OT: Smartphone always charging destroyed battery?

[John Doe]

The 4.36 V is higher than the standard 4.20 V lithium-ion batteries
are typically charged to, therefore "overcharged" is appropriate
terminology, especially when the explanation "to provide maximum run
time between charges" is given. Being overcharged is problematic
when the battery is forever held at that high 4.36 voltage level.

--
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit gmail.com> wrote:

X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5502:: with SMTP id j2mr12157488qtq.127.1579717752337; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 10:29:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:42cd:: with SMTP id g13mr11892844qtm.168.1579717752170; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 10:29:12 -0800 (PST)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!g89no83709qtd.0!news-out.google.com!w29ni17qtc.0!nntp.google.com!g89no83699qtd.0!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 10:29:11 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <r0a2a3$3av$1 dont-email.me
Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=50.205.158.211; posting-account=I-_H_woAAAA9zzro6crtEpUAyIvzd19b
NNTP-Posting-Host: 50.205.158.211
References: <r08nnm$vip$2 dont-email.me> <h8qmt8FgpucU1 mid.individual.net> <r09l56$tfa$1 gioia.aioe.org> <7d71fe6f-9183-40c1-85b2-fdd23c7ae008 googlegroups.com> <r0a2a3$3av$1 dont-email.me
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <370cf99e-4332-410c-a246-3a6dceadcfff googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: OT: Smartphone always charging destroyed battery?
From: Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit gmail.com
Injection-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 18:29:12 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:580353

On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 12:55:22 PM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit gmail.com> wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
John Doe wrote:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/27532210 N04/

Another Chinese battery bit the dust here. Noticed my
smartphone was bulging, the screen was warping. The cause was
obvious so, not having a torx t1 screwdriver, I ripped it
apart. Tried using a capacitor in place of the stock battery
but that didn't work. An 18650 works, but it's charged to 4.36
V.

The smartphone is used for Wi-Fi security camera monitoring,
so it is plugged in all the time.

Question: Would putting a resistor or diode in series with the
battery reduce the constant charge voltage? Is there some way
to very simply reduce the battery voltage peak while it is
always connected to the charging cable?

A simple on/off timer might be the simplest fix to avoid
continuous overcharging.

I won't attempt messing with the smartphone's charging circuit
wherever or whatever it is.

The charging circuit should completely turn off charging when
the battery is fully charged, so having it plugged into a
charger all the time shouldn't matter.

In an ideal world that might be true, but experience tells me
that most mobile devices do rebel and wreck their batteries if
left on charge continuously. I used to kill all my portable PC
batteries that way (they run faster when on mains power).

Do you really think it would have lasted longer if you had run it
down every day or even twice a day and charged back up? I keep
mine on the power cord constantly and they seem to do fine.

One positive experience is practically meaningless.

Not meaningless, representative sampling of a larger data set because if cell phones wore out their batteries prematurely just because they were charged overnight, every night, we would have all heard about it. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.


What might work simply is to put the charger on a weekly or daily
timer so that the battery does get exercised over the 20%-80%
range of charge a couple of times a week. That would probably
extend battery life.

That should all be built into the phone really. My car manages
the battery pretty well. The battery should last at least as long
as my previous vehicles did.

The damages done by the persistent high-voltage level. They are
overcharged in order to maximize run time between charges. Generally
speaking... A switch that allows keeping the battery at a lower
charge level for when it's not intended to be portable would be best.

Not overcharged, they are fully charged. If your phone is overcharging the battery it is defective.

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 10:02:41 PM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:

The 4.36 V is higher than the standard 4.20 V lithium-ion batteries
are typically charged to, therefore "overcharged" is appropriate
terminology, especially when the explanation "to provide maximum run
time between charges" is given. Being overcharged is problematic
when the battery is forever held at that high 4.36 voltage level.

Who gave that justification and where did a cell phone maker even talk about this stuff? Can you provide a source? I'd love to read that.

--

Rick C.

-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Martin Brown]

On 22/01/2020 18:29, Rick C wrote:

On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 12:55:22 PM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
John Doe wrote:


The charging circuit should completely turn off charging
when the battery is fully charged, so having it plugged into
a charger all the time shouldn't matter.

