Other Question for those who think it’s OK for Apple to throttle old phones w/out the owners consent...

[laurim]

Because the uneducated consumer would just assume the phone was outdated and old. Time for an upgrade. If Apple was upfront then they would be informed and possibly have the phone checked out before they act on their assumption.
[doublepost=1513975900][/doublepost]

It isn't just having the option to opt in or not. They should just be upfront with it. I'm fine with what they are doing. I just feel they should inform consumers.

If they are so uninformed to immediately bail on a phone and buy a new one instead of simply having it serviced, why do you think they would pay attention to a notice, say, in the list of items changing in an upgrade notice AND remember reading about that particular software function when it eventually came into play? Doesn’t seem very plausible to me.
[doublepost=1514017432][/doublepost]

So Apple develops OS routines that guarantee reliable performance for phones with degraded batteries, and this is somehow a crime? Does anyone have any factual information about how much real-world effect these system changes make on performance. I just upgraded a 6S, and that thing had way more than 600 cycles on its battery. It ran beautifully, and I had absolutely no complaints about its performance. It never crashed, locked up or stuttered. But I can tell you without a doubt that if that phone hung or crashed or otherwise performed unreliably, I would have been very very disappointed.

I think people are looking for something to freak out over this. I see some using terms like "crippling their phones" and "destroying performance." This is quite wrongheaded in my opinion--Apple's engineering was ensuring optimum reliability in the face of aging batteries.

People nowadays are always looking for a corporate conspiracy to “discover”, be outraged about, start a lawsuit or boycott, and make a hundred posts smearing the reputation of the big bad company who supposedly committed the heinous crime. It’s so annoying and counterproductive

 

[cyb3rdud3]

... how would you feel if, instead of crippling the processor speed, Apple implemented some other hypothetical power saving virus “feature” for phones via unreversible iOS update such as:

• Instead of having a maximum brightness of 500-600 nits... the phone now only allows a maximum of 250-350 nits.
• Instead of being able to get continuous location information via GPS during navigation... the phone now only acquires your location every 3-5 min.
• Instead of being able to stream video via cellular... you can now only do so via WiFi.
• Instead of being able to choose the how long the display is on before it goes to sleep... the phone now always goes to sleep after just 30-seconds.
• Instead of being able to choose which video recording mode... you can now only record at 480p / 15fps.

Would any of the above still be ok for Apple to do without letting their customers know ahead of time or giving them an option to shut it off?

“But... but... but... Apple always knows what’s best for the customer and did the only thing possible given the situation!”... Riiiiiiiiiight

I could give more examples like the ones above, but I think you get the point. Apple was completely shady with their lack of transparency on this issue and how they forcefully crippled device processors without letting their customers know with no way to downgrade anymore.

Just another example of Apples heavy-handed approach of not giving users any choice or option (even if an update downgrades the experience) and in general just not giving a **** about customers on the software side of things once they have their money

A lot of what ifs. What if it gave you an electrical shock to indicate it requires a new battery.

I’m still happy with our 5S, 6 Plus, 7, 7 Plus and X. I’m alright jack.

 

[The Game 161]

this was handled badly by apple but it is what it is. I think software updates do hurt older devices. Don't think thats news. It happens with all devices on with different companies. Sometimes those update do not help at all and to get the new updates it likely means you need to upgrade to newer devices like it or not.

 

[laurim]

They provided an adequate fix - battery replacement programs, for certain models.

What they should've done, is replaced batteries for all impacted models & perhaps continue to do so in future.

The battery replacement program was for batteries with a specific manufacturing defect. Something about being exposed to air at a bad time in the process if I remember correctly. It’s not for batteries that are just nearing their end of normal life.
[doublepost=1514018027][/doublepost]

this was handled badly by apple but it is what it is. I think software updates do hurt older devices. Don't think thats news. It happens with all devices on with different companies. Sometimes those update do not help at all and to get the new updates it likely means you need to upgrade to newer devices like it or not.

I still use my 2008 MacBookPro for my personal stuff to keep my business Macs clean. It’s on the last OS it can upgrade. Even though I can no longer upgrade it and the battery is crap so I have to leave it plugged in, I can still do everything I need to do with it. Upgrading is a choice.

