Apple Addresses Alleged Throttling of iPhones With Degraded Batteries

[Ronlap]

User-replaceable batteries with a popup warning: "Performance will be slowed until you replace the battery."

 

[newtype2011]

And I stand by my original comments on this matter. There is/was a specific reason behind it. Same behind why laptops slow down while running off a battery vs wall plug. Extremely overblown topic.

Your analogy is quite poor, and thus your argument is weak: A laptop has the option to maintain performance at current levels, or change behaviors depending on power source. Consumers have no choice in this matter of iOS and iPhones.

Just because there is a reason behind something doesn't mean it's in the best interest of all consumers that purchase a product. If Apple was transparent in this practice, then, yes, this would be much ado about nothing. They weren't. They've tried to hide it. Worse, consumers don't have a -choice- when it comes to enabling/disabling.

This whole issue is very telling about the Apple community, and I'm personally refreshed/pleased at the "discomfort" this practice has caused. We shouldn't be "outraged" over anything (these are simply mobile devices), but we should speak out when a company does something that smells of dishonesty.

I think Apple is doing a good thing here by extending the life of people's devices that would otherwise be almost useless due to aging batteries (unavoidable), but I think they went about this the wrong way. Other devices (Android - Samsung/Sony/etc) have had user-controllable, power-management controls for years: screen display management, CPU performance, RAM loads, etc that can be enabled/disabled at will. iOS needs this. Leave it on by default once it needs to go into effect, but then give power users the option to disable if they so choose. Win-Win.

This is an opportunity for Apple to step up and create a better experience for customers; they usually respond well to such public issues. I expect this to get cleaned up in the next iteration of iOS. I have a 2013 rMBP, and it runs very, very well and gets acceptable battery life. Apple is clearly capable of making devices that last.

 

[I7guy]

So you wouldn't buy that phone, but that's the phone apple sold you, and you are defending apple.


I really do not understand your car question, please clarify.

I just humored you because there is no guarantee my phone will have a certain level of MHz in one year based on o/s updates. I always thought absolute MHz was tweaked by the o/s anyway so having power mgmt adjust the cpu doesn't surprise me.

 

[Fugitivo8]

I propose the following, before you write a comment defending Apple in this tell us what device you had throttled and at what degree it was throttled. Because I see here lot's of people defending that it is a normal thing to do or that we shouldn't expect the devices to keep the performance but I get the idea that the ones defending that, never had in their hands a device throttled. If you don't know the agony that is trying to do simple things like sending an sms or opening an email. Please go defend Apple somewhere else.
There is no analogies that would work here, or excuses, iPhones 6 throttled are nearly impossible to use.

 

[nia820]

replace the battery or go get a new phone simple as that

But the issue is Apple didn't inform consumers about it.

I understand why Apple underclocks the device. It saves battery as the battery degrades.

But I think it' s shady of them to not saying anything about it.

 

[iCat]

I've never been in a situation where I want to upgrade my phone because it became "too slow". Also, I had been able to replace my batteries in my iPhone 5 and 6s for free under Apple's replacement programs.

 

[nia820]

Apple knows that most consumers would assume that their device slowed down due to age of the device. So the consumer will buy a new one.

They know if consumers know that a battery change will speed up their device, they will just simply purchase a new battery instead of buying a new one.

Ita extremely shady on Apple's part.

 

[Abazigal]

And your OK with apple not telling you this when you bought your phone?

If the box had a warning on it that said "Warning after 1 year phone will run 20-50% slower because the battery is old" would you buy it?

Now you are grasping at straws.

Being unhappy about not being informed about this is a separate issue from the current discussion at hand - which is about Apple’s intent behind throttling their phones, and if this was foul play or simply an expedient solution to a very real issue that plagues anything running on lithium batteries.

So far, most are unhappy about this (naturally), but what’s interesting is that the tone over at Ars Technica is actually more accepting, with quite a few programmers coming out in defence of what Apple has done.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...life-benchmarks-suggest/?comments=1&start=240

My takeaway is that this whole throttling solution made sense to the people working at Apple from an engineering perspective (you extend the life of old devices and batteries by limiting max current draw causing voltage sagging and shutdowns, rather than let phones shutdown randomly and make users even more likely to just toss them and buy new devices).

But somewhere along the line, they neglected to see this from a PR perspective and how one might interpret this as forced obsolescence. Or maybe they did, which is why they decided to keep mum until now.

You can blame Apple's secrecy, but again, I am not seeing any evidence of foul play from Apple.

 

[Aydy]

What’s your point except to say some people agree it’s a reasonable action by Apple while others do not and opinion is divided.

