it? Doesn't that make Shuttle per launch costs 1.5 billion dollars, I say ONE POINT FIVE BILLION DOLLARS? And wasn't the Space Shuttle largely re-manufactured every launch with extensive work being done on the tiles and all the rocket motors needing to be totally disassembled, qualified and rebuilt? Isn't it true that re-using the boosters actually cost more money than just building new ones would have cost?
Yeah, I've heard of the Space Shuttle. It was a dead-end money pit that begat a public works super-pig that continues to bedevil NASA today through SLS.
Really? One supposes that you would also question whether Weinstein should be trusted with young actresses. After all, "there have yet to have been compelling" proven arguments that he isn't a predator, just like Putin's Russia is.
You really want to trust someone who has explicitly declared himself an enemy of an open press and the west with auto-update privileges on your PC that he could use to perform attacks on the west? Ooops, sorry about that DDOS on critical infrastructure, it was just an innocent error not at all related to Russia deciding to liberate the poor, suffering ethnically Russian 30% of the Estonian population from their oppressors? Oh and by the way I, Vladimir the Great have decided to annex those parts of Estonia that please me (and rejoin the Kaliningrad enclave with Mother Russia!)...
Not me. I don't trust men like Putin who kill off those that disagree with him.
Glad to have helped. Leading by example does help avoid problems when puberty & then adulthood come around...
Do note that this was mostly 10-20 years ago before legal streaming services (for Video & Music) were available. Nowadays, as noted in replies to my post most people would not have the patience nor the need (except as you noted for books).
Unless you can point to something more serious than "I think that", no. As you're making the claim that "only a few" people in the U.S. care about limiting their use of electricity, prove it.
> I can point to the cited areas where limiting ones use of electricity brings concrete benefits and the sales figures of LED light fixtures.
Slashdot Mirror
Given that _every_ phone that lasts long enough exhibits the same "design flaw" (rebooting when drawing too much off a weakened battery or slowing down), it just shows once again that iPhones are used for years longer than Android phones that get tossed before they can generally reach the age where this becomes necessary. But making it so that your android phone is obsolete before it is old enough isn't a design flaw, nope not at all...
Given that there aren't any phones with replaceable batteries with the water resistance of my 7+ (that replaced a drowned 5), it is a very _UN_reasonable expectation to want both.
Those that complain "phones ere too thin. I want a bigger battery" and that do NOT buy a battery case to have exactly what they claim they want are lying about what they want anyway.
Whatever floats, er sinks your boat...
Sales of the LG20 versus current iPhones show that many many more people agree with me than with you.
Just so that it'd make you feel better is not a sufficient reason. Nor is because otherwise "you'd think the worst of their reasons for doing so" because that's visibly already true.
Batteries don't just have less of a charge when they get older, their peak draw also diminishes. If, when you are using an older battery you need more than the battery can supply, the phone reboots. So Apple is slowing down the CPU on older iPhones so they do not go over the max battery draw available on older batteries.
It is preferable to have a slower iPhone than it is to have it rebooting. If the slowdown is an issue, replace the battery for $75 and the performance will be back to normal. As for those who complain "I want a removable battery", well I much prefer having the water resistance that has saved my phone a few times than a removable battery that I only need after 3 years.
Let the truth be known at last!
Tom Hanks and Bill Murray are, in fact _the_same_person!!!
People who consider Gawker to be serious journalism clearly have no standing to make judgments on what serious journalism is/isn't.
Gawkers testament is written in the percentage of muckraking stories on people in the public eye versus non-sexual titillation exposés on the really powerful: 99.99999% to 0.000001%. But then you visibly consider publishing HH's sex tape as "exposing" the RICH AND POWERFUL.
Snort, Gawker didn't target "the powerful", they targeted those in the public eye to sell their trash to the easily titillated.
Of course those with sufficiently dysfunctional sex lives that they are titillated by peeking into the sex lives of others are OK with Gawker doing that.
No. Gawker did very little real journalism & only did the little they did so they could try and hide behind it.
Serious journalism does not need to be associated with muckraking excrement, in fact the opposite is true.
Cobalt, like just about every heavier element is a toxin when ingested, but even that that doesn't make it a cancer risk.
