Apple Being Sued for 'Purposefully Slowing Down Older iPhone Models' [Updated]

[Puddled]

It’s a simple choice really, slow the phone or have it shut off.

As someone who’s phone shut off every. Single. Time. I went for a walk in the winter I’m now happily able to listen to my podcasts on my walks where I couldn’t before.

That’s not “because Apple said so”.

And this is where those blindsided by the words and doublespeak of Apple are not getting it.

If your phone can't handle cold weather because the high stress battery design and management apple use, flogs the (undersized and over worked?) battery to death in 12 months or so, it means that the battery design is pants. Adding a throttle to the CPU to help the knackered batteries crawl past the warranty period is not "good engineering." Its not "doing what is best for the customer". Its not "extending device life".

It is a bandaid. When said band aid is hidden and to the major benefit of the manufacturer, you are walking a very close line towards fraud.

That is why you have a court case on this.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Watch how apple respond. They wont get rid of throttling with poor battery life. They can't. It will show up very quickly in a rapidly increasing warranty load as more and more devices die a quick and very premature death without this patch.

Apple will keep it and bury the notification or option in the settings. The vast majority of iphone users don't bother with faffing around in the settings so this issue will thus be whitewashed away.

I keep saying it, Android exists. Androids (afaik) don't do this. There is no excuse

Oh , as for arguing that thermal or load throttling is the same thing as Apple's hobbling of an iphone with a weak battery. Stop it. Its silly.

 

[NT1440]

And this is where those blindsided by the words and doublespeak of Apple are not getting it.

If your phone can't handle cold weather because the high stress battery design and management apple use, flogs the (undersized and over worked?) battery to death in 12 months or so, it means that the battery design is pants. Adding a throttle to the CPU to help the knackered batteries crawl past the warranty period is not "good engineering." Its not "doing what is best for the customer". Its not "extending device life".

It is a bandaid. When said band aid is hidden and to the major benefit of the manufacturer, you are walking a very close line towards fraud.

That is why you have a court case on this.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Watch how apple respond. They wont get rid of throttling with poor battery life. They can't. It will show up very quickly in a rapidly increasing warranty load as more and more devices die a quick and very premature death without this patch.

Apple will keep it and bury the notification or option in the settings. The vast majority of iphone users don't bother with faffing around in the settings so this issue will thus be whitewashed away.

I keep saying it, Android exists. Androids (afaik) don't do this. There is no excuse

Oh , as for arguing that thermal or load throttling is the same thing as Apple's hobbling of an iphone with a weak battery. Stop it. Its silly.

I keep having to ask this, where the hell does this “one year” claim keep coming from?

Also, what chemistry would you have gone with for better performance in cold weather that doesn’t result in poorer performance in other regards?

 

[skeleton11223]

How can these iSheep even defend Apple for this?! Low power mode already underclocks the processor and disables other stuff making it very good for battery without degrading the performance.
This is just a forced underclock!

 

[Michael Goff]

Can you elaborate on that?

I can try, mostly from a higher level. Apple has generally tried to design a faster single core than the alternative. Why? The easiest way to make a phone appear snappy is to have fast bursts. So that’s what Apple has seemingly done so far, make use of every bit of performance that their processors give them. Android, in the other hand, was designed to deal with the lower power CPU more.

The more I look at it, the less I’m thinking this is a design principle and more plain laziness. Google Engineers have been working hard due to constraints that the iOS engineers don’t have. Or maybe I’m just second guessing myself for no reason.

OS has nothing to do with it. It's between CPU and the battery. Processor power management seems to have a design flaw. Larger battery would obviously help too. Ultimately, as a consumer, I don't care what sort of design flaw this is. The phones should be recalled.

Please tell me you’re joking.

If you mean those benchmarks apps, Apple does not approve apps that report the actual CPU frequency. It's a private API, not available to user mode code, not allowed by Apple's guidelines, thus not legal for App store submission.



Queue the frivolous lawsuits against every Android vendor next week. Whether that code does exactly the same or not, it can be misconstrued by conspiracy theorists just as badly as Apple's statement.

No, because most people don’t care.