The point is they can do no wrong. So long as it can be explained away, right or wrong they are never held accountable and users continue to be accepting of apples way ahead even if it means they have complete control over a device the user “thought” they owned.
If my device that I paid 1K for is gonna fail due to a depleted battery then let it fail. Its my bad, let me decide what to do. Don’t go messing around with my device via coding that acts not dissimilar to a virus that instigates irrational and poor performance. Its confusing for users that until last week didn’t know this was a thing and now because they have been called out “they”decide to let it all make sense.

 

[Abazigal]

I think Apple is doing a good thing here by extending the life of people's devices that would otherwise be almost useless due to aging batteries (unavoidable), but I think they went about this the wrong way. Other devices (Android - Samsung/Sony/etc) have had user-controllable, power-management controls for years: screen display management, CPU performance, RAM loads, etc that can be enabled/disabled at will. iOS needs this. Leave it on by default once it needs to go into effect, but then give power users the option to disable if they so choose. Win-Win.

From Apple's perspective, throwing an extra dozen different switches, toggles and options at the user is not a great user experience. Like you said, this is an option that only a small group of power users will understand the ramifications of, much less actually bother tinkering with. Most users won’t know that they mean or how toggling those options on and off will impact the performance of their products, much less be in a position to modify those controls to optimise their phone to their individual needs.

 

[617660]

But the issue is Apple didn't inform consumers about it.

I understand why Apple underclocks the device. It saves battery as the battery degrades.

But I think it' s shady of them to not saying anything about it.

It also takes courage to call it a "feature" rather than anything else.

 

[Jmausmuc]

Now you are grasping at straws.

Being unhappy about not being informed about this is a separate issue from the current discussion at hand - which is about Apple’s intent behind throttling their phones, and if this was foul play or simply an expedient solution to a very real issue that plagues anything running on lithium batteries.

So far, most are unhappy about this (naturally), but what’s interesting is that the tone over at Ars Technica is actually more accepting, with quite a few programmers coming out in defence of what Apple has done.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...life-benchmarks-suggest/?comments=1&start=240

My takeaway is that this whole throttling solution made sense to the people working at Apple from an engineering perspective (you extend the life of old devices and batteries by limiting max current draw causing voltage sagging and shutdowns, rather than let phones shutdown randomly and make users even more likely to just toss them and buy new devices).

But somewhere along the line, they neglected to see this from a PR perspective and how one might interpret this as forced obsolescence. Or maybe they did, which is why they decided to keep mum until now.

You can blame Apple's secrecy, but again, I am not seeing any evidence of foul play from Apple.

Have you noticed that the comments on Ars can be rated? And have you seen which ones are rated the highest?

I have a 13 month old 6S that’s throttled to less than half it’s original speed - after only 13 month!!
These devices are way to expensive to be slowed down after just a year.

Also, as countless others on this thread have told you, they could have used better batteries from the get go or not have advertised the processors like they did.

Before the 6, this issue doesn’t exist and people on here have shown that they old iPhones have the same speed that they always had even with batteries degraded below 50%

 

[opfreak]

Another analogy, when we use the wrong octane rating gasoline in a car, the engine will retard the ignition timing and protect the engine by preventing detonation. The downside of this is the engine cannot produce full power, but can still function. Until proper fuel is used for the car, the engine won't operate at full capability. In case of the phone, the analog to gasoline is the battery health and capability.

Apple decided for the users that if the battery deteriorates, by implementing the power management solution, Apple was able to keep the phone functional and not shut down during usage. A few users would prefer an opposite implementation with information about the battery health, but that is not how Apple operates. That to me is a completely fair implementation.

another bad analogy. I can just buy the correct gas and get my power back. Recharging my phone doesn't.

But to be clear, your OK with your iPhone running 20-50% slower after a year?

 

[sphinx99]

I suspect we are entering an era where performance will vary over time for all mobile devices. See, every battery’s ability to provide (or receive) power degrades over time. Typically a minimum power envelope is defined based on likely end of life conditions, then the rest of the system stays within this envelope even from the date of purchase. The benefit is consistent experience; the drawback is that you are potentially leaving performance on the table when the device is new.

Now here we are in the mid 2010s with CPUs with many sleep states and very low latency to transition between them. Does it not make sense to spool up a core and hit the battery for everything it’s got to get a quick job done, then go back to sleep? Sure. But now what the battery ‘gives’ will drop as a function of battery health, temperature and state of charge. “Results will vary.”