In an ideal world that might be true, but experience tells me
that most mobile devices do rebel and wreck their batteries if
left on charge continuously. I used to kill all my portable PC
batteries that way (they run faster when on mains power).

Do you really think it would have lasted longer if you had run
it down every day or even twice a day and charged back up? I
keep mine on the power cord constantly and they seem to do fine.

One positive experience is practically meaningless.

Not meaningless, representative sampling of a larger data set because
if cell phones wore out their batteries prematurely just because they
were charged overnight, every night, we would have all heard about
it. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

That isn't so bad provided they are not left on charge for weeks on end.

But we *DO*! The last thing my wife did with her iPhone 5S before giving
it to her brother was take it into an iStore for a free battery
replacement (still in warrantee) because they had cocked up the charging
regime or the manufacture of the battery which is how they reported it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2480211/iPhone-5S-battery-problems-admitted-Apple-replacements-offered.html

The "small" number of customers affected seemed to be everyone I knew
with that model of phone. Go figure.

Or if you prefer the Apple spin on their battery degradation problem:

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/iphone/repair/service/battery-power

And that was normal day to day use not leaving one on permanent charge.

The only thing I know of designed to be permanently left on charge is
the Dyson series of handheld vacuum cleaners and guess what? - ours has
just bricked its battery after 3 years of ownership. It has a very
curious external PSU that outputs exactly regulated 26.10v (and the unit
won't charge at all off a charger that only outputs 25.90v!)

I'm not surprised it died as in use the battery gets uncomfortably hot.

Don't get me wrong battery technology and recharging regimes are getting
better all the time but leaving a phone on charge continuously *will*
significantly shorten the life of its battery even today.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 12:20:39 PM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:

Smartphone charging maximizes uptime when not connected, by keeping
the battery at the highest temporarily safe voltage level.

What exactly does "temporarily safe" mean? An hour? 24 hours? A week?
Lots of people keep their phones plugged in much or most of the time,
including me. Batteries have all lasted as long as I had the phones,
3+ years.






That's

why the battery voltage is 4.36. That's why there is no UL marking
on the battery.

If the cell phone makers are doing what you claim, abusing the batteries,
why would the battery manufacturers not be getting the batteries
UL certified and not appropriately labeling them?

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 3:37:48 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

On 22/01/2020 18:29, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 12:55:22 PM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
John Doe wrote:


The charging circuit should completely turn off charging
when the battery is fully charged, so having it plugged into
a charger all the time shouldn't matter.

In an ideal world that might be true, but experience tells me
that most mobile devices do rebel and wreck their batteries if
left on charge continuously. I used to kill all my portable PC
batteries that way (they run faster when on mains power).

Do you really think it would have lasted longer if you had run
it down every day or even twice a day and charged back up? I
keep mine on the power cord constantly and they seem to do fine.

One positive experience is practically meaningless.

Not meaningless, representative sampling of a larger data set because
if cell phones wore out their batteries prematurely just because they
were charged overnight, every night, we would have all heard about
it. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

That isn't so bad provided they are not left on charge for weeks on end.

This is getting old. You seem to be making a distinction between a phone on charge continuously and one left on charge continuously 12 hours out of the day or longer. When I get home I put my phone on charge and take it off charge the next day. I don't monitor the charge to take it off when it is done. My smart phone even has a fast charging mode where it is done in an hour or so. So it easily spends more than half the time on the charger. Not so much different from being charged all the time.

But we *DO*! The last thing my wife did with her iPhone 5S before giving
it to her brother was take it into an iStore for a free battery
replacement (still in warrantee) because they had cocked up the charging
regime or the manufacture of the battery which is how they reported it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2480211/iPhone-5S-battery-problems-admitted-Apple-replacements-offered.html

The "small" number of customers affected seemed to be everyone I knew
with that model of phone. Go figure.

Or if you prefer the Apple spin on their battery degradation problem:

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/iphone/repair/service/battery-power

And that was normal day to day use not leaving one on permanent charge.

Yeah, a "manufacturing defect". Nothing about charging 24/7.

The only thing I know of designed to be permanently left on charge is
the Dyson series of handheld vacuum cleaners and guess what? - ours has
just bricked its battery after 3 years of ownership. It has a very
curious external PSU that outputs exactly regulated 26.10v (and the unit
won't charge at all off a charger that only outputs 25.90v!)

