Apple Did Not Consider How Battery Replacement Program Would Impact iPhone Upgrade Rates

[Handsome Bacon]

Nearly a month later still waiting for Apple to contact me saying my battery is in. No word from them since 1/10/18 when I showed up for my appointment saying they were ordering one via their replacement program.

 

[gwaizai]

The lady doth protest too much, me thinks.

A simple "nah, not really," would have sufficed--not all this baloney:
Apple "did not consider, in any way, shape, or form, what it would do to upgrade rates," said Cook.

What arrogant contempt for us who make them rich.

 

[Handsome Bacon]

Three months to get a battery. I placed the order on January 10.

 

[Wanted797]

amazing how salty everyone is on this forum.

Welcome to MacRumors 2018
[doublepost=1517549704][/doublepost]It will possibly hold me off. As someone with a 6S thathad terrible batter I went for the smart battery case.

My contact was up in August but I’m going to just get a battery replacement and keep using the phone if it’s still working well

I haven’t had an slow issues.

 

[alexhardaker]

I’ve said before that I don’t think Apple throttled phones to sell new phones. The only way you can do that is to inhibit system access to RAM or the HARD drive or slow down the CPU. Any form of inhibiting the system will be detectable, so if you slow down older phones while new phones aren’t affected it’s going to be noticed and then measured. You will get caught, too many 3rd party testing sites doing tests over the lifespan of the phone for it not to be noticed.

Yes they cut CPU clock speed. Intentionally. But since old phones with new batteries DON’T have the same problem that means Apple is counting on the battery being somewhat to mostly worn out for the slow down. That wouldn’t work in many cases. If it’s tied to a phone model replacing the battery won’t fix it. This breaks the attempted fraud into 2 parts: Worn Batteries and solution fraud.

I don’t think there was solution fraud because the easiest thing for Apple to do about worn batteries was nothing. Just let the phones carry on at full speed until they crash. Putting any code fix in would be (and was) discovered. If the phone was declared dead how many people are going to chase down why? Especially if a new model is out or just around the corner, which, since new phones come out every year is bound to not be far off.

Battery fraud is more clouded. At least recently, Apple batteries don’t last as long as competitors batteries do. Once again, though, the CPU throttling doesn’t make sense if it’s intentional. The throttling had zero chance of not being discovered. Why put it in if leaving it out clears you legally. The warranty in the US is only one year, most batteries lasted longer than that, although not 2 years. Do nothing and you’re in the clear. Batteries die, phone dead, at least some will buy the new phone and for those that don’t they have no reason to sue. Or at least, not a good expectation of winning.

So why did they put in software that was bound to be noticed AND could make them liable for phones that they wouldn’t be legally liable for if they don’t change the clock speed and let the phones just stop? I think they really were looking for a way to extend the useful life of the phone, albeit at reduced effectiveness. And had they stated what the problem was, and what they were doing BEFORE they implemented it I think they would also be in the clear. But Apple is a company that likes to keep secrets, and phone life is something that competitors could use against them. So just say you have a fix, don’t say what it is, and bury it in an upgrade.

I am willing to bet the person who made the initial decision to install software to slow the CPU to extend battery life wasn’t an engineer, and probably didn’t listen when an engineer told him the consequences. You got a fix! Great! Let’s do this!

But I am also willing to bet the engineers knew that over the years there was an effect on the batteries from the thinner and lighter craze Apple and others went through. Samsung, you remember, also had battery problems just a couple of years ago. I think Apples situation was a different facet of the same problem. With Samsung a significant number burst their case and exploded, with Apple it is mostly batteries dying way earlier than they should have. Different designs, different consequences, although I think some iPhone 6’s also burst their cases. Just not very many.

That is why I don’t think that the throttling was meant to push people to buy new phones. Doing nothing would allow phones to fail, which the conspiracy says they wanted to happen, but would have left no trace that Apple was legally responsible for failure.

The EU warranty is 2 years, though. They must’ve taken that into consideration too?

