Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Fined 25 Million Euros in France for Slowing Down Older iPhones With iOS Update

gnasher729 said:
Well, absolutely. In the future, iPhones in France with an old battery will run at full speed until the battery is empty and the phone crashes. Like good phones do, like Samsung etc.
Click to expand...

What part of having the option and a notification from the get go, do you find ridiculous and insulting? I really am wondering.... You dont like it that now there is a toggle for people who want to take a risk? So you think it is more ethical to say NOTHING to the consumer, throttle his phone without explaining why to him, have him buy a new phone, only to realize latter that all his phone needed is god damned battery replacement?

REALLY? You guys are going to try and spin this as something great Apple did? wow...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peza19, Ludatyk, Ladybug and 4 others
Valkyre said:
yes it was very nice of Apple throttling people's iphone without even notifying them AT ALL! It obviously is a "mile ahead of competition" thing to do! Seriously I love Apple but there are some daft people out there. If people did not complain and made a thing about it you still wouldnt have that toggle option to fix this issue. Apple said nothing about it because it suited them, because it made people give away their perfectly fine iphones to get new ones, instead of just having a battery replaced for little cost. What a "mile ahead of competition" thing to do... yes....clearly... the right thing to do if apple "really cared" would be to issue a notice and have that toggle option from the beginning. Then nobody would have any problem and that would indeed be very decent of them. But they tried to exploit the situation to make more money and sound like the good guy. Sorry but that is foul play. Either be a good guy from the get go and leave the semantics...
Click to expand...

This toggle was added for legal reasons. I don't see how it helps or fixes anything. I looked into it for curiosity (not now, before) I have it on, I would never want it off, and neither should you. I would say more, this toggle should not be there, as disabling it downgrades the experience. My battery is super old and I don't have money to replace it, my iPhone still shuts down sometimes rarely, this is very unpleasant, I suspect if I turn off throttling it would shut down more often.

Also adding a warning for the OTA update is a ****** idea. It's hard enough to covince user keep their devices up to date, and Apple is the leader here. Such a ****** warning would only confuse and scare people, it's not a solution.

The only thing I could agree with you, that more people should know they can replace battery on their iPhone, and they should now when is a good time to do it. I think the Mac solved this problem ages ago with a warning message "battery needs replacement". That would be a great thing for iOS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: H3LL5P4WN
iOS market share in France
7F9CBC01-2720-4697-B7C7-E939706D1665.jpeg
 
So they got fined because your computer chip that’s many years old can’t do the higher functionality of today’s CPUs we are software is demanding more. Where is the logic in this?

Imagine Apple being forced to dumb down futures software products because they’re afraid their older phones won’t be able to work as fast as their newer phones this makes no sense

it’s the most baseless lawsuit I’ve ever heard France is a sham!

No wonder France is about 5 to 6 years behind the rest of the globe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lkalliance
m0sher said:
So they got fined because your computer chip that’s many years old can’t do the higher functionality of today’s CPUs we are software is demanding more. Where is the logic in this?

Imagine Apple being forced to dumb down futures software products because they’re afraid their older phones won’t be able to work as fast as their newer phones this makes no sense

it’s the most baseless lawsuit I’ve ever heard France is a sham!

No wonder France is about 5 to 6 years behind the rest of the globe.
Click to expand...

Did you even read / know what the article is about?
 
  • Like
Reactions: HVDynamo, freedomlinux, martyjmclean and 1 other person
itsmilo said:
I especially love their solution on Mac by removing the percentage all together so you don’t even know if your starts to die faster
Click to expand...

I still have the charge percentage displaying (macOS 10.15.3); Unless you are you referring to the charge capacity? I use the Monity app to keep track of my computer's stats: https://monityapp.com. This tells me how well my battery is performing; unless these diagnostics aren't accurate anymore? I haven't done detailed tests, but it seems about right for my computer (mid-2014 rMBP) from my daily use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: martyjmclean
m0sher said:
So they got fined because your computer chip that’s many years old can’t do the higher functionality of today’s CPUs we are software is demanding more. Where is the logic in this?

Imagine Apple being forced to dumb down futures software products because they’re afraid their older phones won’t be able to work as fast as their newer phones this makes no sense

it’s the most baseless lawsuit I’ve ever heard France is a sham!

No wonder France is about 5 to 6 years behind the rest of the globe.
Click to expand...
And you live in which advanced country?
 
  • Like
Reactions: martyjmclean
itsmilo said:
I especially love their solution on Mac by removing the percentage all together so you don’t even know if your starts to die faster
Click to expand...
Which version of macOS/OS X had a percentage for maximum charge capacity?
 
This is a BAD ENGINEERING decision. When initially designed, the battery capacity was matched to the maximum power draw of the components without considering what would happen in 1-2 years of heavy use. They designed the phone to the edge of its performance envelope and surprise, that design didn't hold up to the real world. If Apple had put slightly bigger batteries into the phones in the first place this wouldn't be an issue at all.
 
urtules said:
This toggle was added for legal reasons. I don't see how it helps or fixes anything.
Click to expand...
Legal reasons were probably part of the reason. But to some degree it was added to deflate the fantasy that a significant number of people prefer premature sudden shutdowns over a slower phone. It forced critics to put up or shut up (as in select the option to have premature shutdowns). And it worked, very few people kept criticising Apple after that in regard to the current state (it all focussed on the past).
 
I still don't understand why anyone thinks this is anyone's business besides Apple engineers. Tim Cook never should have acknowledged it publicly, which is what invited all the backlash. They could have simply maintained that how and why they manage the iPhone CPU is really not anyone else's business or concern.

Apple can throttle up and down CPU for any reason whatsoever and no one, anywhere, has any 'legal' claim otherwise.

What Apple did wrong was letting idiot Tim Cook acknowledge it, apologize for it, and start the stupid battery program. He admitted wrong-doing where there was none, as a means of customer appeasement, but boy was that stupid. It told all of the idiot whiners who still think they own something other than some bits of aluminum and glass that they were right, and that there was some other recourse available to them other than 'buy something else'.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
 
We're getting to a point where there will be a law/rule that states purchased device needs X amount of years of support and security updates issued. As the law stands currently, manufacturers only need to support the device as sold for X number of years (like the vintage/obsolete list).

Would be really easy for Apple to lock the OS versions and not offer updates to be in compliance with the law and save themselves $25M next time. Don't think that's going to happen, but that is the signal this EU ruling sends.
 
uller6 said:
If Apple had put slightly bigger batteries into the phones in the first place this wouldn't be an issue at all.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure 'bigger' is the relevant characteristic here. Designing a battery to last longer is probably not exactly the same as designing a battery to accommodate a higher power draw (or even more precisely maintain the capacity to accommodate a higher power draw for longer along the battery's life time). In other words, the problem was not having enough headroom to still provide x Wh after two years of usage. It didn't have enough headroom in regard to how many Watts it could supply after two years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HVDynamo and the johnmc
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back