There are many ways a branded charger can be detected. I find it very hard to believe it has to do with a 0.2 volt difference. It's hard to measure such a small difference in voltage accurately in embedded devices.

I'm not surprised it died as in use the battery gets uncomfortably hot.

Don't get me wrong battery technology and recharging regimes are getting
better all the time but leaving a phone on charge continuously *will*
significantly shorten the life of its battery even today.

Not if the phone is appropriately designed and turns off the charge when the battery is full. It's really that simple. It's hard to imagine a cell phone not having an appropriate charging chip in it these days.

--

Rick C.

+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 1:13:38 PM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 3:37:48 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
On 22/01/2020 18:29, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 12:55:22 PM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
John Doe wrote:


The charging circuit should completely turn off charging
when the battery is fully charged, so having it plugged into
a charger all the time shouldn't matter.

In an ideal world that might be true, but experience tells me
that most mobile devices do rebel and wreck their batteries if
left on charge continuously. I used to kill all my portable PC
batteries that way (they run faster when on mains power).

Do you really think it would have lasted longer if you had run
it down every day or even twice a day and charged back up? I
keep mine on the power cord constantly and they seem to do fine.

One positive experience is practically meaningless.

Not meaningless, representative sampling of a larger data set because
if cell phones wore out their batteries prematurely just because they
were charged overnight, every night, we would have all heard about
it. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

That isn't so bad provided they are not left on charge for weeks on end..

This is getting old. You seem to be making a distinction between a phone on charge continuously and one left on charge continuously 12 hours out of the day or longer. When I get home I put my phone on charge and take it off charge the next day. I don't monitor the charge to take it off when it is done. My smart phone even has a fast charging mode where it is done in an hour or so. So it easily spends more than half the time on the charger. Not so much different from being charged all the time.

Sounds logical to me. My phone also spends most of it's time plugged
in, fully charged. I keep it charged so it's good to go. Like yours
it has fast charging, so it's fully charged typically in an hour and
then it just sits there, many times for 12 hours. Been doing that for
years, various phones, no problems, no batteries going bad.

But we *DO*! The last thing my wife did with her iPhone 5S before giving
it to her brother was take it into an iStore for a free battery
replacement (still in warrantee) because they had cocked up the charging
regime or the manufacture of the battery which is how they reported it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2480211/iPhone-5S-battery-problems-admitted-Apple-replacements-offered.html

The "small" number of customers affected seemed to be everyone I knew
with that model of phone. Go figure.

Or if you prefer the Apple spin on their battery degradation problem:

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/iphone/repair/service/battery-power

And that was normal day to day use not leaving one on permanent charge.

Yeah, a "manufacturing defect". Nothing about charging 24/7.


The only thing I know of designed to be permanently left on charge is
the Dyson series of handheld vacuum cleaners and guess what? - ours has
just bricked its battery after 3 years of ownership. It has a very
curious external PSU that outputs exactly regulated 26.10v (and the unit
won't charge at all off a charger that only outputs 25.90v!)

There are many ways a branded charger can be detected. I find it very hard to believe it has to do with a 0.2 volt difference. It's hard to measure such a small difference in voltage accurately in embedded devices.


I'm not surprised it died as in use the battery gets uncomfortably hot.

Don't get me wrong battery technology and recharging regimes are getting
better all the time but leaving a phone on charge continuously *will*
significantly shorten the life of its battery even today.

Not if the phone is appropriately designed and turns off the charge when the battery is full. It's really that simple. It's hard to imagine a cell phone not having an appropriate charging chip in it these days.

--

Rick C.

The charging control is built into the std cell phone chip sets.

 

[John Doe]

No, it's not "really that simple". The phone is overcharged, in this
case to 4.36 V, in order to provide the longest possible usage
between charges. On my smartphone, there is no proper setting like
on a Lenovo laptop (and probably others) that allows a user to limit
the maximum charge. The charger turning off when the battery is full
isn't the solution. If the poster would think for a second (or for
an eon), it might realize the difference between phones that are
left connected to a charger and phones that aren't. Normal use means
the phone sits at less than its maximum voltage for hours during the
day. Being on a charger with no battery charge setting adjustment
means the device is always overcharged. Being on the charger is
necessary because the application requires a lot of current.