And couldn’t they think that slowing down the cpu would make people think their phones were old and so would upgrade? It’s a sneakier way of hiding the hope of upgrading whilst saying you’re trying to prolong the life of the phone. Doing the ‘letting batteries die’ option doesn’t let them hide behind doing something good whilst hoping for upgrades.

 

[Harry Mlondobozi]

I agree, if you mean the teapot intermittently shuts off whenever the tea bag becomes moderatly used, and its manufacturer fixed the issue by forcing the teapot to make the tea in twice the usual amount of time, while telling owners they did it to extend the life of their teapot rather than because the teapot had a design defect.

And the Extended Tech Metaphor award goes to...

 

[macs4nw]

Really? Which Apple is that? The Apple that looks at design challenges and logistics from every angle before moving a chess piece? Or some slow-witted twin in charge of customer relations?

I have no doubt either, that it was a calculated response.

Apple doesn't do things haphazardly, or should I say, on a whim of conscience.

 

[amattholl]

I don’t believe Tim, but if he is telling the truth, I’m pissed as a shareholder because Apple’s first loyalty should be to shareholders and not to customers. If he doesn’t care how this move would affect the share price, then maybe it’s time to sell. Tim is a disaster, and the sooner he gets removed, the better it is for both shareholders and the customers.

Completely disagree. Apple doing what's best for customers instead of shareholders is one of the many reasons why I support Apple.

 

[Baymowe335]

There is no conspiracy. Apple can misjudge software effects on 1B devices.

When they got feedback it was too much, they acted with the customer in mind.

Hard to criticize them for that and prove what they thought or their reasoning originally. Maybe they just didn’t want peoples’ phones to shut down suddenly and they thought power management wouldn’t noticeable affect normal daily performance.

 

[UL2RA]

Hard to criticize them for that and prove what they thought or their reasoning originally. Maybe they just didn’t want peoples’ phones to shut down suddenly and they thought power management wouldn’t noticeable affect normal daily performance.

Except mostly everyone that's brought up this problem has had very noticeable drops in performance ... and the go-to Apple employee response to this problem has been to upgrade the phone ... not replace the battery. This battery replacement program wouldn't exist if it didn't blow up in their face.

 

[Baymowe335]

I don’t believe Tim, but if he is telling the truth, I’m pissed as a shareholder because Apple’s first loyalty should be to shareholders and not to customers. If he doesn’t care how this move would affect the share price, then maybe it’s time to sell. Tim is a disaster, and the sooner he gets removed, the better it is for both shareholders and the customers.

A truly ridiculous assessment of Cook.

They just made $20B in PROFIT in 90 days. As a shareholder, I can see he’s doing a fantastic job.

Apple cares about long term shareholders, not traders. Luca basically said those words on the earnings call today. What’s good for customers will be good for shareholders in the long term.

It was reported that iPhone, iPad and Mac had the highest customer loyalty and satisfaction ever on Today’s earnings call.

 

[kingofwale]

"right thing to do"...

sure Tim. that's why you only did it after the story broke and Apple getting sued, right??

 

[Baymowe335]

Except mostly everyone that's brought up this problem has had very noticeable drops in performance ... and the go-to Apple employee response to this problem has been to upgrade the phone ... not replace the battery. This battery replacement program wouldn't exist if it didn't blow up in their face.

Those numbers could be very few. Apple employees sell...they don’t force you to buy a new phone. We don’t know how many people experienced meaningful daily slowdown.

If it were bad enough, they should have kept pushing it until Apple took care of them....not just buy a new phone bc a teenager suggested it. Without knowing the affected device volume, all this is speculation. This is slowly dying down.

$20B in profit.

 

[UL2RA]

Those numbers could be very few. Apple employees sell...they don’t force you to buy a new phone. We don’t know how many people experienced meaningful daily slowdown.

If it were bad enough, they should have kept pushing it until Apple took care of them....not just buy a new phone bc a teenager suggested it. Without knowing the affected device volume, all this is speculation. This is slowly dying down.

$20B in profit.

What does Apple's profit margins have to do with the fact that they hid phone throttling from everyone?

 

[trifid]

Count me as just replacing 3 iPhone 6s batteries and not upgrading 3 phones in my house. May even keep these three for 2 more years.