 

[44267547]

False premise. You consented. Carefully read the software license agreement that you had to click Agree on before the device update would precede. Apple's lawyers carefully crafted this, so you most likely have no legal case that you didn't agree. Whether you forget you did or not.

https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/

Now that you listed the indications behind the license agreement, I'm curious to see how these lawsuits play out that were filed in Federal court in Chicago over the last few days. For the record, anyone here thinking that someone suing Apple is going to walk away with a lot of money in a short amount won't happen. This type of litigation could take years.

 

[laurim]

Now that you listed the indications behind the license agreement, I'm curious to see how these lawsuits play out that were filed in Federal court in Chicago over the last few days. For the record, anyone here thinking that someone suing Apple is going to walk away with a lot of money in a short amount won't happen. This type of litigation could take years.

I can’t believe a judge would rule that people are completely incapable of realizing that they should have a poorly-performing expensive device serviced before throwing it away and buying a new one. There is a level of personal responsibility people should be expected to have. It’s not like smartphones are a new technology where people would be completely clueless about the standard ownership requirements. These people apparently would take the exact same drastic action if the software function wasn’t there and the phone simply crashed so what are they actually out because of Apple’s attempt to mitigate the capability of old batteries?

 

[Ralfi]

The battery replacement program was for batteries with a specific manufacturing defect. Something about being exposed to air at a bad time in the process if I remember correctly. It’s not for batteries that are just nearing their end of normal life.
[doublepost=1514018027][/doublepost]

Yeah I think you're on the ball there. Guess I was very lucky to have had the battery replaced for other reasons.

Who knows, If I had to have held onto that original 6s battery for what would be a second year, I may feel differently about the throttling. But having not experienced the slow downs & subsequently upgraded due to them, I can't say.

 

[D1G1T4L]

I can’t believe a judge would rule that people are completely incapable of realizing that they should have a poorly-performing expensive device serviced before throwing it away and buying a new one. There is a level of personal responsibility people should be expected to have. It’s not like smartphones are a new technology where people would be completely clueless about the standard ownership requirements. These people apparently would take the exact same drastic action if the software function wasn’t there and the phone simply crashed so what are they actually out because of Apple’s attempt to mitigate the capability of old batteries?

Simply because people assume older tech gets slow due to upgrades. One person in this thread posted that assumption. It goes both ways. Yes people should have it serviced but there are those who don't. At least let the consumer know up front and not leave it to the assumption they know better.

 

[TPadden]

They provided an adequate fix - battery replacement programs, for certain models.

What they should've done, is replaced batteries for all impacted models & perhaps continue to do so in future.

Nope, you are missing the whole point: they should allow the owners' to make their own decision, informed or not, WITHOUT DECEPTION.

Almost everyone recognizes a battery that won't hold a charge (my MBA even tells me); battery goes bad customer makes a decision - replace the battery or replace the phone. Almost no one would expect a phone slowdown to be caused by a battery going bad. Phone slows down the owner has only one choice (and will most likely blame the most recent OS update): replace the phone because he's already locked into the latest OS. The slowing phone will also make new hardware deceptively appear to be a greater improvement than it is over the replaced phone.

 

[lah]

I’m torn on this. I think their solution is pretty clever and extends the life of a device, but at the same time, maybe they should be more upfront about it. That being said I can only imagine my 70 year old mother calling me asking what to do with this pop up notification she received and how to explain to her what is going on. Reality is most of Apple’s users are not not ”techy” enough and wouldn’t know how to handle the notice or understand the effects. As long as they can Snapchat or check their messages, all is good.

What I do think would help them is ease the restrictions on battery replacement. That could provide some goodwill.

 

[TPadden]

I’m torn on this. I think their solution is pretty clever and extends the life of a device, but at the same time, maybe they should be more upfront about it. That being said I can only imagine my 70 year old mother calling me asking what to do with this pop up notification she received and how to explain to her what is going on. Reality is most of Apple’s users are not not ”techy” enough and wouldn’t know how to handle the notice or understand the effects.

Come on, it's not clever it's deceptive.

Even my dead mom would have no problem understanding a "Service Battery" notification like my 2013 MBA gave me 2 weeks ago. I changed the battery (and I'm 67) ; didn't buy a new MBA.

