Don't you dare take advantage of this offer to stop our throttling twice!
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 Says $29 Battery Replacements Are One-Per-iPhone When Device Passes Diagnostic Test
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is unfortunate considering 3rd party batteries are only needed because of the crappy lifespan of Apple's original batteries. (And, up until now, the high cost of replacement!)
Surprised people don’t like this. But some people always choose to hate a company regardless of what they do.
I had my battery replaced by my local Apple store. Battery life is much better now, and my phone is noticeably faster, especially, when opening apps, which was the most annoying aspect of the slow down for me.
Overall, I'm happy and this should allow me to keep my iPhone 6 around for a couple more years without having to empty out my wallet for a new phone.
Overall, I'm happy and this should allow me to keep my iPhone 6 around for a couple more years without having to empty out my wallet for a new phone.
No it would be more like going to a burger place ordering a cheeseburger and having them proceeded to tell you how to eat it. I said it in another post. Apple is NOT in the business to make customers choices for them. That’s the same thing as the government telling you where you can/can’t go just because they THINK they know more/better than you. Taking choices out of paying customers hands are starting to come back and bite them.
With your logic maybe Apple should sell one kind of spec’d Computer with no choice to upgrade. Because after all they know better than us customers on what we want right????
James
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I'm still not grasping what you are trying to show here. Pick ANY issue that ever happens to iPhones. Occasionally, we get the iPhone meltdown story. It does happen ever once in a while. If I wanted to imply that it was a big problem, I could go out on the web and find lots of stories about as little as a single instance of it, implying that it's a big problem.
How about the yellowish-screens that pops up in some products? I can go out to many sites all basically reiterating the story so it might look like it's a huge problem too.
This "remedy" was applied to EVERY SINGLE iPhone- not just those affected. It's not like the iPhone meltdown "probably using a cheap chinese charger" rebuttal. EVERY SINGLE iPhone received this throttling code.
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.
If THAT's the problem (and it's a big problem), instead of $29 batteries, perhaps Apple should RECALL all poorly-built iPhones that conk at 30-40% charge and replace them with more reliable iPhones? But I bet you are not saying that either. Instead, I think you are trying to find enough disparate examples to justify throttling code without Apple looking like they make bad phones that can't stay awake down at 30-40% charge. Or, in other words: Apple is right to secretly inject this throttling code and Apple is right to offer iPhones even if they conk at 30-40% charge.
Do you see ANY wrong here? (not exclusively the wrong that some fellow consumers are unhappy that Apple would secretly inject code that would slow down our property and dare to post how they see that as wrong, rather than just accept it as if Apple was doing us some favor).
Last edited:
And why is it that these batteries suddenly begin to cost $79 again exactly?
Is Apple really making a loss on a $29 battery replacement?, or a $50 profit on a $79 one?
Or is the truth somewhere in between?
Is Apple really making a loss on a $29 battery replacement?, or a $50 profit on a $79 one?
Or is the truth somewhere in between?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
That's good news! Personally, I've been hoping Apple was telling the whole truth here and that iOS throttling code is solely tied to aging battery power management... instead of the long-bandied conspiracy theory that they might be building OTHER throttling code into iOS to make iDevices run slower (to motivate us to buy new versions sooner). That's the big (consumer) upside here:
- if Apple told the whole truth- that is, that the slow down code is strictly tied to older battery throttling- for $29, we all can make our older iDevices get back up to nearly full speed.
- if Apple told only a partial truth- that is, that this is only SOME of the throttling code in iOS such that a new battery doesn't bring it back toward full speed- the second round of this would soon kick in, meaning the same basic test still shows iDevices running newer versions of iOS running meaningfully slower than when they were new. That would imply there is OTHER throttling code in iOS and that the battery excuse was more spin than reality... or the whole story. This would press Apple to have to come up with ANOTHER excuse, which would make this situation look that much worse.
Personally, I was hoping it was the first one and that only a $29 spend would bring iDevices back toward full speed. I hope that proves out in objective testing too.
Yes. Lawyers must sue Apple for bait and switch. We were never made aware of the "one-time" limitation of this offer. So Apple needs to be sued until it bleeds billions.
Meh, I suppose, but that's software updates which AAPL does too. I should have said hardware because it's pretty amazing they are supporting hardware on devices this old.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Yes. Lawyers must sue Apple for bait and switch. We were never made aware of the "one-time" limitation of this offer. So Apple needs to be sued until it bleeds billions.
OR
No. Apple should not be able to be sued regardless of them choosing to insert secret code in software to make older products sold to consumers run more slowly. Apple is above the law. Consumers should be happy with whatever Apple chooses to do for- or to- them.
