[Zetaphor]

The obvious solution would be to report the lowest number, as multiple replies to you have already proposed, but you again chose to ignore because it doesn't serve your agenda.

This entire thread started with you claiming Apple was somehow trying to prevent issues by hiding these features, and you've twice tried to move the goalposts to irrelevant points when given evidence to the contrary.

If you can't even defend your original position then I have no interest in continuing a discussion with Apple's most useful idiot.

[dwaite]

The lowest level of the three is not a useful number. The case serves as a battery pack to recharge the headphones (something I did earlier today while on an international flight).

The reality is the sort of compatibility being talked about is a new feature with design choices, not just unwired functionality.

I'd rather them work on features to report charging time or expected playback time on iOS, or write their own app for Android, than try to arbitrarily increase their bluetooth profile compatibility checklist.

[raw_anon_1111]

“the lowest number” would be completely useless. What would that tell me? Do I need to charge the case? So I need to put my left pod in the fully charged case? The right one?

[Zetaphor]

The average between the two buds then, and rely on the LED for the case. This isn't that complicated guys, other earbud manufacturers somehow figured it out, I'm sure Apple can too.

Hyper-fixating on an issue with one part of the spec doesn't dismiss the larger problem being discussed. It's baffling (and kind of sad) how hard you guys feel the need to defend a trillion dollar company making obviously anti-consumer decisions.

[raw_anon_1111]

How does the “average” help? It still isn’t actionable. It doesn’t tell me whether I need to charge my case, put my left AirPod in a fully charged case or put the right AirPod in a fully charged case.

If you know the average of those three, what does it tell you?

What other manufacturers have figured out how to report three devices that represent to a Bluetooth host as one device in a standards conforming way that will work across multiple hosts?

It’s not that I am defending a trillion dollar company - the idea of averaging three completely different devices is non sensical and provides absolutely no benefit to the end user. If you want ti complain about anyone - complain about the standards body.

[Zetaphor]

You, like the person this thread started with, are (deliberately?) missing the fire in the forest because you want to talk about the state of one tree. Yes, the standard should be improved to support multi-part devices, nobody here is arguing against that.

This entire thread started with someone trying to claim that Apple was not in the wrong by restricting these features, of which battery reporting is A SINGLE ONE.

No, I don't have a perfect solution for this one specific part of the problem, but that's also not been the my focus the entire time. Getting dragged into the weeds only serves to distract from the actually important point here, which is that what Apple is doing is anti-consumer.

Let's first agree that Apple should play on even ground with everyone else, and then we can whinge over how to correctly report the battery of three components over a single connection. Yeesh.

[raw_anon_1111]

Yes because it’s easy as long as you ignore the details. Speaking of which, how do you surface all of the other features of the AirPod using the Bluetooth protocol?

You claimed other manufacturers have “figured this out” - how?

Every single thing that you say Apple should do is about how Apple can do that in a method that conforms to the spec - you kind of have to “fixate” upon the spec if you claim that Apple isn’t conforming to the spec.

The battery reporting is the one you brought up and had only horrible ideas.