Other Throttling iphones; battery life vs performance

[Galacticos]

They're probably having meetings with the stores to prepare for a massive increase in battery replacement requests once they release an update for this feature.

They will have created another income stream out of this.

But they did release a statement saying they would never intentionally shorten product life, so at least we can all sleep soundly tonight

 

[jeyf]

Good to here all this winds up in the courts
apple should know the iphone market is saturated yet they prefer to flog the horse.

 

[Galacticos]

Good to here all this winds up in the courts
apple should know the iphone market is saturated yet they prefer to flog the horse.

I would think this could end up being a landmark case. Glad to see that a decision will be made on it

 

[lec0rsaire]

Since you asked

Does Windows 7 run well on XP era hardware?

could'nt say

[/QUOTE] Does Windows 10 perform well on Windows 7 era hardware?[/QUOTE]

with a 2011 i7-2600 and a 2009 intel xm-25 ssd, Yes it does.[/QUOTE]

Yeah SSD. What about with a 5400rpm HDD? SSD's were not at all mainstream back in 2011. You're using a rather high-end configuration as an example. I'm taking about Core 2 Duos which were mainstream in '09 when Windows 7 was released. Intel made such a giant leap with its CPUs around that time that every subsequent generation has brought minor improvements. More along the lines of additional capabilities but really in terms of raw performance. GPUs are were the performance improvements have been dramatic over the last decade. AMD by then was years behind. In the early 2000s AMD had been on par with Intel and in some cases surpassed Intel's performance much like Nvidia had no answer to ATI's R300 for a couple of years.

 

[rui no onna]

could'nt say

Does Windows 10 perform well on Windows 7 era hardware?

with a 2011 i7-2600 and a 2009 intel xm-25 ssd, Yes it does.

Yeah SSD. What about with a 5400rpm HDD? SSD's were not at all mainstream back in 2011. You're using a rather high-end configuration as an example. I'm taking about Core 2 Duos which were mainstream in '09 when Windows 7 was released. Intel made such a giant leap with its CPUs around that time that every subsequent generation has brought minor improvements. More along the lines of additional capabilities but really in terms of raw performance. GPUs are were the performance improvements have been dramatic over the last decade. AMD by then was years behind. In the early 2000s AMD had been on par with Intel and in some cases surpassed Intel's performance much like Nvidia had no answer to ATI's R300 for a couple of years.

XP era spanned a long time. Core 2 Duo was released near the end of that so pretty much peak XP performance. Early XP with Pentium 3 and 4, not so much. Something like a Core 2 Duo E8400 or Core 2 Quad Q9550 actually handled Windows 7 very well particularly if one pairs it with an SSD. Moreso with a discrete GPU for Aero.

A large part of the SSD push actually came about because Intel processors were fast enough that the storage subsystem became the biggest bottleneck for most people's usage. If one has a PC with HDD from 2011, installing an SSD on it is like a breath of fresh air. I bought my first SSD in 2009, iirc. By 2011, all my computers had at least a 120GB SSD for operating system and programs. Power efficiency became a bigger focus for Intel rather than pure performance. I had low-power 1.8GHz Celeron 1037U Ivy Bridge Mini-ITX builds with 128GB SSD on Windows 7 handling basic computing duties just fine.

I don't have extensive experience with Windows 10 but the few laptops I've dealt wih (ULV processors so likely still slower than Core i5-2500) don't appear to run significantly slower than Windows 7, again, as long as the build has a decent SSD and at least 4GB RAM.

P.S. Just checked PassMark. A Core 2 Duo E8400 actually scores higher in single-core than the Core M-5Y31 found in some rMB and ultrabooks.

 

[aevan]

This is one instance of Apple throttling devices. I’m against it, but I’d like to see what you all think about this as it’s at least a water tight example

Your poll makes it seem they are throttling to prolong battery life on older batteries. Instead, what they are doing is preventing shutdowns, not increasing battery life. Battery life will stay mostly the same, but demanding tasks won’t shutdown the phone.

 

[Jimmy James]

Let me have full performance and I'll change my battery when it's time. Don't hide it from me and cause me to wonder whether my phone is old and slow and needing an upgrade, when I just need a battery. I'm not made of money and I don't upgrade just because I want the new shiny.

 

[lec0rsaire]

XP era spanned a long time. Core 2 Duo was released near the end of that so pretty much peak XP performance. Early XP with Pentium 3 and 4, not so much. Something like a Core 2 Duo E8400 or Core 2 Quad Q9550 actually handled Windows 7 very well particularly if one pairs it with an SSD. Moreso with a discrete GPU for Aero.

A large part of the SSD push actually came about because Intel processors were fast enough that the storage subsystem became the biggest bottleneck for most people's usage. If one has a PC with HDD from 2011, installing an SSD on it is like a breath of fresh air. I bought my first SSD in 2009, iirc. By 2011, all my computers had at least a 120GB SSD for operating system and programs. Power efficiency became a bigger focus for Intel rather than pure performance. I had low-power 1.8GHz Celeron 1037U Ivy Bridge Mini-ITX builds with 128GB SSD on Windows 7 handling basic computing duties just fine.

I don't have extensive experience with Windows 10 but the few laptops I've dealt wih (ULV processors so likely still slower than Core i5-2500) don't appear to run significantly slower than Windows 7, again, as long as the build has a decent SSD and at least 4GB RAM.

P.S. Just checked PassMark. A Core 2 Duo E8400 actually scores higher in single-core than the Core M-5Y31 found in some rMB and ultrabooks.

I know. SSDs are really what have given us the kind of modern day performance we have come to expect from computers.

The rMB is just an underpowered machine. It’s designed like this on purpose. It has extremely low energy consumption and no fans. An older desktop processor, especially from Intel, will typically have the upper hand compared to newer low power CPUs. They may lack some new features but overall performance will be stronger.

 

[jeyf]

Apple has a history of Rumor and Deceit. It has become part of their corporate culture. Its just
Apple claims to be not that way but occasionally the thin surface gets a scratch and you get to see what is underneath. What despicable things has apple done that has not gotten discovered? Probably a lot...


What if Volkswagen de tuned their cars as they got older to go slower, handle worse or emit more pollution. This is sorta along those lines.

For every day use, which includes 88% of us users, a significantly old iPhone would work just as good if not better.