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 Sued Over Meltdown and Spectre in U.S. as iPhone Slowdown Lawsuits Now Total 45
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You own hardware, software is generally used by license. You sign a terms and conditions agreement to use the software on apple’s terms. I’m sure changes to the operating system that they own to optimise the performance of the hardware that you own is something you signed off on.
No one is winning any cases here. It’s a joke. It’s arguable that your intel chip does the same thing (I.e, doesn’t run at full speed to conserve power / battery life ) whenever it can. Basically if you don’t like the way they design software you’re free to buy something else. And even if you feel they are coercing you into buying a newer machine it will be pretty hard to prove unless there is an email somewhere in cuppertino expilicity saying that.
never seen eruopean companies sue apple just
Never seen europe sue apple like they have like microsoft and google someone is getting there plamed greased in apple
So what should the option read?
"Slow my Phone and allow graceful shutdown"
"Leave my phone alone and shut it down immediately"
As a customer who willingly bought a company's product, I have no right to try to dictate what they should have done.
If there's a problem, lodge a complaint and allow the company to respond and take appropriate action to resolve the complaints - updates/corrections/refunds/whatever - exactly as Apple have done.
Suing the company is such a f*cking American thing to do - creating conflict as a first course of action, not as a last resort.
If there's a problem, lodge a complaint and allow the company to respond and take appropriate action to resolve the complaints - updates/corrections/refunds/whatever - exactly as Apple have done.
Suing the company is such a f*cking American thing to do - creating conflict as a first course of action, not as a last resort.
Benchmark testing reveals little about how a device performs in real world use.
Y’all are going to be shocked by how little Apple has to pay for any of the 45.
Assuming any of the class action lawsuits win, I had buck 75 at most for the class action members (aka 'us') - now, as for the lawyers involved...
Let's be real people, 99 times out of a 100, lawyers are really truly honestly only in it for themselves; members of the class action lawsuit are simple a necessary means to a very large payday for the legal teams involved on both sides.
[doublepost=1516066254][/doublepost]
And that's illegal just how? Pray tell, what contract was broken here?
Listen, I personally feel Apple made an egregious mistake by not being open about what they were doing. But, being honest, that's ALL it is. The lawsuits are going to have to prove 'bad faith' and, if Apple's intentions were to prolong the daily use of a battery, then that 'bad faith' is going to be harder to prove than a hedgehog attempting to climb Everest.
I can attest to what a consumer might do when faced with random shutdowns - after 5+ solid years with Android (Droid Incredible - gawd I loved that phone, Samsung S3, HTC M8 and finally a Nexus 6) when my Nexus started to power down with 50% of battery just because I fired up Waze or Google Maps - I switched my life to Apple.
Not saying I represent all users; but this is the very real gamble Apple faced.
Yeah, they blew it big time by not being upfront with the changes. But if we could sue every company because of what comes down to basically bad PR, then we'd be suing EVERYONE 24/7.
Last edited:
Dude said his phone slowed down by 30%.
I’m guessing it was actually due to the known throttling, and not this Spectre fix. But that’s for the courts to decide.
Any manufacturer that knew the chips had a flaw, and still continued to use the chips with a flaw, because it saved a couple of bucks. Yes, they should be sued. But more importantly intel also needs to be sued. I don’t care if your Apple, or some guy that builds PCs in his garage as a hobby job, if you knew the chips were flawed, your responsible, and either need to recall, or compensate.
Biggest clash action ever was Exxon at $5B and it was appealed to $500M.
That’s a week of sales for Apple even if they get hit with the $5B, which won’t happen.
Sorry to disappoint everyone, it Apple has better lawyers, more money, and frankly they didn’t do much if anything wrong. No guarantees for performance and they have terms and conditions to software.
That’s a week of sales for Apple even if they get hit with the $5B, which won’t happen.
Sorry to disappoint everyone, it Apple has better lawyers, more money, and frankly they didn’t do much if anything wrong. No guarantees for performance and they have terms and conditions to software.
Wow - stop the press - the dude said....
You are aware that in a court of law, that's heresy and 100% inadmissible?
Courts require irrefutable proven FACTS. A dude saying a phone slowed down by 30% is totally useless.
I would think the lawsuites would be better aimed at INTEL & ARM. That's where the problem came from
They’ve got their slew of suits as well.
[doublepost=1516066532][/doublepost]
Wow - stop the press - the dude said....
You are aware that in a court of law, that's heresy and 100% inadmissible?
Courts require irrefutable proven FACTS. A dude saying a phone slowed down by 30% is totally useless.
He did some tests apparently, seeing as the suit was filed. Has nothing to do with me bro.
There are plenty of court cases launched and won because somebody says that something happened.
If there is no merit to this case, then I expect it will be thrown out soon enough.
I did not mention real world use. What I found was all that was available. You are welcome to measure and contribute.
Also, if you can so much as to suggest a "real world" usage test that we can unanimously agree upon, that would be great.
Lastly, even Apple's iPhone 8 page still points out how it is 70% faster than its predecessor on CPU and 30% faster in GPU (benchmarks). So benchmark performance as per Apple is obviously what people bought and paid for.
Last edited:
I am not disappointed, but you know this how? Better lawyers than the rest of the world? More money than the rest of the world? Did not do anything wrong? Bold claims. You must have inside information nobody else has.
