• LordKekz@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s an interesting article but I think its more likely that the ratings are calculated differently. The title makes it sound as if there was some real-world data proving that Samsung is better, but the only data source is the number they put on the energy label.

    • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah this is just manufacturers self rating themselves. This is just like VW cars rating themselves as getting 5-10mpg better than their competitors, when really they were just measuring from the balls.

      The up side is if they fail to meet those ratings then are the consumers entitled to some sort of compensation?

      • LordKekz@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I don’t know, but even if they were I can’t imagine it’d be easy to prove that the labels are wrong. After all, I’m not aware of any data collection on degradation or failures of batteries at the required scale and precision. And I don’t think the ratings constitute a warranty, i.e. I don’t think you’re entitled to anything if your particular phone falls short of the after the 2-year warranty expires.

        But I sure would like there to be some standard that allows collecting these kinds of metrics in a way that’s privacy-preserving and can’t be fudged by manufactureres.