 

[Abazigal]

Well, public sentiment seems to be gradually shifting to “Okay, maybe Apple did have the best of intentions, but their communication still sucks”. Apple will still need to answer for this, but they just might be able to walk away from this one unscathed.

 

[firewood]

And they should be given a way to turn off this feature.

In general, Apple does not allow iOS app developers to provide a feature that is likely to cause a device to crash. They probably apply that same rules to the engineers who do their Settings app.

 

[Michael Goff]

I keep having to ask this, where the hell does this “one year” claim keep coming from?

Also, what chemistry would you have gone with for better performance in cold weather that doesn’t result in poorer performance in other regards?

The one year claim comes from the idea that the patch introducing the “problem” came shortly after a year the phone was released (in regards to the 6S and 7).

 

[falainber]

Well, public sentiment seems to be gradually shifting to “Okay, maybe Apple did have the best of intentions, but their communication still sucks”. Apple will still need to answer for this, but they just might be able to walk away from this one unscathed.

That's what AAPL share holding posters are obviously hoping for and doing their best posting all sorts of nonsense.

 

[Abazigal]

That's what AAPL share holding posters are obviously hoping for and doing their best posting all sorts of nonsense.

Well, if you know me, you will know that I hold absolutely zero Apple stock (any any shares for that matter). So I have zero vested interest in this beyond a desire for a rational and civil discussion.

 

[Ladybug]

Rumor has it that Tim has a new dongle in the works.

Introducing the new iChoke! You thought your phone was slow after we throttled it, the new iChoke will either shut your phone down prematurely or have it gasping for life.

Starting at $199 Coming Soon!

Warning: Consumption may cause stomach discomfort or a laxative effect!

 

[Michael Goff]

Well, if you know me, you will know that I hold absolutely zero Apple stock (any any shares for that matter). So I have zero vested interest in this beyond a desire for a rational and civil discussion.

Same here. No stock of any sort both because I’m poor and because I don’t see the stock market as something I want to be a part of.

 

[Puddled]

Well, public sentiment seems to be gradually shifting to “Okay, maybe Apple did have the best of intentions, but their communication still sucks”. Apple will still need to answer for this, but they just might be able to walk away from this one unscathed.

Just read the reddit link you posted.

You also don't get it.

I would be absolutely delighted for any phone or portable device manufacturer to give the user warning that battery condition is poor and give an option throttle the power draw on the device until the battery is replaced (actually android does give the former).

It is the right thing to do and absolutely follows the redditers recommendations.

However "options" is the argument here so his and your points are meaningless in context to this issue (which he himself admits)

 

[NT1440]

The one year claim comes from the idea that the patch introducing the “problem” came shortly after a year the phone was released (in regards to the 6S and 7).

Ok that’s what I was thinking, so again we have assertions based on faulty logic.

Thanks for clearing that up, I figured it was something like that.
[doublepost=1514252247][/doublepost]

Just read the reddit link you posted.

You also don't get it.

I would be absolutely delighted for any phone or portable device manufacturer to give the user warning that battery condition is poor and give an option throttle the power draw on the device until the battery is replaced (actually android does give the former).

It is the right thing to do and absolutely follows the redditers recommendations.

However "options" is the argument here so his and your points are meaningless in context to this issue (which he himself admits)

Here’s the thing though, a perfectly fine battery can still have issues in the cold and only in the cold. So is Apple going to be required (by the users calling for it) to somehow explain every variable involved in battery performance and battery degradation? I honestly don’t know how you’d have a pop up that would give a reasonable explanation to the technologically illiterate.

Going back to the cold, how do you explain to a user that their battery is otherwise fine, but not handling the walk in 20 degree weather well currently? That’s a direct example from my own usage, an otherwise fine battery that was shutting off in the cold when I went on my winter walks.

 

[Act3]

If you mean those benchmarks apps, Apple does not approve apps that report the actual CPU frequency. It's a private API, not available to user mode code, not allowed by Apple's guidelines, thus not legal for App store submission.



Queue the frivolous lawsuits against every Android vendor next week. Whether that code does exactly the same or not, it can be misconstrued by conspiracy theorists just as badly as Apple's statement.