--

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 3:37:48 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
On 22/01/2020 18:29, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 12:55:22 PM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
John Doe wrote:


The charging circuit should completely turn off charging
when the battery is fully charged, so having it plugged into
a charger all the time shouldn't matter.

In an ideal world that might be true, but experience tells me
that most mobile devices do rebel and wreck their batteries if
left on charge continuously. I used to kill all my portable PC
batteries that way (they run faster when on mains power).

Do you really think it would have lasted longer if you had run
it down every day or even twice a day and charged back up? I
keep mine on the power cord constantly and they seem to do fine.

One positive experience is practically meaningless.

Not meaningless, representative sampling of a larger data set because
if cell phones wore out their batteries prematurely just because they
were charged overnight, every night, we would have all heard about
it. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

That isn't so bad provided they are not left on charge for weeks on end.

This is getting old. You seem to be making a distinction between a phone on charge continuously and one left on charge continuously 12 hours out of the day or longer. When I get home I put my phone on charge and take it off charge the next day. I don't monitor the charge to take it off when it is done. My smart phone even has a fast charging mode where it is done in an hour or so. So it easily spends more than half the time on the charger. Not so much different from being charged all the time.


But we *DO*! The last thing my wife did with her iPhone 5S before giving

it to her brother was take it into an iStore for a free battery
replacement (still in warrantee) because they had cocked up the charging

regime or the manufacture of the battery which is how they reported it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2480211/iPhone-5S-battery
-problems-admitted-Apple-replacements-offered.html

The "small" number of customers affected seemed to be everyone I knew
with that model of phone. Go figure.

Or if you prefer the Apple spin on their battery degradation problem:

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/iphone/repair/service/battery-power

And that was normal day to day use not leaving one on permanent charge.

Yeah, a "manufacturing defect". Nothing about charging 24/7.


The only thing I know of designed to be permanently left on charge is
the Dyson series of handheld vacuum cleaners and guess what? - ours has

just bricked its battery after 3 years of ownership. It has a very
curious external PSU that outputs exactly regulated 26.10v (and the unit

won't charge at all off a charger that only outputs 25.90v!)

There are many ways a branded charger can be detected. I find it very hard to believe it has to do with a 0.2 volt difference. It's hard to measure such a small difference in voltage accurately in embedded devices.


I'm not surprised it died as in use the battery gets uncomfortably hot.

Don't get me wrong battery technology and recharging regimes are getting

better all the time but leaving a phone on charge continuously *will*
significantly shorten the life of its battery even today.

Not if the phone is appropriately designed and turns off the charge when the battery is full. It's really that simple. It's hard to imagine a cell phone not having an appropriate charging chip in it these days.

 

[Martin Brown]

On 23/01/2020 16:35, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 12:20:39 PM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
Smartphone charging maximizes uptime when not connected, by keeping
the battery at the highest temporarily safe voltage level.

What exactly does "temporarily safe" mean? An hour? 24 hours? A week?

I think he's right. Probably no real harm in 24 hours but after a week
you are potentially distressing the battery.

> Lots of people keep their phones plugged in much or most of the time,

Really. The clue is in the name *mobile* phone.

By comparison a powerful laptop may well spend a high proportion of its
time docked or on mains power since it runs faster that way.

including me. Batteries have all lasted as long as I had the phones,
3+ years.

That is about when the battery tends to start swelling and die if you
have been unkind to it. Treated more reasonably you can get 5+ years
life out of these batteries and still have useful capacity in them. They
do start to swell towards the end of their life. Likewise in UPS's where
again the tradeoff of battery life vs runtime when needed is an issue.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 4:54:08 AM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:

No, it's not "really that simple". The phone is overcharged, in this
case to 4.36 V, in order to provide the longest possible usage
between charges.

According to you. Yet I have had several smartphones now and the
batteries lasted as long as I had the phones, which has been at least
three years and most time over four years. So, if there is "over
charging', it's not impacting the phones. And they spent over half
their time on the charger too.