I think this latter approach will become more common, and maybe that’s what’s happening here (not sure) but I suspect that’s the case and our expectations of mobile device performance (anything battery powered) will have to evolve.

 

[jcc5169]

Over the course of the last week, there's been speculation that Apple is throttling the performance of older iPhones with degraded batteries, leading to resurgence of accusations that Apple is deliberately slowing down older iPhones that aren't operating at peak battery performance.

In a statement to TechCrunch on the results people are seeing when testing iPhones with older batteries, Apple says it is aiming to smooth out the high power draw peaks that can result in shutdowns and other problems in older devices to "deliver the best experience for customers."

Lithium-ion batteries degrade over time by nature, and there's nothing Apple can do to halt the process, so it uses power management techniques to attempt to prolong the life of the iPhone and its battery. Apple isn't denying that iPhones with older batteries can sometimes see slower performance, but power management is not a feature that's been implemented to force users to upgrade by deliberately slowing devices.The throttling accusations first surfaced last week, after a Redditor shared Geekbench results taken before and after the battery in his iPhone 6s was replaced. He claimed that performance on his iPhone 6s sped up drastically after replacing a battery with a wear level "around 20%."

Then, earlier this week, Primate Labs founder John Poole showed some aggregate Geekbench data that visualized a link between lower processor performance and degraded battery health. He compared iPhone 6s scores between iOS 10.2 and iOS 10.2.1, which showed variations in benchmarking scores following the update.

Apple in iOS 10.2.1 introduced an update designed to fix a bug that was causing iPhone 6s models to shut down unexpectedly, a problem attributed to uneven power delivery from older batteries. Apple says this feature has been implemented for iPhone 6, 6 Plus, 6s, 6s Plus, SE, and, as of iOS 11.2, the iPhone 7 and 7 Plus. It will be implemented in future iPhones going forward, too.

It's this power management feature causing the benchmark variations John Poole found in Geekbench scores between iOS 10 updates last year. As explained by TechCrunch's Matthew Panzarino:When an iPhone's battery ages, there may come a point when it can't provide the processor with enough power to reach a peak of power, and thus it spreads the requests out "over a few cycles," resulting in the peaks and perceived lower scores on benchmarking tests. As Panzarino points out, benchmarking tests are not reflective of real world usage and will artificially trigger the power management features in the iPhone.

"In other words, you're always going to be triggering this when you run a benchmark, but you definitely will not always trigger this effect when you're using your iPhone like normal," writes Panzarino.

Apple has clear battery replacement guidelines in place. The iPhone battery is designed to retain 80% of its original capacity at 500 complete charge cycles. A defective battery that does not meet those parameters can be replaced for free for customers who have AppleCare+ or who have devices still under warranty.

For out of warranty customers, Apple offers a battery replacement service, with the company charging $79 for a battery replacement plus $6.95 in shipping.

Apple's iPhones do send out a notification when a battery has degraded enough that it's going to impact performance, but it is "pretty conservative" according to Panzarino, and he recommends Apple make this notice more aggressive, in addition to providing customers with clearer information on the link between battery life and performance.

Article Link: Apple Addresses Alleged Throttling of iPhones With Degraded Batteries

 

[Sy7ygy]

The comments for this story should be good. There is going to be lots of rage for something that actually seems logical. All batteries degrade at some point. So you can't expect hardware that relies on the power from that battery to still function the same.

Strange, same 'logic' could be applied to any form of Flash Storage, or even heat relation to hardware longevity.

No, it's bollocks. Welcome to Tim Cooks world.

 

[Radon87000]

Now you are grasping at straws.

Being unhappy about not being informed about this is a separate issue from the current discussion at hand - which is about Apple’s intent behind throttling their phones, and if this was foul play or simply an expedient solution to a very real issue that plagues anything running on lithium batteries.

So far, most are unhappy about this (naturally), but what’s interesting is that the tone over at Ars Technica is actually more accepting, with quite a few programmers coming out in defence of what Apple has done.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...life-benchmarks-suggest/?comments=1&start=240

My takeaway is that this whole throttling solution made sense to the people working at Apple from an engineering perspective (you extend the life of old devices and batteries by limiting max current draw causing voltage sagging and shutdowns, rather than let phones shutdown randomly and make users even more likely to just toss them and buy new devices).

But somewhere along the line, they neglected to see this from a PR perspective and how one might interpret this as forced obsolescence. Or maybe they did, which is why they decided to keep mum until now.

You can blame Apple's secrecy, but again, I am not seeing any evidence of foul play from Apple.

Ars has a rating system. Heir comments were downrated so much they ended up on almost the last page.

