With the throttling disabled? Remember you have to re-enable it if the phone shuts off unexpectedly. Happens to me occasionally if it gets really cold.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Faces Yet Another Class Action Lawsuit Over 'Secretly Throttling' Older iPhones
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It was not “blown out of proportion.”
Do you understand, phones would power off with 80% battery level remaining. Or 50, or 63, or 26, all different ranges throughout the day. And the ONLY way to get them to power back on was to plug it into a wall and charger. Then it would come back on. Otherwise all you could do was see the battery charge image on a black screen.
MILLIONS of phones did this. They were defective and rather than admit this and recall, Apple tried throttling to such a degree that it avoided the shutdowns (and prompted upgrades). It’s actually very simple...
[doublepost=1564718291][/doublepost]
Yes because the batteries were erroneously surrounded by air. That’s what they said in the recall, air gets into the device or got into the device during installation. I worked in a cooler and my phone would stay in my back pocket (40 degrees Fahrenheit) and would consistently shut off at all different percentages. Usually at 81% or 30% something. Apple initially told me the battery was passing diagnostics and did NOTHING for me. Months later they admitted the issue and replaced the same phone free of charge. Pretty gross, the whole coverup.
Fair point, but there really is no excuse for the storage or battery. The battery especially only lasts a few years where as a laptop or phone could last much longer. My comment was more focusing on the general design of Apple products being one that tends towards not being repairable.
Exactly....
The defenders on here conveniently ignore this point. Apple lied, they did not tell ANYONE they were throttling their phones in purpose until they were caught red handed doing it, people think their phones slow, they go to APPLE STORES and the Genius Bar staff using APPLE diagnostic tools simply claim theirs absolutely nothing wrong with your battery, you need a new iPhone...
THATS why there are now several lawsuits plus on going government investigations, some of which have already fined Apple, for this scandal. It’s pretty much affected million and millions of iPhone users around the globe.
IMO it’s the lowest Apple has ever gone so far and about as anti consumer as the diesel gate scandal.
I’m still waiting to see what happens in France because planned obsolescence is actually a crime there.. they are investigating Apple for this scandal still so far as I know.
[doublepost=1564727192][/doublepost]
Imagine defending Apple over this
Well plenty on here and elsewhere DO defend them on this... makes you wonder just how far would they actually go to defend Apple? How bad would an act performed by Apple have to actually be before they stop defending them?
Last edited:
Unless Apple pays them off, they should win. Because they engaged in planned obsolescence.
Sorry this is way too ignorant. You shouldn't comment one something you don't really understand.
In iOS, throttling CPU frequency is the last step when your battery degraded and the charges getting low. Before that your phone had already took various different ways like lowing the network polling frequency, adjust display brightness & contrast, increase the threshold for suspending inactive processes, a lot of tweaks like that. The only thing that Apple never touched is the ability to connect to cellular network, to ensure you that you can still make a quick emergency calls for the last 1% of remaining power.
Besides, there is no any human technology that can effectively handle the drop in peak current from "normally aging batteries". Because there is no such thing as a "normally aging batteries". Batteries are generating power by chemical reaction and there isn't any way to precisely estimate the actual health status of a battery. The so called "83%" or so in some comments they're only estimated by the charging cycles, not from real voltage / current behavior. Every battery, every SINGLE battery made by human technology is made with common tolerance and will NOT have identical behavior, even when they're fresh new. Not to mention that all the usage conditions might drastically effect the real effective capacity of an aged battery, like temperature. The only thing you can do is make the best guess, and take precautions when the statistics shows that the chance of trouble is rising to a threshold.
Basically this is like commenting "the government health policy isn't properly designed to handle the heart attack of normally aging persons", because one cousins of a friend of a friend of a friend of yours is getting heart attack at the age of 49.
Last edited:
Apple didn’t invent the lithium ion battery, true... but they did make them extremely difficult to replace or swap out. When most other phones made it simple or trivial even, Apple made it next to impossible.
I disagree. The batteries they use seem to degrade rapidly after relatively few cycles.
My SE battery "claimed" to be at 95% health after a bit more than months use and about 200 cycles, kept cool, no gaming etc. However in practice the battery % remaining drops from, say, 30% to 5% within a few minutes of use. That is indicative of cells which have undergone irreversible loss of capacity and exhibit a large ESR.**
The bottom line is that Apple uses low cost, low performance batteries in their phones and it benefits them by getting people to upgrade after a year or two. That is bad for consumers and bad for the environment, which is why I dislike Tim Cook's leadership so much - his disingenuously claims to be 'green' and pro-consumer, when it's clear that the only 'green' he worships are those sweet, sweet US dollars.
**bona fides: that is my professional opinion as a HW design engineer
Clarity is important, but also a lack of clarity helps to sell new iPhones. Which is ultimately and slyly what Apple did. Now they are clear on this, and people don't need to upgrade their phones, but instead need a new battery, sales of iPhones are down.
Apple knows exactly what they are doing!
88% of max capacity sounds right on the money for a LIon battery wearing out when a device a full capacity cycle every day. You do realize that there is nothing Apple can do about lithium chemistry, right?
Imagine how pissed off these people would be if their phones kept randomly rebooting, and then demanded Apple build software to repair this issue?
Sorry but I understand the matter quite well and nothing you wrote has demonstrated otherwise. There has been no iPhone before or after the iPhone 6 series which required permanently throttling the CPU by 50%, so your lengthy reply with all its extraneous detail did nothing but take up a lot of space.
