Sidebar Sidebar
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

In case anyone cares, the actual recently affected iPhones were benchmarked a few days ago. Not much performance change for iPhones 7 to X, but whopping 40% performance drop for anything A8 like the iPhone 6 and I suspect the iPad Air 2. I think that 40% drop due to Spectre and Meltdown patch and the 30% drop due to the battery throttling basically renders any iPhone 6 unusable (my opinion). Likely anything older than the A8 would suffer even bigger performance drops with the patch.

Link: https://www.gsmarena.com/spectre_an...rmance_impact_on_iphone_8_plus-news-29132.php

Link 2 (iPhone 6-specific): https://www.gsmarena.com/iphone_6_takes_massive_performance_hit_after_spectre_patch-news-29124.php

Not sure if these are identical to the numbers quoted already.
 
Last edited:
deferredAnon said:
Yes, we throttle your phones. Why of course it is a feature!

2018 when people are okay with their phones being throttled.
Click to expand...

So are you pursuing a class action lawsuit for when your MacBook or iMac slows down when it reaches it's Thermal Design limit?
 
I view this as a positive development. If not the only one culpable in this, Apple could nevertheless have been more proactive in both protecting and informing its customers.

As near as I can tell this is only tangentially related, if that, however there is also the significant issue of Intel ME (Management Engine) having been incorporated into all their chips since something like 2006. To their discredit Intel will not disclose specifics but this "feature" is nothing less than a backdoor—controlled by others—into every Apple device (Mac, and I believe all) since then. It allows full access to the computer, even remotely, whether it is on or off.

Particularly since Apple is so keen to have us believe they value and protect our safety and privacy—they really should. That revealed recently indicates their basic practice is precisely the opposite, only the illusion of security when they know better but keep their customers in the dark.

That is unacceptable. I wish Apple the best but only as the best expression of Steve Job's highest ideals. There is clearly some reordering necessary to achieve such a state. Whether it is through class action lawsuits or something else Apple needs to be starkly reminded that ultimately what we value in it is what it can do for us in products that meet and even exceed our desires and needs. That as repugnant as lies, deceit and backdoors have no place in such an equation.

Apple, I am waiting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hanson Eigilson
Kmart9419 said:
Yes, making a hardware fix is very difficult, expensive, if not impossible in the late stages. Doesn't excuse apple of releasing a product with a known defect. Takata knew about their air bags hurling shrapnels but continued to sell them. Takata then got sued into bankruptcy. With Apple, if certain security breaches occurred using spectre/meltdown after the known fact, like a hack on transunion where everybody's social security numbers got stolen, there will be a lot of pain for apple. My opinion is, if Apple released a security patch quickly after the discovery, then Apple will probably get off scotch free. But 10.2.2 was only released last week. 6 months window where a lot of bad things can happen.
Click to expand...

1. There wasn't pain for Equifax, they are still in business and not going away.
2. Once acceptable prototypes have been done at the fab, there is no turning back.
3. Apple knew about the risk until June/July. By then, most CPU designs that are going into products to be released are already made and soldered. Like I said, no turning back.
 
jkdsteve said:
So are you pursuing a class action lawsuit for when your MacBook or iMac slows down when it reaches it's Thermal Design limit?
Click to expand...

so the phones aren't properly designed since this "battery throttling" design hidden feature change was introduced after the phones were sold
 
Good my phone is unusable. I'm getting the battery changed tomorrow, if that doesn't fix it i'm done with apple 100%.
 
BurgDog said:
Or design a phone that neither crashes nor slows down over specified service life of the battery and tell people when it is time to change the battery.
Click to expand...

Oh you mean 1 year?!

Did you pay for AppleCare to get the extended 2yrs?
Did you not try to service your iPhone 6S or later as part of Apple's policy change to include a 1 time FREE battery exchange as well as Refunding your battery replacement fee up to $80 if done before the policy?!

Frivilous lawsuit AFTER the fact of changes implemented. Good luck.

nviz22 said:
Apple is a part of the ARM consortium right? Lawyers want to hit Apple with a suit because other consortium members have a duty to protect their end users from malware or exploits?
Click to expand...

And that they did ... iOS update was pushed last week. Arm and the rest of the consortium did NOT know until after Intel published or was caught but Intel DID know for months. THEY are the ones that should have the lawsuit against them.

This pretty much can topple Intel for newer mobile computer chips into the future beyond 2018 Q3. Microsoft is already supporting Arm for Windows 10 64-bit.
 
jav6454 said:
1. There wasn't pain for Equifax, they are still in business and not going away.
2. Once acceptable prototypes have been done at the fab, there is no turning back.
3. Apple knew about the risk until June/July. By then, most CPU designs that are going into products to be released are already made and soldered. Like I said, no turning back.
Click to expand...

1) Too bad isn't it. Business as usual.
2) Agree
3) Cpu completed with security flaws of the worst kind, but sold anyway. Millions of tynelol had been produced by J&J and all of them were removed from store shelves after the discovery of tainted products. Was it expensive? yes. Was it worth it? Yes. J&J protected its brand and reputation. I believe Apple should take a page out of J&J's playbook.
 
Neepman said:
Class Action trial lawyers are scum. Next question?
Click to expand...

Well... there is truth to that.
BUT... lets say an entity purposefully cheats each customer out of $1.00
And, they have 20 million customers.
That is $20 Million a year... 1 dollar at a time.

Now, how would anyone sue that company for this $1 damage? You cant. You won't.

So... a class can collectively "police" this type of behavior.

Is there another way? And a way that serves as a deterrent to the next company?
 
I want to see apple exporting speeds pre and post exploit patches. All nice and good showing Safari benches, but where is the cpu benches? Thats where systems are being crushed right now
 
Wags said:
So are they going to sue every manufacturer of any product that uses any Intel, ARM or AMD chip ?
Click to expand...

No. They need to be like Apple who designed, branded and sold their own ARM based chip - they are liable to anyone who bought it.

In theory, Apple can go after ARM.
 
Dominicanyor said:
macOS Sierra was affected with the meltdown as well? I should’ve never updated from Yosemite...
Click to expand...

Every Mac going back to Snow Leopard would have been affected. With Spectre, every CPU that is 64bit is affected, leaving the x86 CPUs the only ones not impacted, although they have their own problems (F00F, FDIV, etc.)

In this case, Apple would basically be the middle man in the problem, as Intel would share the blame, just like ARM would. However, with the in-home processors (A9, A10, A11, etc.), Apple would be on the hook for those.

BL.
 
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