Lol ok then. But sold in Apples App Store.

 

[deferredAnon]

I cannot trust Apple after this fiasco. With each update, our iPhone 6 felt slower and slower while we had no knowledge of what was causing this slow down. Apple intentionally hid why our phone, which was supposed to work under specific CPU, was slowing down.

This, of course, coincided with Apple's lagging iPhone sales in 2016. To me, this makes sense from a financial perspective and also sense in that Apple is able to use the excuse of failing batteries if confronted. But no other phone company does this to their phones and I believe they all use lithium ion batteries. Why are Apple's batteries different, or held to a different degree of responsibility? Why was Apple hiding the fact that they reduce performance of a product people purchased solely because of its advertised performance specifications?

Apple knew iPhone was giving diminishing returns after iPhone 6 because people were just not updating to new models as fast as before. This was an attempt of using the so-called fix that only applied to or was relevant to a very small number of failing iPhone batteries and applying it system-wide to slow down 'all' older models, including version 7. Irresponsible, fraudulent, and dishonest.

Apple intentionally erred in two ways:
1) Failed to communicate there was an 'alleged' problem with batteries. (From my understanding, battery shutdown issues only applies to very small amount of users, however, throttling update was applied to everyone using the specific model, including the one year old iPhone 7).
2) Decreased CPU power with each iteration of iOS without the knowledge and consent of user. (No one assumes CPU performance issues stemming from an aged battery, as it is simply not a symptom of it. This isn't your AA/AAA batteries.)

A user never suspects their phone's CPU power decreased because of battery issues. But sluggish performance would be blamed on out-of-date phones. At least, that is what one can expect to be told if contacting the Apple store.

The general ignorance by those apologizing for Apple is showcased by this NYT article published on November 15, a month(!) before the whole scandal broke out: “A New Phone Comes Out. Yours Slows Down. A Conspiracy? No.” - NYT It is important to mention that no where in this month old article is one advised to replace the battery for their slowed down device, simply because one never expects/suspects CPU performance issues from an aged battery. But what the article does dedicate a whole paragraph to in the end is advising you to... upgrade your device.

The Nov. 15 NYT article should be referenced in the lawsuits showcasing public perception.

One other thing of interest I found on this forum is the mention of Apple removing ability of third-party apps to measure battery cycles and their health state in September 2016.

P.S. NYT doubled down in a Dec. 21 follow-up article: “Is Apple Slowing Down Old iPhones? Questions and Answers - NYT”

 

[Michael Goff]

I cannot trust Apple after this fiasco. With each update, our iPhone 6 felt slower and slower while we had no knowledge of what was causing this slow down. Apple intentionally hid why our phone, which was supposed to work under specific CPU, was slowing down.

This, of course, coincided with Apple's lagging iPhone sales in 2016. To me, this makes sense from a financial perspective and also sense in that Apple is able to use the excuse of failing batteries if confronted. But no other phone company does this to their phones and I believe they all use lithium ion batteries. Why are Apple's batteries different, or held to a different degree of responsibility? Why was Apple hiding the fact that they reduce performance of a product people purchased solely because of its advertised performance specifications?

Apple knew iPhone was giving diminishing returns after iPhone 6 because people were just not updating to new models as fast as before. This was an attempt of using the so-called fix that only applied to or was relevant to a very small number of failing iPhone batteries and applying it system-wide to slow down 'all' older models, including version 7. Irresponsible, fraudulent, and dishonest.

Apple intentionally erred in two ways:
1) Failed to communicate there was an 'alleged' problem with batteries. (From my understanding, battery shutdown issues only applies to very small amount of users, however, update was applied to everyone using the specific model, including the one year old iPhone 7).
2) Decreasing CPU power with each iteration of iOS. (No one assumes CPU performance issues stemming from an aged battery, as it is simply not a symptom of it. This isn't your AA/AAA batteries.)

A user never suspects their phone's CPU power decreased because of battery issues. But sluggish performance would be blamed on out-of-date phones. At least, that is what one can expect to be told if contacting the Apple store.

