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

[coolfactor]

Uhhh no, you did it because you got caught, and it was the only way you could quickly think of, to keep the customers and governments off your back. The lawsuits will still come, but this greatly reduced the calls to tar and feather everyone at Apple.

I don't think they were trying to sneak anything by their customers. The media just loves to paint it that way, and apparently you, too.

I think that someone on the engineering team led the changes and it wasn't discussed with the top-level executives. But the executives were left to respond to the realities of the situation afterwards. Can every change be micro-managed effectively? No. I truly believe that they had the best intentions, but it backfired as a media storm. Offering cheaper battery replacements was the right solution, and they should make the lower prices permanent, if you ask me. What better way to keep devices performing optimally over a longer term?

 

[Bobo03]

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.

Clumsy?

You might have a bad one. My X is running great.

I went from a 6s plus to a Note8 and now I’m using the X. I love the X and do not miss the gross clicky button.

 

[imronburgundy]

I wish all of this would have come out 6 months ago. Replaced my 6+ due to introduced lag from iOS 10 with a 7+. Sure the camera may be slightly better, but nothing that really warrants an upgrade.

 

[Macintoshrumors]

What a misleading headline that borders the line of an agenda being pushed and fake news. It should read.

“Apple does not consider the battery replacement program to impact upgrades”

 

[gatearray]

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.

Great history lesson, I remember Steve Jobs' Apple quite fondly, too.

 

[BeanieMan]

I guarantee they considered how replacement batteries would affect upgrade rates.

You know what else? I also guarantee they considered how "battery preserving" CPU throttling would affect upgrade rates. And if that comes out in some investigation, where they find that mentioned in an email or something, Apple will be in for a real s*storm.

My girlfriend and I have the same phone, bought at the same time. (OK, 6s vs 6s+, but the compute is all the same.) My 6s+ battery is fine, hers is, i would call, terrible, though battery diagnostics say it's just barely fine. My phone is so buttery smooth, yet hers is so incredibly painful to use with how slow it is.

 

[essential]

Well, of course they discussed whether or not replacing batteries in older phones would impact the amount of upgrades customers would purchase in the future. What a stupid lie. This replacement program will reduce how quickly customers upgrade their iPhones, it's just a question of by how much.

https://investorplace.com/2018/01/apple-inc-battery-replacement-program-cost-iphone-sales/

The Implications for iPhone Sales
Barclays Capital released an analyst note yesterday that predicts the cost will be 16 million iPhone sales in 2018. That’s 16 million current iPhone owners who will opt to replace their batteries rather than buy a new iPhone. Depending on model mix, Barclays estimates that represents roughly $10 billion in lost revenue.

As I've said, I don't think Apple was necessarily trying to force consumer upgrades, but it was an unintended consequence of their actions. We can't know how many people upgraded in 2017 because of a sluggish phone who would have just replaced the battery instead if they had that knowledge, but I wouldn't be surprised if the number was similar to Barclays 2018 estimate.

 

[Ericus Macabeus]

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.

Most well thought out post yet and unfortunately most wont rest it.

This forum needs a way to promote posts like this. That would really negate most of the trolls and help educate more people.

 

[Act3]

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

Not something the shareholders around here want to hear.

 

[Cryates]

What are we expecting him to say?

"Yes, we were hoping people would upgrade to the new iPhone. That's why we throttled their devices."

I think what they did for the consumer was the right move. They should have been more transparent about what they were doing, but it was a the right move. People largely just want their phones to work, and they did what they had to do to keep them running and to prevent random shutdowns. Now, the potential of increased upgrades is a side benefit, and having been involved in business discussions with a corporation, it was no doubt considered as a potential upside to the plan whether he wants to admit it or not.

But really, what are people expecting him to say?

 

[EdT]

Most well thought out post yet and unfortunately most wont rest it.

This forum needs a way to promote posts like this. That would really negate most of the trolls and help educate more people.

If Apple IS guilty of intentionally slowing phones so people buy new phones then I would want that pointed out. I don’t think anyone has proven that their scaling CPU fix was primarily intended to do that. If documents come out showing that this WAS the intention then I will join the mob calling for Tim Cook’s head. I just don’t see it from the information available. Apple said they were implementing a fix for phones that may lock up-though they didn’t say what it was- and it does do what they said it would do. As I point out, slowing the CPU was inevitably going to be discovered. If this was Apple upper managements fiendish plot to sell new phones they shouldn’t be fired for rigging the phones. They should be fired for being stupid.

 

[Baymowe335]

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

It shows you that the forum overreacts to something not many care about or experience. Yes, some phones had issues. Apple is fixing them.