Rest of the world, you can stop now! Apple did nothing wrong and they have much better lawyers anyway!
Makes sense to throttle it, for one it requires less power so it would increase the length of the battery comp
this is just good practice, even Intel do this with their CPUs, they slow them down if not doing much and when needed they ramp up, allowing a CPU to run full speed all the time today is just wasting energy, and ramping down is good as it will get more time out of your battery and when a battery gets too worn it helps to get that little more time out of it by comprising performance v power available
All these people trying to get some money. These vulnerabilities weren't Apple's fault, and I don't think they should sue over the slowing down of iPhones. It makes sense. I work at Verizon, and just the other day someone brought in a Galaxy S6 that was shutting down randomly and it was really hot....if the processor was slowed down, that wouldn't happen...and of course all the crap Samsung puts on their phones.
[doublepost=1516067043][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1516067043][/doublepost]
I'm not an apologist, but I don't think they should be sued over making their products last longer...I do agree, though, they should have given people the option. I have customers that would be fine with the slowdown in order to keep their phone longer. A lot of customers still come in with the iPhone 4S, even though that one isn't affected by the slow down done for battery reasons. I do think it's absurd people are demanding free batteries. EVERYTHING in the universe deteriorates. Sometimes I just want to ask, so do you still function like you did when you were 20? Didn't think so...hahaha.
the intentional slowdown is anti-consumer and lawsuit worthy.
frankly I lost a good 50% of interest an respect I had fo Apple and it's products after this.
I don't the buy the excuse they brought up at all, if there was honesty in what they claim, they wouldn't hide it from people.period.
frankly I lost a good 50% of interest an respect I had fo Apple and it's products after this.
I don't the buy the excuse they brought up at all, if there was honesty in what they claim, they wouldn't hide it from people.period.
Oh, he did some tests - well, that makes it ALL better then.
Listen, in a court of law, in a class action, results have to be 100% irrefutable and repeatable. For that they'll have to take an iPhone with an older version of the OS on it and compare it to one with a new one in real life measurable instances. And that's assuming the courts don't throw it out on it's ears because of the EULA.
And let's talk class action law suits for a minute here. First off, starting a class action lawsuit is easy. Keeping one going is going to be damn hard.
In 2009 for example, a few years after the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 came into power, out of the 148 class action lawsuits out there that didn't involve labor practices or securities (different beasts altogether), ~70% never even got a settlement. Out of the ones that did, only 28% got a settlement.
So, right then we're down to a third. Out of that third NONE made it to trial. Not a single one. The Federal Court success rate is around 65% - over DOUBLE the class action settlement rate. And even with those settlements, payouts ranged between 20% and 0.000006% of members!
Case in point: Heartland Payment Systems Data Security Breach: 130 million customers injured by the breach. Claims paid: 11 - at around $10K each. Lawyers take: $641K. Everyone else : bupkis.
So, for all you folk think that the sheer number of class action lawsuits is somehow representative of a big payday for y'all - Dream On!
Oh, he did some tests - well, that makes it ALL better then.
Listen, in a court of law, in a class action, results have to be 100% irrefutable and repeatable. For that they'll have to take an iPhone with an older version of the OS on it and compare it to one with a new one in real life measurable instances. And that's assuming the courts don't throw it out on it's ears because of the EULA.
And let's talk class action law suits for a minute here. First off, starting a class action lawsuit is easy. Keeping one going is going to be damn hard.
In 2009 for example, a few years after the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 came into power, out of the 148 class action lawsuits out there that didn't involve labor practices or securities (different beasts altogether), ~70% never even got a settlement. Out of the ones that did, only 28% got a settlement.
So, right then we're down to a third. Out of that third NONE made it to trial. Not a single one. The Federal Court success rate is around 65% - over DOUBLE the class action settlement rate. And even with those settlements, payouts ranged between 20% and 0.000006% of members!
So, for all you folk think that the sheer number of class action lawsuits is somehow representative of a big payday for y'all - Dream On!
I honestly don’t care that much, and I seem to be taking it a lot less personally than some people are. Apple makes $1 billion a week in profit, they can handle another measly lawsuit
Anyway, as we said earlier, every company involved in this, Intel, ARM etc is being sued. It’s not just Poor Apple.
They will survive just fine, so you can rest well at night.
You're totally an apple apologist if you think that beats having an option and not being transparent to shadily force you to upgrade your ($500+ value) phone just because you're not being told that $29 battery is the culprit... heck, they even rejecting to service us before to change batteries if we brought it to apple store. Just be thankful every time you serviced your phone to change batteries and it last for couple of years... that's mainly because of the controversy
Last edited:
@TiggrToo
To put this into perspective, I used to work for Google & their legal department is upwards of 1000 people.
These massive corporate legal departments are adept - if there is in fact no legal basis for the suit, it will disappear.
And Apple will go on making $1 billion per week in profit.
Meanwhile this will probably take years, and by then there will be an iPhone XXX costing $1890 for the base model.
To put this into perspective, I used to work for Google & their legal department is upwards of 1000 people.
These massive corporate legal departments are adept - if there is in fact no legal basis for the suit, it will disappear.
And Apple will go on making $1 billion per week in profit.
Meanwhile this will probably take years, and by then there will be an iPhone XXX costing $1890 for the base model.