On my smartphone, there is no proper setting like

on a Lenovo laptop (and probably others) that allows a user to limit
the maximum charge. The charger turning off when the battery is full
isn't the solution.

And in phone chip sets that have 8 cores and billions of transistors,
they didn't put in the correct battery monitoring and charging solution?





If the poster would think for a second (or for

an eon), it might realize the difference between phones that are
left connected to a charger and phones that aren't. Normal use means
the phone sits at less than its maximum voltage for hours during the
day.

And it also means that it typically spends about half of it's time
on the charger, sometimes a phone will go days on a charger.
When I'm home, for example, mine is usually on the charger, yet
no battery problems. Do you actually have a cite for these alleged
battery overcharging problems?




Being on a charger with no battery charge setting adjustment
> means the device is always overcharged.

No settings? The chips set and software control the battery charging.
It's not just a rectifier and diode.



Being on the charger is
> necessary because the application requires a lot of current.

What application is that? I keep mine on the charger most of the time
just so it's fully charged when I go out. No problems here. Maybe you
just have a crappy phone?

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:636a39f2-c9de-4634-bb0a-9d1d6a20e064@googlegroups.com:

What application is that? I keep mine on the charger most of the
time just so it's fully charged when I go out. No problems here.
Maybe you just have a crappy phone?

Probably just a bad battery. The element most likely to be out of
spec.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:636a39f2-c9de-4634-bb0a-9d1d6a20e064@googlegroups.com:

And in phone chip sets that have 8 cores and billions of
transistors, they didn't put in the correct battery monitoring and
charging solution?

Despite billions of nuerons, apperently only of which two are
fucntioning, you still don't get much of any of it.

What happened to the watchdog that would rid the world of dopes like
you?

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 10:33:55 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:636a39f2-c9de-4634-bb0a-9d1d6a20e064@googlegroups.com:

And in phone chip sets that have 8 cores and billions of
transistors, they didn't put in the correct battery monitoring and
charging solution?


Despite billions of nuerons, apperently only of which two are
fucntioning, you still don't get much of any of it.

What happened to the watchdog that would rid the world of dopes like
you?

Whatever number of neurons (not nuerons) I have working obviously it's
way more than you have, you can't even spell the word or two others
in that one sentence. And again, you added nothing to the discussion,
just another silly ad hominem attack.

 

[John Doe]

If what this clueless troll says were true, then Lenovo would not
enable users to limit the maximum charged voltage on Lenovo laptops
AND EXPLICITLY SAY EXTENDING BATTERY LIFE IS THE REASON FOR DOING
SO.


--

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

On Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 1:13:38 PM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 3:37:48 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
On 22/01/2020 18:29, Rick C wrote:
On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 12:55:22 PM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
John Doe wrote:


The charging circuit should completely turn off charging
when the battery is fully charged, so having it plugged into
a charger all the time shouldn't matter.

In an ideal world that might be true, but experience tells me
that most mobile devices do rebel and wreck their batteries if
left on charge continuously. I used to kill all my portable PC
batteries that way (they run faster when on mains power).

Do you really think it would have lasted longer if you had run
it down every day or even twice a day and charged back up? I
keep mine on the power cord constantly and they seem to do fine.

One positive experience is practically meaningless.

Not meaningless, representative sampling of a larger data set because
if cell phones wore out their batteries prematurely just because they
were charged overnight, every night, we would have all heard about
it. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

That isn't so bad provided they are not left on charge for weeks on end
.

This is getting old. You seem to be making a distinction between a phone
on charge continuously and one left on charge continuously 12 hours out of the day or longer. When I get home I put my phone on charge and take it off charge the next day. I don't monitor the charge to take it off when it is done. My smart phone even has a fast charging mode where it is done in an hour or so. So it easily spends more than half the time on the charger. Not so much different from being charged all the time.


Sounds logical to me. My phone also spends most of it's time plugged
in, fully charged. I keep it charged so it's good to go. Like yours
it has fast charging, so it's fully charged typically in an hour and
then it just sits there, many times for 12 hours. Been doing that for
years, various phones, no problems, no batteries going bad.







