Apple Says $29 Battery Replacements Are One-Per-iPhone When Device Passes Diagnostic Test

[Bacillus]

But the optional trigger would be "throttle phone under load" or "have phone restart"

That's not really an option, why would you want the phone to freeze and restart?

Because the threshold value was neither optimal nor uniform over similar devices.
Making it harder to replicate/proof

 

[gnipgnop]

Is Apple learning from their mistake now? Instead of committing and innovating with batteries that don't degrade as much like Samsung is doing now, Apple instead is now promising more throttling as needed for iPhone X and beyond.

If Apple made a mistake with batteries, why are all the lawsuits focusing on the communication? Answer: nobody has actually found anything wrong with the hardware. It's all legal maneuvering around whether or not Apple can be held liable for initially referring to the change in iOS as "power management" and not being more specific about what exactly it did and when it might happen.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

You're misrepresenting what Apple has said. Low charge, cold, or an old battery...those are the three conditions that Apple has specified as potentially causing voltage problems.

Again, same thing every thread: not Apple, Geekbench. But where were you faulting Geekbench tests when they imply so much positive about Apple products? Why is Geekbench wrong here- in this one measure- but apparently NOT wrong when Geekbench scores are showing that new iDevice is XX% faster than old iDevice to help spur on sales of the new one? If you are so sure that this is about the measuring stick- Geekbench- instead of what is being measured, you should be just as passionately faulting Geekbench measures so flattering to new iDevices when they show up there. Why are missing from those threads? You are so attentive to every one of THESE threads.

 

[trifid]

If Apple made a mistake with batteries, why are all the lawsuits focusing on the communication? Answer: nobody has actually found anything wrong with the hardware. It's all legal maneuvering around whether or not Apple can be held liable for initially referring to the change in iOS as "power management" and not being more specific about what exactly it did and when it might happen.

Not all lawsuits focus on communication:
Third iPhone battery lawsuit says Apple used slowdowns to avoid fixing defects

 

[dannys1]

It doesn't freeze or restart

But it does though. I know of a few people with older devices that happened to and it only happens with devices from a few years ago because they reached the point where the CPU is maxing out power draw on the battery.

I agree with the person who said when it's plugged in the CPU throttling should be disabled though, that makes sense.

Personally i've never owned a device long enough to get poor battery performance, reboots, throttling or anything else so.

 

[gnipgnop]

Again, same thing every thread: not Apple, Geekbench.

Huh? What does a low charge or cold conditions have to do with Geekbench? I merely pointed out that your characterization of Apple limiting the condition for possible throttling to an old battery was incorrect.

 

[Joesmith13245]

Most performance issues that occur within 100% charge down to 20% charge are unlikely to be specific to the battery unless it's already at EOL.

So basically you get the first one with a discount, then you pay the usual price unless the battery is bad.
Makes sense to me. The important thing is being able to replace the battery for $29 at least once even if their diagnostic test says the battery is fine. I'm planning to change my dad's iPhone 6 battery later this year, it isn't really bad but the phone is more than 3 years old and it ought to have more than 1000 cycles. By replacing the battery the phone will continue to work with a decent battery life for at least another 3 years

Yea if you can find an Apple store that has them in stock. Went to Apple today and they told me I had to wait 4 weeks before they can replace the battery.

 

[gnipgnop]

Not all lawsuits focus on communication

And his evidence is that he previously owned an iPhone 6 that experienced shutdowns and ran slow. Good luck with that in the court system!

 

[deferredAnon]

Guys, DO NOT REPLACE until near the end of 2018. Apple will definitely start throttling after one year of new battery claiming supposed wear as they did with iPhone 7, so you want to maximize on their scam/fraud/hoax/batterygate.

Do not replace unless it is ridiculously slow.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Huh? What does a low charge or cold conditions have to do with Geekbench? I merely pointed out that your characterization of Apple limiting the condition for possible throttling to an old battery was incorrect.

Sorry, I'm so accustomed to your posts being a seemingly relentless effort to imply Geekbench as a measure is at fault here that i took that post as yet another.

 

[MrGuder]

Went to the Apple store for my scheduled battery replacement. My 6S shuts down at about 40% battery consistently. They ran diagnostics and said my battery was still in good shape! Interesting. I kindly asked them to replace it anyways, so I am waiting for them to get more batteries in stock then I will make another appointment and trip to the Apple store. Not sure why they scheduled me for a battery replacement when they didn’t have replacements. Apple sure is going down hill

6s and shut downs????
When they said your battery is still in great shape you should have referred that Apple rep to their very own bulletin...do it and watch them replace your battery for free.

https://www.apple.com/support/iphone6s-unexpectedshutdown/

My 6s serial # fits this campaign so my battery should be free as it has shutdown twice on me below 20%

 

[macTW]

Sort of. Apple recognizes that enough customers are upset about throttling based on power supply that the non-user serviceable battery should be inexpensive to replace. I can tell you for sure that Apple's battery replacement is worth nowhere near $80 (battery is worth $8 RETAIL and is literally a 5 min job).