The general ignorance by those apologizing for Apple is showcased by this NYT article published on November 15, a month(!) before the whole scandal broke out: “A New Phone Comes Out. Yours Slows Down. A Conspiracy? No.” - NYT It is important to mention that no where in this month old article is one advised to replace the battery for their slowed down device, simply because one never expects/suspects CPU performance issues from an aged battery. But what the article does dedicate a whole paragraph to in the end is advising you to... upgrade your device.

The Nov. 15 NYT article should be referenced in the lawsuits showcasing public perception.

One other thing of interest I found on this forum is the mention of Apple removing ability of third-party apps to measure battery cycles and their health state in September 2016.

P.S. NYT doubled down in a Dec. 21 follow-up article: “Is Apple Slowing Down Old iPhones? Questions and Answers - NYT”

“Anyone that Disagrees with my anecdotes is an apologist” - A deferredAnon Story

 

[NT1440]

2) Decreased CPU power with each iteration of iOS without the knowledge and consent of user. (No one assumes CPU performance issues stemming from an aged battery, as it is simply not a symptom of it. This isn't your AA/AAA batteries.)

Uhh, where did this assertion come from?

Are you saying, battery arguments aside, Apple is slowing the CPU clock speed during each iOS iteration?

 

[deferredAnon]

“Anyone that Disagrees with my anecdotes is an apologist” - A deferredAnon Story

Yes, we know this. That is why I quoted the NYT article published on Nov. 14.

 

[Michael Goff]

Uhh, where did this assertion come from?

Are you saying, battery arguments aside, Apple is slowing the CPU clock speed during each iOS iteration?

Weirdly enough, the vaunted GB everybody points to explained what’s going on and it disagrees with what this guy is saying.

https://www.geekbench.com/blog/2017/12/iphone-performance-and-battery-age/

Yes, we know this. That is why I quoted the NYT article published on Nov. 14.

A) Assuming you mean 15.
B) The premise of your rant come from not understanding basic power management principles that all companies do to deal with the realities of lithium ion batteries.
C) Apple didn’t even start slowing down the CPU until 10.2.1.

 

[deferredAnon]

Weirdly enough, the vaunted GB everybody points to explained what’s going on and it disagrees with what this guy is saying.

https://www.geekbench.com/blog/2017/12/iphone-performance-and-battery-age/

If you can point out where the article disagrees with me, that would be great. Or, are we still in the apologist phase? Perhaps more relevant to call it the 'fake news' phase.

 

[Michael Goff]

If you can point out where the article disagrees with me, that would be great. Or, are we still in the apologist phase?

You said Apple slowed the CPU in each version and it had nothing to do with the battery. I can also point to a Futuremark article where their CPU performance remained pretty flat over the versions if you’d like.

Edit: Also, learn what apologist means please.

 

[617660]

Are you honestly expecting normal people to find that and edit the code in a way where it doesn’t break something?

Are you seriously expecting normal people without programming skill to even touch the code?

The point it's that it's open source and there is nothing to hide. People with knowledge would have exposed the company a long time ago.

 

[Michael Goff]

Are you seriously expected normal people without programming skill to even touch the code?

No. I don’t expect normal people to have to do any of that. I wouldn’t want any normal person to be expected to do any of that. I wouldn’t even expect any normal person to even understand what they’d have to do to even begin to do that. I want people to be able to use their phones, enjoy their phones, and not have to worry about tinkering.

Period.

 

[617660]

No. I don’t expect normal people to have to do any of that. I wouldn’t want any normal person to be expected to do any of that. I wouldn’t even expect any normal person to even understand what they’d have to do to even begin to do that. I want people to be able to use their phones, enjoy their phones, and not have to worry about tinkering.

Period.

And not worrying about company slowing down their device through "updates", assumably?

 

[Michael Goff]

And not worrying about company slowing down their device through "updates", assumably?

Sadly, worrying about a phone slowing down over time is something that happens with both phones. I don’t want it, but battery technology is what it is. And being Open Source hasn’t helped bring it forward with the amount of “Android doesn’t slow down your phone like this” comments I’ve read.