I imagine this will be disabled in the EU, but it’s a concern nonetheless.

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Probably makes sense. They don’t want to be responsible for your phone exploding.

    • nesc@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      There were news recently that there won’t be grapheneos for newer models.

      • cron@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Do you have a definitive source for this? All I found was speculation.

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          GrapheneOS team has extra work cut out for them but nothing that they can’t over come.

          But this is the beginning of the end IMHO

          Over next few years Sundar the creep will ensure they are ml viable

            • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              2 days ago

              Android is open source but Google is starting to move certain things behind closed doors.

              This year they decide to no long provide “device trees” for pixel phones… Ie GrapheneOS will need to recerwse engineer android for each pixel devices where before this was provided.

              Extra work, hard work but it is doable.

    • frongt@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Sure, in the same way that the fix for a smoke alarm going off is taking out the battery.

  • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 days ago

    Whatever the case I know that I’m very concerned about getting a pixel until they demonstrate several models that don’t swell or spontaneously combust into flames. I mean, if they had to kill the 4A, the 6A, which bursts into flames, and the 7A, that makes me highly concerned.

      • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        I wonder if they’re using worse quality batteries in the “A” series since it’s a cheaper device. I haven’t heard reports of the main devices exploding or bursting into flames. Just the “A” series.

    • mesa@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Yeah my old 6a by the end of it had to be charged 2x a day. And it was less that 3 years old. My theory is they cheaped out on some component or the batteries themselves. The software just made it even worse for those of us who actually use the phone. But beats it exploding I guess.

      Still haven’t received my money.

        • frogbellyratbone_ [e/em/eir, any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          meh. i’d argue that’s wild hysteria because if these things seriously had that problem there’d be thousands of lawsuits, class actions, recalls, etc. strict product liability is strict for a reason and all that.

          also the battery health feature isn’t bad per se. it helps prolong battery life and most phones should use it in some form. i think it’s wild on pixel9+ you’re forced to use it though, although i also don’t see dev tools / patches won’t allow more knowledgeable users to turn it off

  • lustrum@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    I just hate that 100-0% is a cycle regardless of the actual usage. 100-0% is more damaging to the battery than 80-30% twice.

    I’ve turned it off on my P9ProXL just for that reason, i’m treating my battery well and will just swap it out if it’s shagged.

    • Tower@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      I didn’t understand why we didn’t set the expectation years ago of phones ignoring the top and bottom 20%. Change it so 80 is the new 100, 20 is the new 0, and then play up the longevity factor and some marketing bs around “we squeeze every last drop out of the last 5%” (ie letting the phone go to 18% or something).

      • frongt@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        We did. Your phone’s battery controller already does that, and the percentage displayed to you is normalized to the available range.

          • frongt@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            You aren’t. If you choose to limit it even further, you’re actually limiting it to 80-20% of that first 80-20%, or to 68-32% of the battery’s true capacity, if I did that math right. (I probably didn’t, but you get the idea.)

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    we are an American company so we will lie and steal and cheat. Get used to it