[doublepost=1564746735][/doublepost]
The iPhone 7 does not have the issue. There have only been a few sporadic reports of shutdowns on the 7, which actually occurs on all smartphones models (Apple or otherwise) due to the tiny and expected defect rate of batteries.
iphone 7 eventually received the same update which permanently throttles the CPU like the one iphone 6 and 6s got.
iphone SE is also confirmed to be affected by this issue.
A Quote from iOS 12.1's support page
So yeah iphone 7 does have the same issue iphone 6 and 6s have.
Well in other cases it doesn't happen because of the way phone was designed so most other phones actually don't have the same issue iphone 6, 6s, 7 have.
Last edited:
Neither the SE nor 7 series had widespread shutdown issues. Apple chose to include those phones (and later phones like the 8 as well) in their software mod likely as a preventative measure, to handle the outlier cases of actual marginal / bad batteries, but that is separate and distinct from the 6-series issue, which happened with regular, non-defective batteries.
It happens with other phones but again only in the case of defective batteries. On the iPhone 6 series it happened due to a design issue with the phone.
Well that's because the iphone 7 was newer when the throttling was discovered but it has the same design defect that leads to the same shut down issues iphone 6 and 6s have.
Apple itself admired it.
Man the iphone 6, 6s, SE and 7 are all lumped together in Apple's explanation as phones that have the same issue.
iphone 8 and X are mentioned separately. What's so difficult to understand?
https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/...ottling-iphone-performance-based-battery-life
The iPhone 6s debuted in September 2015, which means the first update to show evidence of this pattern — 10.2.1 — dropped about 16 months into its life cycle. The iPhone 7 isn’t quite that old yet, at not-quite 15 months, but a similar pattern is emerging as of iOS 11.2.0
OK so why mention other phones then if they don't have the same problem?
How about the SE?
It's not difficult, provided you rely on actual customer accounts of what happened on their phones rather than reading too much into an Apple release blurb. Not to mention Apple has misdirected on their release notes many times, including for the original battery issue, so not sure why you're so keen on relying on some text vs empirical evidence from owners.
Because shutdown issues have happened on other models but due to actual faulty batteries rather than the design issue that happened on the iPhone 6 series.
It wouldn't be an issue if Apple's software solution repaired the problem and restored performance to advertised specs. Instead, it was a band-aid for a hardware-related cause. Instead of restoring performance like a new battery does, it compromised performance. Your 6s suddenly has the limitations of the first iPhone.
A half-ass solution is more ass than solution.
iPhones couldn't handle them wearing out and would just turn off rather than handle power fluctuations
Combined with Apple's policy of suing people that offer replacement batteries and not offering replacements themselves
Pure greed and obsession with controlling customers from Apple, and anyone defending them over this issue is just a stock bot
Android phones don’t handle this at all and just shut down. And before a citation is requested, there is enough out there.
What has this got to do with the topics?
That’s all your speculation combined with some type of ding against a general group of fictionalized people.
This has been described in detail numerous times. Often in direct response to you claiming ********.
When speccing out the required battery for a phone. Companies do often take into account expected degradation of those batteries into the overall health of the device. They will provide an overage of power availability so that there's a reasonable time frame in which battery degradation does not impact the experience of using the device.
Even Apple does this in just about every other phone and device. What happened is with the iPhone 6/6s, Apple did not provide suitable overhead to account for degredation under cooler conditions, nor long term cycles of charges. Resulting in shutdown behaviour occuring well within the first 2 years of owning the device. For many, having a device in which the battery specc is incapable of properly powering the device for 2 years is ridiculously short and most people expect 2+ years of life out of their device before battery issues become noticeable.
I don't believe this design issue was intentionally. I believe with the advancement of the Ax series CPU happening so fast, they did not account for it properly in the battery they paired to it.
unfortunately, this led to the random shutdown problem as the battery hit the point where powerdraw exceeded capacity much sooner than anticipated.
This on it's own IMHO isn't the big issue. especially considering some of the other faux pas manufacturers have had with batteries over the years.
The issue that is of contention is Apple's handling of the issue. More, the lack of transparency surrounding it. Instead of immediately offering a battery replacement program, and then releasing the software fix with transparent information on why it was occuring and why they were rolling out a throttle fix. They obfuscated the patch under (battery management) without details.
When users noticed their devices were getting slower and slower, they would take them to Apple stores looking for answers. Unfortunately, the information about throttling was not relayed or given to the stores. Apple employees would run a battery test that did not measure the capability of peak current issue, only retention of power. So batteries according to Apple's tests would pass the Apple store tests. Apple policy was if a battery passed the test, no replacement battery would be offered. Apple stores would even reject users who were willing to pay for that service. Leaving them with a seemingly permanently crippled slow phone that they didn't know why it was slow and the only solution presented was "live with it or buy a new phone"
When Tim Cook was asked "Do you throttle old phones". He responded with an outright "no we do not throttle old phones". This was a technical truth as the throttling was not based on age. But it was underhanded and misleading as phones were being throttled for other reasons.
it took approximately another month before 3rd party testing uncovered both the battery issue, and the software throttle. By this time, there were already emerging reports of users who bought new phones because they thought the throttling and slow down was just "typical old harware" behaviour instead of a purposeful throttling by Apple.
Overall. The Throttle in order to limit the accidental shutdowns was not a bad solution and work around for the issue. it was the lack of transparency. the obfuscation. the lying by Cook, and the miscommunication that is the problem here, more so than any technical issue that may have existed. it showed a level of unethical behaviour that a company like Apple should not be allowed to behave in. Hence the lawsuits, which are the way for consumers to hold corporations acconutable for behaviour that they believe is anti-consumer.
The demand for battery replacements due to throttling was so high, that upon release of the battery replacement program for this issue and the issuing of testing to account for the battery issue, Apple saw 9-11 million devices take advantage of this battery swap.