 

[Kavika808]

1. My iPhone 6 Plus sat on a shelf for two years while i was away. The battery is not a problem. The performance is.
2. The iPhone should go back to best speed when plugged in.
3. If the clock speed is turned down, then there is no reason this can't be undone. Slowing can't be done via code loops because in practicality loops are more energy intensive.
4. I call BS. Apple wants us to upgrade perfectly serviceable phones, which is not only very expensive (and increasingly so) but also wasteful.
5. Time for class action.

 

[jcc5169]

Its actually an old IBM trick they used on their mainframes to motivate clients to upgrade ... creating false clock cycles is not a new game, nor is throttling down to motivate purchases ... they achieve the same purpose. Tying it to "battery performance" is legal protection to prevent lawsuits.

 

[Leomon84]

Guys absolutely not..

1. A analogy

A car engine degrades naturally over time. No manufacturer in the world will de-tune your engine for reduced hp. And if they do the are ethically obligated to inform you as an owner of their products.

Apple is NOT acting ethically here, they are modifying a product that you purchased withpit the consumers knowledge. This is NOT okay. I bet you their are consumer laws that protect you against this.

2. 2 ways to look at this technically.

Peak power increases with OS updates.
This looks bad for apple as it means their code is inefficient. As technology progresses the OS should demand and be more efficient.

Peak power capabilities decrease with battery degradation. This is ALSO a engineering failure. Why would apple design a phone that would required to be throttled in a year or two?? They must build safety factors into the phone so it can handle a year or two of battery degradation and still jandle at peak performance.

So at best case this is an engineering design flaw on apples part and now they have to go back and "fix" it.

I tell you this is also not true. We all now Apple engineers and makes great phones.

Android phones Do Not get slower from OS updates. Neither do Windows phones. The industry standard is that OS gets more efficient as time goes on and requires less CPU time. I have an old NOTE 4 3 years old that is just as fast if mot faster.

And finally.

There are many ways around this.
Dont update the OS for older phones, disable some new OS features for older phones. Etc etc.

The end of the day, in conclusion, Apple is throttling your phones because they want you to buy new phones.

Is it thay unplausible that Apple is greedy? Every company is, but crossing the ethical boundary to be greedy is NOT okay.

In the age of price fixing, fake baby formula its not that suprising. Apple jist got caught with their pants down and this is their PR release nothing more.

 

[Akagi]

As opposed to my phone shutting down randomly? Guess that’s still the lesser of two evils.

Having the phone shutdown is obviously worse but the shutdown itself is caused by a design issue. Apple is working around a design problem. If it wasn’t, Apple would have implemented this feature in MacBooks and iPads. If there weren’t any shutdowns with iPhone 6/6s, Apple wouldn’t have put the change in the first place.

 

[Aydy]

I propose the following, before you write a comment defending Apple in this tell us what device you had throttled and at what degree it was throttled. Because I see here lot's of people defending that it is a normal thing to do or that we shouldn't expect the devices to keep the performance but I get the idea that the ones defending that, never had in their hands a device throttled. If you don't know the agony that is trying to do simple things like sending an sms or opening an email. Please go defend Apple somewhere else.
There is no analogies that would work here, or excuses, iPhones 6 throttled are nearly impossible to use.

I honestly have to wonder if all the aplologists, defenders, whatever They’r called get their iPhones for free with conditions that they are infinitely available to douse any potential negativity online.

For the life of me I can not understand this need to defend being dumped on by big Corp.
Fool me once, shame on me..Twice, Three, four times..well, we know where this goes.

 

[opfreak]

I just humored you because there is no guarantee my phone will have a certain level of MHz in one year based on o/s updates. I always thought absolute MHz was tweaked by the o/s anyway so having power mgmt adjust the cpu doesn't surprise me.

the os is limiting power because the battery is unable to run the process at full speed.

I guess by this post, you are OK with apple limiting phone performance by 20-50% a year after purchase.

 

[opfreak]

But the issue is Apple didn't inform consumers about it.

I understand why Apple underclocks the device. It saves battery as the battery degrades.

But I think it' s shady of them to not saying anything about it.

Theres a very big mistake in your post. Apple doesn't underclock the device to save the battery. The battery is unable to fully run the iPhone, so apple has to limit the cpu so the phone still remains on.

 

[Kmart9419]

Planned obsolescence. Nothing more & nothing less.

I still have my older 6s and it runs like a pig with iOS 11. It has nothing to do with the age of the device or battery, it's running like crap by design.

This is shameful and cannot be defended.

My 6s is running great on ios 11. Must be the battery.