Likewise, my SE works amazing now compared to the disaster it was before and I no longer feel an urgency to upgrade.

 

[MvdM]

HA! Sure they didn't... Just like they didn't think how slowing peoples phones down in the first place would impact upgrade rates.

Exactly what I was thinking. They forgot what they were accused of so quickly?

 

[MrX8503]

Yea I kinda wish I bought a used 6s and just replaced the battery instead of this clumsy and very expensive iPhone X. Unless Apples comes up with a new UI for this model I suggest people stick with older models or Android.

Sell your iPhone X and buy an older phone. You’ll save money and be happier with your phone.

 

[steve62388]

I had an out of warranty phone with old battery that was experiencing this shutdown issue. It’s incredibly annoying. I just wish Apple had this throttle feature in place back then. I sent it off to Apple for a new battery and they replaced it with a new (likely refurb) phone and didn’t charge me anything.

 

[monkeybagel]

Yea I kinda wish I bought a used 6s and just replaced the battery instead of this clumsy and very expensive iPhone X. Unless Apples comes up with a new UI for this model I suggest people stick with older models or Android.

Seriously? Did you not research your purchase before dropping a grand+ on an iPhone? Did you not evaluate the device during your return window?

I am not one to upgrade every model; instead I make my phone last as long as possible. I have owned an iPhone 4, 5S, and 6+. I would not have upgraded if the 6+ had not stopped functioning due to physical damage. However, I purchased the X over the others and have never looked back. It is not nearly as large with a case as the Plus versions are, and the way iOS is designed for the X provides the best iPhone experience to date. FaceID is a big jump in convenience and usability, and the speakers are excellent for a phone, and the battery life is excellent as well. The only complaint I have is the continued lack of a headphone jack.

 

[Vjosullivan]

Android fanboy here, but in my family, wife, kids, parents, they all use iPhone/iPads, why? I have to admit, it's one of those devices where you just pickup and know how to use, it's that easy. They struggle a little with Android devices, so in my household I have the best of both worlds. My mum who rocks an old Nokia slide phone, had to get her onto iPhone because they shut off the 2G network here, so the old Nokia was useless, I was afraid she would struggle, but she knows the basics.
But the thing that gets me with every new model comes out, yeah it's faster, better camera, etc.. but you use it all the same. Unless it's a must have device go for it, but if your still rocking an old device which works as it suppose to. No need to upgrade in my opinion.

Indeed. I've just upgraded from a iPhone 5s (owner wanted it back) to an X but still run the same apps as before. It is definitely a much nicer phone in almost every way but it doesn't actually do anything for me that the old phone didn't do.

 

[honglong1976]

I

I’ve said before that I don’t think Apple throttled phones to sell new phones. The only way you can do that is to inhibit system access to RAM or the HARD drive or slow down the CPU. Any form of inhibiting the system will be detectable, so if you slow down older phones while new phones aren’t affected it’s going to be noticed and then measured. You will get caught, too many 3rd party testing sites doing tests over the lifespan of the phone for it not to be noticed.

Yes they cut CPU clock speed. Intentionally. But since old phones with new batteries DON’T have the same problem that means Apple is counting on the battery being somewhat to mostly worn out for the slow down. That wouldn’t work in many cases. If it’s tied to a phone model replacing the battery won’t fix it. This breaks the attempted fraud into 2 parts: Worn Batteries and solution fraud.

I don’t think there was solution fraud because the easiest thing for Apple to do about worn batteries was nothing. Just let the phones carry on at full speed until they crash. Putting any code fix in would be (and was) discovered. If the phone was declared dead how many people are going to chase down why? Especially if a new model is out or just around the corner, which, since new phones come out every year is bound to not be far off.

Battery fraud is more clouded. At least recently, Apple batteries don’t last as long as competitors batteries do. Once again, though, the CPU throttling doesn’t make sense if it’s intentional. The throttling had zero chance of not being discovered. Why put it in if leaving it out clears you legally. The warranty in the US is only one year, most batteries lasted longer than that, although not 2 years. Do nothing and you’re in the clear. Batteries die, phone dead, at least some will buy the new phone and for those that don’t they have no reason to sue. Or at least, not a good expectation of winning.