But we *DO*! The last thing my wife did with her iPhone 5S before givin
g
it to her brother was take it into an iStore for a free battery
replacement (still in warrantee) because they had cocked up the chargin
g
regime or the manufacture of the battery which is how they reported it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2480211/iPhone-5S-batte
ry-problems-admitted-Apple-replacements-offered.html

The "small" number of customers affected seemed to be everyone I knew

with that model of phone. Go figure.

Or if you prefer the Apple spin on their battery degradation problem:

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/iphone/repair/service/battery-power

And that was normal day to day use not leaving one on permanent charge.

Yeah, a "manufacturing defect". Nothing about charging 24/7.


The only thing I know of designed to be permanently left on charge is

the Dyson series of handheld vacuum cleaners and guess what? - ours has

just bricked its battery after 3 years of ownership. It has a very
curious external PSU that outputs exactly regulated 26.10v (and the uni
t
won't charge at all off a charger that only outputs 25.90v!)

There are many ways a branded charger can be detected. I find it very ha
rd to believe it has to do with a 0.2 volt difference. It's hard to measure such a small difference in voltage accurately in embedded devices.


I'm not surprised it died as in use the battery gets uncomfortably hot.

Don't get me wrong battery technology and recharging regimes are gettin
g
better all the time but leaving a phone on charge continuously *will*

significantly shorten the life of its battery even today.

Not if the phone is appropriately designed and turns off the charge when
the battery is full. It's really that simple. It's hard to imagine a cell phone not having an appropriate charging chip in it these days.

--

Rick C.


The charging control is built into the std cell phone chip sets.

 

[John Doe]

What this poster is "adding to the discussion" is nonsense...

--
Whoey Louie <trader4 optonline.net> wrote:

X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:6f0:: with SMTP id bk16mr4283280qvb.23.1579891327723; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 10:42:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:74ca:: with SMTP id j10mr1540366qtr.76.1579891327518; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 10:42:07 -0800 (PST)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!g89no6900631qtd.0!news-out.google.com!w29ni287qtc.0!nntp.google.com!g89no6900627qtd.0!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 10:42:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <r0f2ot$1bfv$1 gioia.aioe.org
Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=172.58.235.252; posting-account=C1SVQAkAAACfJY63oQnKBve0H-yhg4CH
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.58.235.252
References: <r08nnm$vip$2 dont-email.me> <h8qmt8FgpucU1 mid.individual.net> <r09l56$tfa$1 gioia.aioe.org> <7d71fe6f-9183-40c1-85b2-fdd23c7ae008 googlegroups.com> <r0a2a3$3av$1 dont-email.me> <370cf99e-4332-410c-a246-3a6dceadcfff googlegroups.com> <r0bm0m$kut$1 gioia.aioe.org> <9e3429d7-376c-4a47-8af5-eb40bbf12318 googlegroups.com> <r0eerg$enm$1 dont-email.me> <636a39f2-c9de-4634-bb0a-9d1d6a20e064 googlegroups.com> <r0f2ot$1bfv$1 gioia.aioe.org
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <9fe745ca-b716-4eef-b5bc-c159e5615a71 googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: OT: Smartphone always charging destroyed battery?
From: Whoey Louie <trader4 optonline.net
Injection-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 18:42:07 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 2464
X-Received-Body-CRC: 917444602
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:580462

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 10:33:55 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux... decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4 optonline.net> wrote in
news:636a39f2-c9de-4634-bb0a-9d1d6a20e064 googlegroups.com:

And in phone chip sets that have 8 cores and billions of
transistors, they didn't put in the correct battery monitoring and
charging solution?


Despite billions of nuerons, apperently only of which two are
fucntioning, you still don't get much of any of it.

What happened to the watchdog that would rid the world of dopes like
you?

Whatever number of neurons (not nuerons) I have working obviously it's
way more than you have, you can't even spell the word or two others
in that one sentence. And again, you added nothing to the discussion,
just another silly ad hominem attack.

 

[John Doe]

This troll is confused...