Really? Forever?

They’re charging $29 for a one-time, without any proof of batter degration replacement. That alone is more than they need to do.

But beyond that, they’re offering a $29 replacement if the new battery eventually falls below 80% capacity.
[doublepost=1515453308][/doublepost]

Defective battery replacement should be free like how other companies handle defect replacement. And, regular price should be no more than $29 every year thereafter considering the battery BOM cost to Apple is $2.50. $79 is about the cost of a new high build quality phone with excellent 4000mAh battery life and only 8.4mm.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/AT-T-PREPAID-Huawei-Ascend-XT2-16GB-Prepaid-Smartphone-Silver/854006794

So you’re battery that you personally degraded is apparently defective from Apple?

Hahaha.....

 

[exumdirect]

Good luck with the replacement battery. I went to the store 3 times and still have no battery. The first two times (both with an appointment) they told me I needed a new battery.....and then told me that they did not have any in stock. The first trip and the second trip were identical.....I asked why did I need to come back again to be frustrated again. This is AFTER calling me to come in to have the battery that I ordered be installed. The third time (this time they told me to NOT make an appointment (since none would be needed....I begged anyway), they now had the battery but I was asked to wait for 3 1/2 or 4 hours. I left. Talk about horrible customer service.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Really? Forever?

They’re charging $29 for a one-time, without any proof of batter degration replacement. That alone is more than they need to do.

But beyond that, they’re offering a $29 replacement if the new battery eventually falls below 80% capacity.

ONCE!

What they are apparently NOT doing is removing the throttling code or giving users an option to toggle the throttling code on or off, or perhaps some custom range of options along such lines.

In short, it is TERRIFIC that we can buy a new battery & get it installed for $29 and apparently (still to be objectively verified) that is going to make our older iDevices run fast again. But if the existing throttling code is staying "as is," the problem is just going to come again... and next time the battery is $79.

The outrage is not and has not been the price of Apple battery replacement. It's that Apple secretly inserted code to slow down older iPhones. Whether they did that with purely saint-like intentions (purely for our own good) or with sinner intentions (let's slow 'em down to spur on sales of new iDevices), all iOS-updated iPhones have the throttling code. A new battery at $29 or $79 only kicks this particular can down the road. It buys some time until the throttling triggers kick in again.

Worse, it implies that if Apple will sneak in THIS throttling code, is there any other throttling code in iOS designed to slow down older iDevices? Why would Apple do that? Apple's path to the first trillion dollar company is built upon selling as much hardware as possible. If consumers are moved to upgrade sooner than later, the money flows in. A little throttling code is much cheaper than building in tangible must-have features to drive upgrades on the merits of the new devices themselves.

 

[charlituna]

You must also have an original Apple battery in your phone to get it replaced. Apple will not replace a 3rd party battery for safety issues. They also will not put in a new battery if your phone is missing a battery, but they couldn't give me a reason why not.

apple takes back a part when they give you a new service part. whether its a battery or the whole phone. and they never remove a battery so you went to a 3rd party for that. and they don't touch devices with 3rd party batteries. don't repair or swap. it's been that way for years. cause they don't know what F'd up crap the tech did or how stable the batteries are. No way are they going to risk that battery having a thermal event and hurting a tech cause they are liable for it.

 

[aristobrat]

The more examples you stack up implying that iPhones needed this throttling code, the more it implies to me that Apple has a big problem with iPhone production (instead of presumably, making me more acceptable to throttling code because we all needed it). Are you saying that... that Apple lost the ability to make reliable phones such that the ONE solution was to insert this throttling code in all of our iPhones? Because I'm not reading that. It's like you're trying to selectively rationalize the throttling code without faulting Apple for making possibly defective iPhones that would shut down at 30%-40% charge.

Oh, I absolutely fault Apple here. To me, it seems like they adopted a new battery design (starting with the iPhone 6) that after time has proven to NOT be effective at providing enough “juice” quick enough to avoid this issue. Seems like yet another example of an Apple design that’s running into problems after being in the field for an extended period of time. A new battery is just a band-aid for this design flaw, IMO.

I’m still not sure you seem to undersatand that even though this throttling code exists on all iPhone 6, 6s, 7 and SEs, it only executes on a subset of phones (depending on specific battery conditions). I’m not sure what your issue with this is. Should this code be something that only gets installed after someone’s experienced their phone randomly shutting down even though they have 30-40% battery left?

 

[rafark]

What do you expect them to do, replace discounted batteries forever?