 

[MacDevil7334]

False premise. You consented. Carefully read the software license agreement that you had to click Agree on before the device update would precede. Apple's lawyers carefully crafted this, so you most likely have no legal case that you didn't agree. Whether you forget you did or not.

https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/

While I agree that the language is written so that users have no legal recourse, that just adds to the shadiness of this whole thing. The user consents to an update that the release notes from Apple say adds features and fixes bugs. Absolutely nowhere did those notes say the update also cripples performance on devices with older batteries. If Apple had mentioned that little tidbit of information, I’m sure so many people would have agreed to the update (though I’m sure there’s a sizable percentage that don’t even read the release notes). But, instead, Apple wasn’t upfront about the change. So, users didn’t know what they were agreeing to and now might not have any legal recourse even though Apple misled them. Shady.

 

[Radon87000]

If Apple had added this throttling stuff to the release notes and made it noticeable no one would have upgraded to iOS 11.

 

[rawCpoppa]

Would any of you who support Apple purchase an iPhone with a reduced clock speed from the start so as to never encounter battery issues in the first 3 years of ownership? Like an A12 chip running at the speed of an A9 forever but in a new iPhone XI?

That would be “clever” by Apple too given current battery technology limitations yes?

 

[smirking]

Has anyone here used a device that craps out when there's a power usage spike because the battery can't meet the power demand? It's worse than having your speed reduced. My wife's 4s was doing this a few years ago. She'd have 100% on the battery and it would sometimes last barely more than 15 minutes. It would run down very quickly and once it got down to around 80% it was prone to abruptly shutting down.

I do have to agree that Apple royally blew this and they may have been too aggressive in applying the throttling, but otherwise I'd say from experience that it's good feature.

 

[rawCpoppa]

Has anyone here used a device that craps out when there's a power usage spike because the battery can't meet the power demand? It's worse than having your speed reduced. My wife's 4s was doing this a few years ago. She'd have 100% on the battery and it would sometimes last barely more than 15 minutes. I would run down very quickly and once it got down to around 80% it was prone to abruptly shutting down.

I do have to agree that Apple royally blew this and they may have been too aggressive in applying the throttling, but otherwise I'd say from experience that it's good feature.

I highly doubt many owners experienced this. The forums would be littered with similar experiences if that used to happen to the extent that Apple felt the need to implement this recently.

In the case of your wife’s phone what did Apple’s battery diagnostics say?

 

[TPadden]

While I agree that the language is written so that users have no legal recourse.......

There is ALWAYS legal recourse; may or may not be successful.

..... I'd say from experience that it's good feature.

Even better feature if Microsoft, Samsung, or Volkswagen had thought of it .

 

[smirking]

In the case of your wife’s phone what did Apple’s battery diagnostics say?

I never ran diagnostics on it. I didn't need any diagnostics to see that the battery was borked so I replaced it myself. It cost me about $20 to do. It works fine now. She's still using that old 4s.

I pretty much expect batteries to die anytime it gets past 2 years.

 

[MachCrit]

... how would you feel if, instead of crippling the processor speed, Apple implemented some other hypothetical power saving virus “feature” for phones via unreversible iOS update such as:

• Instead of having a maximum brightness of 500-600 nits... the phone now only allows a maximum of 250-350 nits.
• Instead of being able to get continuous location information via GPS during navigation... the phone now only acquires your location every 3-5 min.
• Instead of being able to stream video via cellular... you can now only do so via WiFi.
• Instead of being able to choose the how long the display is on before it goes to sleep... the phone now always goes to sleep after just 30-seconds.
• Instead of being able to choose which video recording mode... you can now only record at 480p / 15fps.

Would any of the above still be ok for Apple to do without letting their customers know ahead of time or giving them an option to shut it off?

“But... but... but... Apple always knows what’s best for the customer and did the only thing possible given the situation!”... Riiiiiiiiiight

I could give more examples like the ones above, but I think you get the point. Apple was completely shady with their lack of transparency on this issue and how they forcefully crippled device processors without letting their customers know with no way to downgrade anymore.

Just another example of Apples heavy-handed approach of not giving users any choice or option (even if an update downgrades the experience) and in general just not giving a **** about customers on the software side of things once they have their money

How about a toggle to enable battery saving mode it on old phones? Let the user decide?