--
Whoey Louie <trader4 optonline.net> wrote:

X-Received: by 2002:a0c:c542:: with SMTP id y2mr2959997qvi.225.1579876860705; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 06:41:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:2dbc:: with SMTP id p57mr2383082qta.218.1579876860516; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 06:41:00 -0800 (PST)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!g89no6294200qtd.0!news-out.google.com!w29ni258qtc.0!nntp.google.com!g89no6294188qtd.0!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 06:41:00 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <r0eerg$enm$1 dont-email.me
Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=172.58.235.252; posting-account=C1SVQAkAAACfJY63oQnKBve0H-yhg4CH
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.58.235.252
References: <r08nnm$vip$2 dont-email.me> <h8qmt8FgpucU1 mid.individual.net> <r09l56$tfa$1 gioia.aioe.org> <7d71fe6f-9183-40c1-85b2-fdd23c7ae008 googlegroups.com> <r0a2a3$3av$1 dont-email.me> <370cf99e-4332-410c-a246-3a6dceadcfff googlegroups.com> <r0bm0m$kut$1 gioia.aioe.org> <9e3429d7-376c-4a47-8af5-eb40bbf12318 googlegroups.com> <r0eerg$enm$1 dont-email.me
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <636a39f2-c9de-4634-bb0a-9d1d6a20e064 googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: OT: Smartphone always charging destroyed battery?
From: Whoey Louie <trader4 optonline.net
Injection-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:41:00 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:580454

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 4:54:08 AM UTC-5, John Doe wrote:
No, it's not "really that simple". The phone is overcharged, in this
case to 4.36 V, in order to provide the longest possible usage
between charges.

According to you. Yet I have had several smartphones now and the
batteries lasted as long as I had the phones, which has been at least
three years and most time over four years. So, if there is "over
charging', it's not impacting the phones. And they spent over half
their time on the charger too.





On my smartphone, there is no proper setting like
on a Lenovo laptop (and probably others) that allows a user to limit
the maximum charge. The charger turning off when the battery is full
isn't the solution.

And in phone chip sets that have 8 cores and billions of transistors,
they didn't put in the correct battery monitoring and charging solution?





If the poster would think for a second (or for
an eon), it might realize the difference between phones that are
left connected to a charger and phones that aren't. Normal use means
the phone sits at less than its maximum voltage for hours during the
day.

And it also means that it typically spends about half of it's time
on the charger, sometimes a phone will go days on a charger.
When I'm home, for example, mine is usually on the charger, yet
no battery problems. Do you actually have a cite for these alleged
battery overcharging problems?




Being on a charger with no battery charge setting adjustment
means the device is always overcharged.

No settings? The chips set and software control the battery charging.
It's not just a rectifier and diode.



Being on the charger is
necessary because the application requires a lot of current.

What application is that? I keep mine on the charger most of the time
just so it's fully charged when I go out. No problems here. Maybe you
just have a crappy phone?

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:9fe745ca-b716-4eef-b5bc-c159e5615a71@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 10:33:55 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:636a39f2-c9de-4634-bb0a-9d1d6a20e064@googlegroups.com:

And in phone chip sets that have 8 cores and billions of
transistors, they didn't put in the correct battery monitoring
and charging solution?


Despite billions of nuerons, apperently only of which two are
fucntioning, you still don't get much of any of it.

What happened to the watchdog that would rid the world of dopes
like
you?

Whatever number of neurons (not nuerons) I have working obviously
it's way more than you have, you can't even spell the word or two
others in that one sentence. And again, you added nothing to the
discussion, just another silly ad hominem attack.

Idiot. The point was that your inane remark 'added nothing to the
discussion'. It was fucking retarded, and I called you on it.

IF all I had was two or one as you claim, I would still be doing
orders of magnitude better than a putz like you.

Oh and huge multi-core PC CPUs have billions of transistors, not a
phone's multi-core Arm CPU. So IF I have less than you, I still know
more about the world than the stupid shit that spews forth from you.

Oh and Battery monitoring and watchdog circuits are NOT part of
what a CPU does and would never be incorportated into a CPU latout.

As a hillbilly from my neighbors in Kentucky would say... Yer an
idiot.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 8:42:06 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence..org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:9fe745ca-b716-4eef-b5bc-c159e5615a71@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 10:33:55 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:636a39f2-c9de-4634-bb0a-9d1d6a20e064@googlegroups.com:

And in phone chip sets that have 8 cores and billions of
transistors, they didn't put in the correct battery monitoring
and charging solution?


Despite billions of nuerons, apperently only of which two are
fucntioning, you still don't get much of any of it.