So why did they put in software that was bound to be noticed AND could make them liable for phones that they wouldn’t be legally liable for if they don’t change the clock speed and let the phones just stop? I think they really were looking for a way to extend the useful life of the phone, albeit at reduced effectiveness. And had they stated what the problem was, and what they were doing BEFORE they implemented it I think they would also be in the clear. But Apple is a company that likes to keep secrets, and phone life is something that competitors could use against them. So just say you have a fix, don’t say what it is, and bury it in an upgrade.

I am willing to bet the person who made the initial decision to install software to slow the CPU to extend battery life wasn’t an engineer, and probably didn’t listen when an engineer told him the consequences. You got a fix! Great! Let’s do this!

But I am also willing to bet the engineers knew that over the years there was an effect on the batteries from the thinner and lighter craze Apple and others went through. Samsung, you remember, also had battery problems just a couple of years ago. I think Apples situation was a different facet of the same problem. With Samsung a significant number burst their case and exploded, with Apple it is mostly batteries dying way earlier than they should have. Different designs, different consequences, although I think some iPhone 6’s also burst their cases. Just not very many.

That is why I don’t think that the throttling was meant to push people to buy new phones. Doing nothing would allow phones to fail, which the conspiracy says they wanted to happen, but would have left no trace that Apple was legally responsible for failure.

I agree totally if they throttled and everyone knew about it with Apple staff in store advising customer they need a new battery.

Did that happen?

 

[Lone Deranger]

To anyone at MacRumors, please turn off people’s ability to comment on news stories. Years ago I found this website and was hooked, not only for the latest Apple news, but also for the thoughtful and intelligent comments users posted, that would lead into very interesting and respectful debates, that taught me a lot about not just Apple, but technology as well.

Shareholders to Tim Cook are what button-clicks (ad-revenue) are to MacRumors. ie. Of prime importance. User concerns appears to have become secondary for both, sadly.

Censorship never works out though.

 

[honglong1976]

I had an out of warranty phone with old battery that was experiencing this shutdown issue. It’s incredibly annoying. I just wish Apple had this throttle feature in place back then. I sent it off to Apple for a new battery and they replaced it with a new (likely refurb) phone and didn’t charge me anything.

do you work for Apple?

 

[Phonephreak]

Me neither, because it's the truth.

Hahahaha. So no one at Apple mentioned this to anyone at anytime. It never came up at all. The best minds and most valuable company in the world. I have a bridge for sale. Interested?
[doublepost=1517573397][/doublepost]

True story:

When I took my first iPhone (3Gs) to Apple Store to see about a battery replacement, the employee said it would cost about $60. Then he rolled it around in his hand and said, "It's a bit scratched." I explained that it had fallen out of my shirt pocket a few times. Then for the price of a battery replacement he transferred my sim card to a refurbished iPhone.

Complain all you want, and I do, too. Apple makes tons of profit by striving to satisfy the needs and wants of its customers.

So something that Apple did how many years ago means what ?

 

[Kabeyun]

While it’s plausible that Apple was slowing its phones to force upgrades, its equally plausible that Apple tried to implement a software fix to prolong the life of dying batteries and avoid iPhones just shutting down in the middle of something. Yes, they sucked communicating the effect of the iOS update that implemented battery management. (I remember reading that a notification was buried in iOS update fine print, but I’m not sure. Either way, they clearly did a crappy job letting customers know their workaround to allowing the phone to unexpectedly just shut down.) Did anyone ever actually read Apple’s customer statement on this? So it’s all a big lie just because a) Apple said it, and b) a tantalizing, nefarious alternative explanation exists? None of the “Suuuuure, Tim” posters has any idea. Indiscriminate skepticism isn’t particularly clever, and to those who would suggest that Apple defenders can’t be right, I say this: that’s not how it works. One can’t come up with a conspiracy theory and then transfer the burden of proof to everyone else. Not a single one of these lawsuits will succeed unless there’s evidence that Apple didn’t act in good faith beyond tittilating sound bites and riteous forum posts.