Regardless, that was an end result. If an owner had been aware that they could paid $80 to have the battery replaced and performed restored, I can promise you, many would have taken that route rather than pay a minimum of $700 for a new phone (that's including taxes).
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 Now Faces 26+ Lawsuits for 'Purposefully' or 'Secretly' Slowing Down Older iPhones
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Regardless, that was an end result. If an owner had been aware that they could paid $80 to have the battery replaced and performed restored, I can promise you, many would have taken that route rather than pay a minimum of $700 for a new phone (that's including taxes).
You can't justify poor design by referencing poor design.
Won’t be so easy this time. 2018 will be the year of reckoning for Tim’s Apple. Leadership, direction, sales, all under the gun in 2018. Tim needs to stop announcing products until they are ready to ship. Or, close to shipping. SJ never yapped about stuff 6m down the road like Tim does. Sets Apple up for failure.
Those who have failed to see the real side of Apples Executive Team can no longer defend this Circus of deception and denial.
Well MS-DOS 6.0 had a defect in the HDD compression software that would actually corrupt and wipeout people's entire drives. They quickly released a patch called MS-DOS 6.2 "step-up" edition to go from 6.0 to 6.2 and charged $15 for it.
Apple today is absolutely as bad as Microsoft ever was in the 90's.
This has to be the most common sense request of a class action lawsuit that I've seen in a long time. I'd say it's downright reasonable.
"Many of the lawsuits demand Apple compensate all iPhone users who have experienced slowdowns, offer free battery replacements, refund customers who purchased brand new iPhones to regain maximum performance, and add info to iOS explaining how replacing an iPhone's battery can prevent slowdowns."
"Many of the lawsuits demand Apple compensate all iPhone users who have experienced slowdowns, offer free battery replacements, refund customers who purchased brand new iPhones to regain maximum performance, and add info to iOS explaining how replacing an iPhone's battery can prevent slowdowns."
I don’t want a thick heavy phone in the future they should let costumers devices just die
Last edited:
What has that to do with anything? Maybe I have a new battery in a drawer but enjoy charging my battery twice a day... I don't have to explain my usage of an old phone to you. You are completely besides the point. I was answering a remark from Leman, why there are no lawsuits against Microsoft and the like. But if you want to obscure the discussion with some kind of cheap sarcasm be my guest.
Last edited:
Customers vote with their wallets. If they buy more thin/slim mobile phones than thicker heavier ones, then a thin battery that allows this desirable trade-off is a beneficial feature, not a flaw.
If you buy an expensive fast sports car with a big engine, and it gets worse fuel mileage than a larger econo-sedan, caveat emptor.
If a consumer gets a service battery warning and no CPU slowdown they will be more likely to replace the battery than upgrade to a new iOS device.
If a consumers device is throttled and running slower on a new version of iOS they will be more likely to consider upgrading to the new faster "best iOS device yet".
$29 dollars vs $500 plus dollars
Of course this “feature” was unnannouced
Bring on the suits!
If a consumers device is throttled and running slower on a new version of iOS they will be more likely to consider upgrading to the new faster "best iOS device yet".
$29 dollars vs $500 plus dollars
Of course this “feature” was unnannouced
Bring on the suits!
Oh, right. So Apple is not already charging the maximum possible amount for their products to have maximum profit? They will raise prices to cover their losses on this suit?
If they could raise prices to cover the cost of the lawsuit, they would have already raised prices to that level to fill up their piggy bank.
My iPhone , iPhone 3G , iPhone 3GS , iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, iPhone 5s.... seem to run at full speed, and the batteries while much less than when I bought them, still do a good job.
My 6S, in cold weather ..... shocker ! Maybe the battery is fine and the iPhone design itself is faulty ..... that's my source, do you have anything proving previous iPhones battery woes compare to the 6 onwards ?
Let's hear it . If you ask for a source, show a counter to the debate
I don’t want a larger phone to change a battery I probably will never swap out myself. If having a changeable battery is important to you by a phone that gives you that option and stop projecting your wants on those who are fine buying the devices as they sre
If that's the case, then it seems like there aren't even grounds for a lawsuit. I'm sure Apple has TONS of features related to managing processor speed, memory, bandwidth, you name it, that they implement to get their products to work that they don't explicitly disclose to the user. It's not practical, and Apple has no obligation to explain or justify the reasons for implementing features, especially one that is an electrical design decision.
However, many of the lawsuit articles I've seen have to do with Apple "throttling" the processor speed AT ALL. Which, again, was an electrical design decision. Apple doesn't need the public's consent or input on implementing design features.
TLDR: Should Apple have been more transparent? Sure. Is this grounds for any kind of lawsuit? Not by a long shot.
That's exactly what I have been saying before in those other threads on this same issue, last few iPhones had faster CPU's and bigger screens, people are also longer on their iPhones than before, this all affects battery life and degrades the battery faster, that's how batteries work.
I’m great with every device instantly shutting off upon opening Facebook.
Customers have a legal right in most countries including the US to expect a product to be suitable for the purpose it was bought for a certain length of time.
This is more like you buy a fast expensive sports car with a big engine and then the manufacture realizes the radiator is too small so the car overheats. Then the manufacturer's solution is to keep it a secret but when you take your car in for an oil change to secretly change the car's firmware to reduce the engine power well below what was promised when you bought the car.
Those customers would rightfully sue the carmaker to refund the purchase price or repair the car to function as promised. And that's what these Apple lawsuits are about.
The customers who voted for iPhone with their wallets certainly did not agree to have their 1-2 year old phones throttled due to an undersized battery. And thanks to consumer protection laws, Apple is totally on the hook here.
The above is exactly why the plaintifs will lose. They will make these claims, without having an engineering lab that can make all the actual power measurements. Then Apple will show up with the actual measurements as witnessed by an independant 3rd-party professional power management engineer, and these cases will be thrown out for making false claims.
Let’s complain that the batteries were not fit for purpose / faulty. Or complain that Apple should have put bigger batteries inside a thicker iPhone.
But let’s not complain that Apple is slowing down iOS so we will buy new phones. It’s an argument that, if there is any sense in the world, we will lose. It’s simply not true.
If Apple hadn’t updated the iPhones, they wouldn’t have continued to power down unexpectedly. This would push people to pay for replacements / upgrades more!
But let’s not complain that Apple is slowing down iOS so we will buy new phones. It’s an argument that, if there is any sense in the world, we will lose. It’s simply not true.
If Apple hadn’t updated the iPhones, they wouldn’t have continued to power down unexpectedly. This would push people to pay for replacements / upgrades more!
Where are the threads with people complaining about their phones shutting off? There isn’t any because it wasn’t a problem.
My question is who authorized the throttling of the CPU in the first place. They killed their upgrade cycles and created a battery replacement cycle. Possibly 18 million less iPhones sold this year, I bet shareholders can't be happy by any of this news.
If people see a thin phone next to a thick one, they’re not buying the thick one. Sorry.
They owe you a phone that will work as they promised without design defects for a reasonable period of time. Decreasing CPU speed to compensate for an underspecced battery is not delivering what they promised. It's up to the courts now to decide if Apple has done that or not and we'll see how these lawsuits go.