What makes it even more ridiculous is that iDevice batteries are sealed in & even if zombie idiots were prone to midnight teardowns & subsequent battery gnoshing, they would die from lithium & electrolyte poisoning long before cobalt toxicity became an issue.
Troll alert...
There is no relation between the use of minute amounts of cobalt in batteries and cancer.
Reference on Cobalt being a cancer risk?
And _he_ wouldn't make the claim either. TBL is the father of the _World Wide Web_.
But then you don't even have the courage to sign in so nobody cares what you think.
When you live beneath a bridge it does tend to limit whet everyone else (besides the putin-bots) can see clearly.
Putin controls anything and everything that he desires in Russia, either overtly or covertly. The day Putin decides that it is better to use this covert weapon of his (privileged access to all the files and data of those who use Kaspersky) _your_ bank accounts will mysteriously transferred elsewhere. Yeah, that's soooo much better...
That's the wrong category Alex, the correct category was: Taxpayer funded boondoggles .
Had the objective been to spend hundreds of billions of dollars with as little as possible to show for it SLS was the champion, closely followed by STS which though it has cost less so far, has achieved even less.
Here's a quandary for you: In 5 years, when Space-X is lofting 150 tons for under $50 million per launch on a 100% reusable BFR with absolutely no heritage from SLS what will SLS's legacy be?
Yup, the less obtuse can already see that it will be "SLS slowed mankind's access to space".
Snort, Sure sport, but what exactly did is it your opinion that I got wrong, hmm? Be precise so that we can all enjoy your antics busily moving goalposts at what you've already admitted was true earlier.
The cost of STS was beyond exorbitant, hobbling NASA's manned missions to low earth orbit by beggaring the rest of NASA's budget and may yet doom NASA unless a stake is at last put into the heart of SLS.
We need to bury that past or kiss another 50 years off mankind's hopes to expand beyond a single planet.
The Space Shuttle you say? That's the program that cost 192 BILLION dollars in 2010 dollars for 132 total missions, isn't it? Doesn't that make Shuttle per launch costs 1.5 billion dollars, I say ONE POINT FIVE BILLION DOLLARS? And wasn't the Space Shuttle largely re-manufactured every launch with extensive work being done on the tiles and all the rocket motors needing to be totally disassembled, qualified and rebuilt? Isn't it true that re-using the boosters actually cost more money than just building new ones would have cost?
Yeah, I've heard of the Space Shuttle. It was a dead-end money pit that begat a public works super-pig that continues to bedevil NASA today through SLS.
Yeah, just like Boeing was the first to develop reusable first stages for orbital class launchers... /s
Really? One supposes that you would also question whether Weinstein should be trusted with young actresses. After all, "there have yet to have been compelling" proven arguments that he isn't a predator, just like Putin's Russia is.
You really want to trust someone who has explicitly declared himself an enemy of an open press and the west with auto-update privileges on your PC that he could use to perform attacks on the west? Ooops, sorry about that DDOS on critical infrastructure, it was just an innocent error not at all related to Russia deciding to liberate the poor, suffering ethnically Russian 30% of the Estonian population from their oppressors? Oh and by the way I, Vladimir the Great have decided to annex those parts of Estonia that please me (and rejoin the Kaliningrad enclave with Mother Russia!)...
Not me. I don't trust men like Putin who kill off those that disagree with him.
Glad to have helped. Leading by example does help avoid problems when puberty & then adulthood come around...
Do note that this was mostly 10-20 years ago before legal streaming services (for Video & Music) were available. Nowadays, as noted in replies to my post most people would not have the patience nor the need (except as you noted for books).
So, when asked to produce references to support your position, you give none & double down on "I think that"...
Unless you can point to something more serious than "I think that", no. As you're making the claim that "only a few" people in the U.S. care about limiting their use of electricity, prove it.
> I can point to the cited areas where limiting ones use of electricity brings concrete benefits and the sales figures of LED light fixtures.
Assuming that someone is just now ripping all their DVDs/CDs is the sign of a clueless Anonymous Coward.
I was ripping CDs & DVDs loooong before Spotify etc were created and much of the content I have is still unique.