They could've offered refunds to users who replaced a new iPhone from an older one, or give free battery replacements to everyone for the first time, and latter $29 forever.

This whole thing helped a lot in Apple becoming a 1 trillion Company.

 

[aristobrat]

Worse, it implies that if Apple will sneak in THIS throttling code, is there any other throttling code in iOS designed to slow down older iDevices? Why would Apple do that? Apple's path to the first trillion dollar company is built upon selling as much hardware as possible. If consumers are moved to upgrade sooner than later, the money flows in. A little throttling code is much cheaper than building in tangible must-have features to drive upgrades on the merits of the new devices themselves.

I’m not sure about you, but if I buy an expensive product from a company, and it stops performing adequately at an early age, I’m not inclined to purchase “the upgrade” from that company.

 

[edhudley]

This is becoming a load of bS!! I took my phone into the Cherry Hill, NJ Apple Store last week when I was told they need to order a battery for my 6+. Yet today I got a call from them say the battery wont be in until April. WTF!! Is this an effort just to wait the issue out.!Can someone please say CLASS ACTION!!

 

[stepandy]

I wouldn’t want to stand within 20 feet of said Battery.

If I recall correctly, Apple's iPhone 7 batteries were circa 2 USD.

 

[RWil85]

If I recall correctly, Apple's iPhone 7 batteries were circa 2 USD.

Then color me misinformed.

I will grab my place in the picket line.

 

[macTW]

ONCE!

What they are apparently NOT doing is removing the throttling code or giving users an option to toggle the throttling code on or off, or perhaps some custom range of options along such lines.

In short, it is TERRIFIC that we can buy a new battery & get it installed for $29 and apparently (still to be objectively verified) that is going to make our older iDevices run fast again. But if the existing throttling code is staying "as is," the problem is just going to come again... and next time the battery is $79.

The outrage is not and has not been the price of Apple battery replacement. It's that Apple secretly inserted code to slow down older iPhones. Whether they did that with purely saint-like intentions (purely for our own good) or with sinner intentions (let's slow 'em down to spur on sales of new iDevices), all iOS-updated iPhones have the throttling code. A new battery at $29 or $79 only kicks this particular can down the road. It buys some time until the throttling triggers kick in again.

Worse, it implies that if Apple will sneak in THIS throttling code, is there any other throttling code in iOS designed to slow down older iDevices? Why would Apple do that? Apple's path to the first trillion dollar company is built upon selling as much hardware as possible. If consumers are moved to upgrade sooner than later, the money flows in. A little throttling code is much cheaper than building in tangible must-have features to drive upgrades on the merits of the new devices themselves.

Oh man. They put code in to extend the use life of the phones and keep the phones operating and not shutting down. Let’s assume they do horrific things then.

 

[Altis]

But beyond that, they’re offering a $29 replacement if the new battery eventually falls below 80% capacity.

The interesting thing is that Apple begins throttling the CPU while the battery still shows "Healthy" (>80%).

 

[stepandy]

With Tim Cook at the helm, I would be surprised if Apple was paying more than $5 per iphone battery.

You are close ... cost of iPhone 7 battery $2.50
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/iphone-7-ihs-teardown-list-of-component-prices-2016-9?r=US&IR=T

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Oh, I absolutely fault Apple here. To me, it seems like they adopted a new battery design (starting with the iPhone 6) that after time has proven to NOT be effective at providing enough “juice” quick enough to avoid this issue. Seems like yet another example of an Apple design that’s running into problems after being in the field for an extended period of time. A new battery is just a band-aid for this design flaw, IMO.

I’m still not sure you seem to undersatand that even though this throttling code exists on all iPhone 6, 6s, 7 and SEs, it only executes on a subset of phones (depending on specific battery conditions). I’m not sure what your issue with this is. Should this code be something that only gets installed after someone’s experienced their phone randomly shutting down even though they have 30-40% battery left?

No, in my opinion, power management is a terrific idea/feature, but make it a toggle or maybe several toggles. Even set it up as Apple defaults with toggles off or on as Apple recommends (some Apple-decided default). But then allow users to adjust those toggles. I don't love a corporation deciding to slow down my tools for me and giving me no option to do anything about it but just accept the slow downs... until they are exposed where they then admit the causes of some slow downs... offering a solution that involves me spending money to buy a temporary return to a faster functioning phone until the very same throttling code kicks in again.

Put another way, change the character here. Let this whole thing be about Samsung or Google or HTC. Is all this (Apple) defense/redirection/spin flying just as readily if Samsung inserted secret throttling code in the same way and for the same reason? Or do we pretty much collectively skewer Samsung for doing this exact same stuff? I think that's a rhetorical question. I strongly suspect this crowd would rip into Samsung/Google/HTC/etc with fury for doing this exact same thing if this story was about them.