You can't know what Apple thought or their methodology for power management (something that isn't bad alone).

$20B profit means customers are buying Apple products at record levels.

 

[mi7chy]

Real reason for throttling that Apple don't want you to know.

January 13, 2017
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/faulty-pho...yptair-flight-ms804-investigators-say-1600963

January 23, 2017
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/01/23/apple-releases-ios-10-2-1/

 

[BurgDog]

If Cook’s statement is, “true,” Apple’s boardroom table is getting SLOPPY. Lol!

They told him to leave the room while the issue was being discussed. Plausible deniability is thus established. This is normal corporate practice when shady stuff is being discussed.

 

[dnsp]

Aww, what an innocent angel.

 

[Col4bin]

Unless someone is closely following this story, I don't think the average iPhone consumer has a friggin clue about battery upgrades. I think Apple knows that most consumers want whatever's shiny and new every 2-3 years. Ignorance is bliss.

 

[Phonephreak]

What are we expecting him to say?

"Yes, we were hoping people would upgrade to the new iPhone. That's why we throttled their devices."

I think what they did for the consumer was the right move. They should have been more transparent about what they were doing, but it was a the right move. People largely just want their phones to work, and they did what they had to do to keep them running and to prevent random shutdowns. Now, the potential of increased upgrades is a side benefit, and having been involved in business discussions with a corporation, it was no doubt considered as a potential upside to the plan whether he wants to admit it or not.

But really, what are people expecting him to say?

Or they could have told the customer the truth about the battery. They flat out lied to us about battery health.

 

[halluxsinister]

During today's earnings call covering the first quarter of 2018, Apple CEO Tim Cook was asked whether investors should be concerned about slowing upgrade rates due to Apple's battery replacement program and the fact that consumers may opt to replace their batteries instead of purchasing a new iPhone.

In response, Cook said that he couldn't answer because it wasn't something that Apple took into account. Apple "did not consider, in any way, shape, or form, what it would do to upgrade rates," said Cook.In the same answer, Cook said the iPhone has fantastic reliability, and that the previously-owned market is continually expanding, with customers handing down older iPhones and using trade-ins to get new devices. Cook said he believes customers handing their devices down is a positive, because "the more people on iPhone, the better."

Following the revelation that Apple introduced power management features that slow older iPhones in order to prevent unexpected shutdowns in devices with degraded batteries, Apple was accused of planned obsolescence and deliberately slowing devices to prompt customers to upgrade.

Apple has vehemently denied that the power management features were implemented to spur customers to upgrade, and the company has said that instead, the features were meant to expand the life of an iPhone for as long as possible.

Apple has apologized for the misinformation that has circulated about the power management features, and it has also introduced a program allowing customers to get $29 battery replacements for the iPhone 6 and newer. In iOS 11.3, Apple will provide more information about battery health and give customers the option to toggle off the power management feature all together.

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

B.S. Pure and utter B.S. from one of the kings of B.S. If this were even REMOTELY true, which it isn’t, it’s all lies, they wouldn’t have made the iPhone’s battery impossible for a user to replace, wouldn’t have made it impossible to access without special tools, and sure as hell they wouldn’t have made it so it could slowly die and make it seem as if the PHONE were dying instead, necessitating replacement.

If Apple were sincere instead of a goddamned money grubbing Microsoft wannabe, they would have not made the battery impossible to replace in the first place, and they wouldn’t now be charging customers to replace their DEFECTIVE BY DESIGN junk at all.

Tim Cook, the correct price is FREE, AT APPLE’S EXPENSE, and UNTIL THE END OF TIME.

Otherwise, Apple has seen the last of THIS FORMER CUSTOMER’S money.

Apple has, with this malfeasance, officially made my spitlist.

 

[DailySlow]

A little more s**t for the controversy...Apple has developed a whole genre of health apps with certifications coordinated with partners in the health industry ensuring accuracy, standards, etc. If they were touting your heart monitor as one conforming to medical standards and it was one recommended by an MD as part of a health provider contract - and it failed when the battery suddenly died - Apple could be at least partially liable. So who cares, actually, if a phone is slowed down a few milliseconds when you're playing a game or rendering a live emoji? What's most important here? I am hearing impaired and rely on a set of Apple/iPhone certified hearing aids for phone calls, "find my hearing aid", etc. and it seems that the discussion here ignores the real, legal aspects of the reliance on iPhones and factors an [industrial] Apple considers to manage an information tool and system.