 

[mrochester]

Simply because people assume older tech gets slow due to upgrades. One person in this thread posted that assumption. It goes both ways. Yes people should have it serviced but there are those who don't. At least let the consumer know up front and not leave it to the assumption they know better.

Hang on, does the consumer or Apple know best?

I keep hearing complaints about how Apple don’t allow users to make the decision to compromise their device in some way, but you seem to be saying that users can’t be trusted to make their own decisions because they don’t know/understand what they are doing or the implications.

So which is it?
[doublepost=1514038115][/doublepost]

How about a toggle to enable battery saving mode it on old phones? Let the user decide?

iOS has had a battery saver mode for a few years. It’s called low power mode and can be found in the battery section of the settings menu.

 

[Martyimac]

If Apple had added this throttling stuff to the release notes and made it noticeable no one would have upgraded to iOS 11.

ROTFLMAO! What world do you live in that "no one would have upgraded to iOS 11"?
Sorry but I'm willing to bet not even 5% of users even read the release notes much less the SLA.
I'm fairly tech savvy and I haven't read an SLA in years. I do keep up on  release notes through the MR forums, but I don't actually read the release notes very thoroughly either.

 

[TPadden]

ROTFLMAO! What world do you live in that "no one would have upgraded to iOS 11"? ......

Almost everyone of those who upgraded and noticed their phone was much slower than before would have downgraded to the previous OS; and even more would have changed the battery if notified to "Service Battery" by either OS.

There would have always been the 5% who shined up their phone screen and didn't notice anything else . If the OS is smart enough to slow down due to battery it is certainly smart enough to notify you that the battery is a problem.

 

[Martyimac]

Almost everyone of those who upgraded and noticed their phone was much slower than before would have downgraded to the previous OS; and even more would have changed the battery if notified to "Service Battery" by either OS.

There would have always been the 5% who shined up their phone screen and didn't notice anything else .

You changed the dialogue. I agree that  should have put a "Service Battery" alert in the OS. Apples biggest fault was trying to hide it from the consumer. That hiding has caused many to think it was just an old phone and forced folks to up-buy to get the latest fastest phone.
But not all of us noticed the slow down. On my 6S, I didn't notice it. But that may be because 95+% of my phone usage is, gasp, making phone calls. The throttling doesn't affect how well my phone works, as a phone.

 

[OriginalAppleGuy]

So they cripple those of us who don't want to update every time.

That does NOT happen and it's been proven. The issue being discussed in this thread is when the OS realizes the battery is low, it adjusts how the processor is used. If your battery is good, your device will run fine.

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/10/06/apple-doesnt-deliberately-slow-older-iphones/

This didn’t age well from October

Nothing changed from that study. Apple does not intentionally slow down phones based on model to try to get people to upgrade. They recognized an issue with degrading batteries and attempted to rectify it. And now many people are upset.

Apple admitted to modifying the processor cycles but also stated it shouldn't have affected the user experience of the device. It is possible they could not think of all circumstances or they didn't come up in testing. Happens all the time. The change WILL trigger lower performance ratings of programs like GeekBench. They are designed to push devices to their limits but do NOT reflect real world usage of the devices.

To the OP - the way you wrote your first post was poor. It's extremely biased and does not indicate a willingness or desire for open dialogue.

To the people saying they are leaving Apple forever because Apple didn't tell them precisely how their operating system works with the processor, well, good luck with the other manufacturers and OS's.

I personally like what Apple has done here. If you were to ask me what the life cycle of a smart phone was I'd say 2 years. Just like PCs, laptops and printers have their lifecycles, so do smart phones. Anything more than 2 years on a smart phone and you are doing really well. Apple continues to support these devices 4+ years and many of you are pissed. How nice. Wonder how much of this is real and how much is just to stir things up?

 

[TPadden]

You changed the dialogue......But not all of us noticed the slow down. On my 6S, I didn't notice it. But that may be because 95+% of my phone usage is, gasp, making phone calls. The throttling doesn't affect how well my phone works, as a phone.

Then......I don't even know why you joined the dialogue .

As far as dialogue goes though; I changed nothing, my posts have always stated in this case it's simply a DECEPTIVE practice on Apple's part to sell a new phone to people who needed a new battery.