Well,, not really what u like to hear, but since Apple reduced the price for miss-information to users anyway, at least their acting normal about this..
We don't need every single Apple user to flood Mordor begging for more than one replacement regardless.
That's what a diagnostic test is for. Troubleshooting and proving.
We don't need every single Apple user to flood Mordor begging for more than one replacement regardless.
That's what a diagnostic test is for. Troubleshooting and proving.
No, they book you an appointment and at that appointment they tell you the parts are out of stock and to come back when they arrive, so you need two total trips there instead of one.
I have never hated Apple and I still don't. I admire them as a company, but as a consumer, I am allowed to criticize them when they do things I don't agree with.
This thread is quite entertaining, there are fanboys on one side but there are even more android fans and trolls, a weird combination. Personally I think the way Apple have communicated this issue was dreadful, they should have been open and honest fro the start and make the feature optional. However I think the feature was a good idea to make iPhones perform better for longer. The cheaper battery replacement shows that Apple understand how annoyed people were and how badly customers understood the reasons as the media loves any opportunity to attack Apple.
Anyway, if Apple lets customers change batteries at a lower price DESPITE the battery passing the test, how could ANYONE argue that that is unfair?
The only people that could possibly complain, have never worked in customer services or understand the issue in the first place. The fact that other companies hove lowered the price for their battery replacement kits to the same price shows that there are very few charities for iPhone users, it is not just Apple cashing in. And to the people saying that other providers have better batteries, please provide some reference for that claim.
Anyway, if Apple lets customers change batteries at a lower price DESPITE the battery passing the test, how could ANYONE argue that that is unfair?
The only people that could possibly complain, have never worked in customer services or understand the issue in the first place. The fact that other companies hove lowered the price for their battery replacement kits to the same price shows that there are very few charities for iPhone users, it is not just Apple cashing in. And to the people saying that other providers have better batteries, please provide some reference for that claim.
Yes. Lawyers must sue Apple for bait and switch. We were never made aware of the "one-time" limitation of this offer. So Apple needs to be sued until it bleeds billions.
If that happens Apples legal team will come down on those plebeian barristers like a 800 pound gorilla and dry up all the resources. I’ll be happy too if that happens.
i replaced mine in October 2017 with an iFixit battery. was night and day difference. it felt like i could really use the phone again. before i was stuck connected to a Mophie battery case or forced to keep it connected to a charge and performance was nothing great. almost felt like i was using my old iPhone 3GS for a while. slow as heck.
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.
The key issue to identify though is, Samsung learned from their mistake (S7) and improved the design considerably (S8). 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.
Wife's 6s just shut down yesterday while being used for photo/video's outside (cold day) for 15-20 min when the battery showed 27% still.
Checked it's stats - It's capable of only 79% of its original capacity..
Battery appointment coming up..
Depends what you mean by “more slowly.” I turned “Hey Siri” to always-on with my new phone, and I let it do a couple of other more intense ops, too.
To me, this whole kerfuffle is around basing speed/power decisions on the model name, versus the % of battery capacity that was left on the phone. My old 6+, in my daughter's use now, got relatively lighter usage than I now demand, and is still showing at 84% of battery capacity; throttling shouldn't be necessary. (And she hasn't noticed any slowdown, although neither of us saw the iOS 10 –> 11 transition.
But smart power management demands doing fewer things with an older battery; who wants to refute that? The confusion is that the new OS does more, AND expects less peak power from the battery, so smartly asks less.
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).
Apple is not Samsung. Comparing exploding batteries that posed serious harm to folks to this is like comparing steak and oranges and to make it more simple your 6S battery issue didn’t cause the FAA to ban you from traveling with it but the Note 7 did.
At least if you are reaching for a comparison choose something better and by that I don’t mean the Firestone tire debacle or even the ford pinto incident.
Innovation to me isn’t putting 3,330 MAH battery in your flagship device which smaller capacity than the Note 7 and S8+ if they had really innovated the Note 8 would have had a larger battery and went thru rigorous safety vetting.
You folks lately have been pulling out the Samsung card over price and now this.
Glad you're not in charge of product management choices. Users generally don't WANT to play janitor to their gizmos. I've been programming for 50 years, designed/built lots of electronics & even a computer or two, and I want it to Just Work the way that Apple thinks will best balance my interests with the realities of physics.
And BTW, there ARE 3rd-party apps etc that can check your battery. Apple isn't hiding anything, just making it simplified. My old 6+ shows at 84% of capacity, consistent with having undergone ~250 full charge cycles. I only wish I knew how long this program is good, plus how quickly the battery will fall off as its capacity falls off further, to delay spending the piddling $29 (to bring a ~$350 device up to full speed).