 

[sdf]

Not throttling the phones would have allowed a worse symptom: sudden shut down of the phone. If that happened, chances are you would form a bad opinion of the product and not want another, especially since Apple wasn’t forthcoming about the cause: an aging battery. Throttling the phone disguised the cause (and the obvious solution)! Apple’s motive wasn’t to push customers to buy a new phone; it was to ensure they didn’t buy a different brand afterwards.

My wife's iPhone 5S, which isn't capable of throttling back like the iPhone 6 and later, started doing this a couple weeks before the Internet had its fit over this. It left her in many situations where her phone was unreliable.

Giving users the choice of behaviours will only convince them Apple made the right choice. That some people can't imagine themselves with a phone that shuts off each time they try to make a phone call… well, it's astonishing to me that people don't realize how truly awful an experience a battery failing to deliver enough power will be.

That said, telling them their battery need replacing is a huge win for the user experience. It was my first guess when my wife's phone started "crashing" like this, but it probably wouldn't be everyone's.

 

[PG(Austin)]

They are obviously smart people. To say they didn't even think about it is very disingenuous.

 

[MRI3T]

During today's earnings call covering the first quarter of 2018, Apple CEO Tim Cook was asked whether investors should be concerned about slowing upgrade rates due to Apple's battery replacement program and the fact that consumers may opt to replace their batteries instead of purchasing a new iPhone.

In response, Cook said that he couldn't answer because it wasn't something that Apple took into account. Apple "did not consider, in any way, shape, or form, what it would do to upgrade rates," said Cook.In the same answer, Cook said the iPhone has fantastic reliability, and that the previously-owned market is continually expanding, with customers handing down older iPhones and using trade-ins to get new devices. Cook said he believes customers handing their devices down is a positive, because "the more people on iPhone, the better."

Following the revelation that Apple introduced power management features that slow older iPhones in order to prevent unexpected shutdowns in devices with degraded batteries, Apple was accused of planned obsolescence and deliberately slowing devices to prompt customers to upgrade.

Apple has vehemently denied that the power management features were implemented to spur customers to upgrade, and the company has said that instead, the features were meant to expand the life of an iPhone for as long as possible.

Apple has apologized for the misinformation that has circulated about the power management features, and it has also introduced a program allowing customers to get $29 battery replacements for the iPhone 6 and newer. In iOS 11.3, Apple will provide more information about battery health and give customers the option to toggle off the power management feature all together.

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

[doublepost=1517602296][/doublepost]
No, I’ll tell you what Apple did. Apple didn’t factor in with all of these battery repairs it will be screwing up appointments for the Genius Bar !!
I just got my first Mac computer for Christmas and I’m having an issue that needs to be brought in for repair and I can’t even get an appointment at the Genius Bar for more than two weeks out, walk in wait times are five plus hrs, and availability of open appointments are more than two weeks out !!! Sucks hard!!

 

[Count Blah]

I think that someone on the engineering team led the changes and it wasn't discussed with the top-level executives.

Sorry, the “Engineering team” does not push out fixes to highly visisble issues, without approval. And at the time, there was a lot of press about suddenly shutting down iPhones.

Engineering is about the lowest rung in importance at nuApple, when it comes to decision making.

 

[sparkinstx]

I made an appointment to get my iPhone 6 battery replaced, and went in to the Apple Store last Friday, to get it done. After waiting 20 minutes to talk to a tech, I was told they didn't actually have any batteries in stock, and instead ordered a battery, telling me it would take "a few weeks" to come in, after which I could set up another appointment.

Couldn't somebody have told me that before I spent 20 minutes driving over there, and another 20 minutes waiting in the store?

 

[JGIGS]

What's so sad about this forum is I can't tell if this is a troll or not...

I'm not. What's really sad is I'm speaking the truth. Do you use an X as your daily driver? I do and know many others who feel the same way I do one of which sold there X and bought a used 8.

Apple's UI, let's really say ios and more so specifically the new gestures on the X, has just become way less intuitive and buggy since ios 7. People can make fun of Androids on screen navigations buttons all they want as well but once you are used to them it's a lot more intuitive and faster to navigate around that UI.

However Apple has great durable hardware, less fragmentation and a more efficient running software resource requirement wise. I think I'm pretty fair assessing both platforms and go with whichever you prefer. But UI wise the old UI is better than the X's hands down.
[doublepost=1517604492][/doublepost]

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

I've thought about it but I feel like I'd be taking such a huge hit from what I paid and lose the processing power and better camera. Tempting though.

Keeping an eye on what the new pixel line ends up being like but the current ones have issues and aren't the deal they used to be either so....