What happened to the watchdog that would rid the world of dopes
like
you?

Whatever number of neurons (not nuerons) I have working obviously
it's way more than you have, you can't even spell the word or two
others in that one sentence. And again, you added nothing to the
discussion, just another silly ad hominem attack.


Idiot. The point was that your inane remark 'added nothing to the
discussion'. It was fucking retarded, and I called you on it.

You don't call anyone on anything and it's YOU who adds nothing to
discussions here. This was a perfect example. You just showed up
with the usual, a vile attack, right out of the gate.

What I posted is directly relevant. Cell phones don't have dumb
chargers that just keep charging batteries, overcharging them if they
are left plugged in. It's absurd to think that phones with 8 core
2 ghz CPUS and advanced electronics don't have charging circuits
and algorithms to correctly charge and maintain the batteries.
Personal experience over many years is consistent with that. I leave
my phones on the charger most of the time and have no battery failure
issues.

IF all I had was two or one as you claim, I would still be doing
orders of magnitude better than a putz like you.

Oh and huge multi-core PC CPUs have billions of transistors, not a
phone's multi-core Arm CPU. So IF I have less than you, I still know
more about the world than the stupid shit that spews forth from you.

"According to WinFuture, the Snapdragon 8180, which is now believed to be the name of what was once called the Snapdragon 1000, will sport 8.5 billion transistors. That's definitely a large number, especially if you compare it to its peers. The Snapdragon 845 has around 5.3 billion transistors.Sep 17, 2018


Business
Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 835 will debut with 3 billion transistors and a 10nm manufacturing process"



Wrong, always wrong.

Oh and Battery monitoring and watchdog circuits are NOT part of
what a CPU does and would never be incorportated into a CPU latout.

First, the cell phone chip sets are not just CPUs, stupid.
Like, it would be hard to communicate with a cell tower with just
a CPU. And here, from the Qualcom product brief for the Snapdragon 670
Chipset. All their cell phone chipsets include QuickCharge:

https://en.wikichip.org/w/images/1/18/sdm670-brief.pdf

Charging
• Quick Charge 4+ technology

Go from empty to 50 percent in just 15 minutes. QualcommÂŽ Quick
Charge™ 4+ technology allows you to power through your day with
confidence. It enhances battery life and safety with technologies
such as dual charge and intelligent thermal balancing


Wrong, always wrong.

As a hillbilly from my neighbors in Kentucky would say... Yer an
idiot.

Don't you ever get ashamed from coming here and making a fool of yourself
all the time?

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:b93f91b6-3dc5-4a8e-
b371-eaed64fd91dd@googlegroups.com:

You don't call anyone on anything and it's YOU who adds nothing to
discussions here.

You said a phone cpu has billions of transistors, AND you were
chirping about the cpu needing to manage the battery.
I shoved your face back into your retarded plate of shit.

That is calling you out on it, you dopey dumbfuck.

You should not even be in the discussion, being that fucking
oblivious about the industry, much less what a cpu does or does not
have incorporated onto it.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:b93f91b6-3dc5-4a8e-
b371-eaed64fd91dd@googlegroups.com:

This was a perfect example. You just showed up
with the usual, a vile attack, right out of the gate.

Idiots like you are worse than the idiots like SkyBuck FlyTurd.

So, yeah, asshole... I showed up and right away the stupid crap you
posted was... just that. So I called you the abject idiot you are.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Saturday, January 25, 2020 at 3:33:11 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:b93f91b6-3dc5-4a8e-
b371-eaed64fd91dd@googlegroups.com:

You don't call anyone on anything and it's YOU who adds nothing to
discussions here.

You said a phone cpu has billions of transistors, AND you were
chirping about the cpu needing to manage the battery.
I shoved your face back into your retarded plate of shit.

No, what I said was:


"And in phone chip sets that have 8 cores and billions of transistors,
they didn't put in the correct battery monitoring and charging solution?"

That is calling you out on it, you dopey dumbfuck.

You should not even be in the discussion, being that fucking
oblivious about the industry, much less what a cpu does or does not
have incorporated onto it.

ROFL

I never used the term CPU, only you did.

Wrong, always wrong. Thanks for playing!