Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I have frequent gripes and a love/hate relationship with Apple. Really don't consider myself a fanboy....but this is one of those things where this was actually a great engineering feature that Apple just wasn't forthcoming enough with. Most phones would just start flaking out when their batteries start to degrade....this actually allows you to get much longer life out of a battery by compromising cpu voltage to prevent failure. slows down your iPhone to a point where you would throw it against the wall just so you can purchase a new iPhone. The huge push to accuse Apple of malice on this is a perfect example of the scourge that is ignorant populism.

Fixed for ya.
 
Two sentences missing from the release notes cost them $500 Million. Probably should learn a lesson from that.
If it had the effect the conspiracy theorists argue, well worth it.

That said, the fine is stupid and the whole thing was overblown and this doesn’t vindicate users because $500M to Apple is essentially nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: citysnaps
I have frequent gripes and a love/hate relationship with Apple. Really don't consider myself a fanboy....but this is one of those things where this was actually a great engineering feature that Apple just wasn't forthcoming enough with. Most phones would just start flaking out when their batteries start to degrade....this actually allows you to get much longer life out of a battery by compromising cpu voltage to prevent failure. The huge push to accuse Apple of malice on this is a perfect example of the scourge that is ignorant populism.
Did Apple let customers (willing to pay the due amount) change degraded batteries of their iPhones? No
Did Apple offer a battery replacement program after this "feature" was publicly spotted? Yes
Did Tim Cook say that battery replacement program affected part of the following iPhone sales? Yes
"ignorant populism" is quite offending, in my opinion
[automerge]1589585278[/automerge]
But again, communication issue. Not a conspiracy. The batteries do degrade, depending on your use case quite badly in less than a year. That impacts what the SOC is able to draw on and do, if it can't reliably be powered of course its gonna go to ****.
Ok. Just let customer replace iPhone degraded battery with a new one then. You know that this was not an available option. You know it and still keep writing about a "communication issue".
 
Last edited:
I have frequent gripes and a love/hate relationship with Apple. Really don't consider myself a fanboy....but this is one of those things where this was actually a great engineering feature that Apple just wasn't forthcoming enough with. Most phones would just start flaking out when their batteries start to degrade....this actually allows you to get much longer life out of a battery by compromising cpu voltage to prevent failure. The huge push to accuse Apple of malice on this is a perfect example of the scourge that is ignorant populism.
Yep. This is a great example of the uninformed being jerked around by the media resulting in lawyers getting millions. The actual result of this lawsuit is that the “legal system” prefer peoples phones are always crashing instead of the phone taking steps to stop it. Dumb from start to finish.
 
And still to this day, people are alarmingly misinformed about this simple issue.

It's not just having the battery die a little earlier. Either the phone randomly powers down at any battery level under sudden loads (like launching an app) since the aged battery can't sustain voltage spikes like it could 500 cycles prior, or it throttles back slightly to allow for you to not lose everything you were doing and 90 seconds to reboot. Apple chose not to allow the phone to power off. You've got the choice now, I hope you're now using it with the setting in the "will randomly turn off" position.
This "will randomly turn off" feature was happening to new iPhones. https://support.apple.com/en-ca/iphone6s-unexpectedshutdown
 
Let's start a poll to see if people think the settlement check will be worth more than the paper, envelope, and postage involved in getting it to them.

My guess: $0.05 maybe?
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithBN
The real mistake Apple made was skimping on battery capacity, and then trying to work around that later with software. I think this was seriously a case of form over function and now they are paying the price. The XR is a perfect example... much bigger battery and zero problems. But more inconvenient for users. I'll take a little beef over loss of performance. Drives me nuts when the wife switches my phone to low power mode.

Was there intention to force upgrades? Not at all! Anyone that thinks that way has no idea who Apple is as a company.
 
I’ll take the lawyers cut, thank you. There are tort lawyers everywhere waiting for the big score. Batteries wear out and are a consumable item. If Apple had Initially given people the choice of throttling or less capacity on their aging batteries, they wouldn’t have lost or the suit wouldn’t have been filed, IMHO.
 
And this comment, ladies and gentlemen, illustrates the dismal state of economics education in this country.
Unfortunate some posters can't see the forest from the trees around here. Maybe you are correct about the dismal state of economics education in this country. However for those who have short memories, and even though apple managed to pull 52B in revenue:
- 500M is still not chump change (although to Apple seemingly a pittance)
- Store closings
- Delayed products, which we will see the effects of
- Covid related manpower, materials and donations
- etc.
 
Last edited:
so the lawyers benefit, big deal, waste of time, you jump on a sue me sue you bandwagon so that a legal firm can enjoy a new car or house

Apple still lost $500 million, which is more profit than the vast majority of companies ever make. If you don't have a system like this, you can never hold large companies accountable for any wrongs short of killing somebody.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
Ok. Just let customer replace iPhone degraded battery with a new one then. You know that this was not an available option. You know it and still keep writing about a "communication issue".
I do, and I also wrote a fairly long response back then explaining my take on the matter.


And I still stand by every word I said 2.5 years ago.

If Apple really wanted to force its users to upgrade, why would they introduce a throttling feature which was pegged to the quality of the battery in your phone? That's a dead giveaway, because just like you said, a fresh battery solves the problem altogether. Why not simply have the software patch slow down your phone regardless of the health of your battery, if Apple wanted everyone to keep upgrading to the newest and greatest?

As it stands, Apple essentially had 5 options.

1) Throttle older iPhone performance in order to prevent the devices from shutting down unexpectedly.
2) Avoid throttling and just let the iPhones unexpectedly turn off.
3) Offer a battery swap program for older iPhone batteries.
4) Improve the power delivery system in order to handle deteriorating batteries.
5) Include larger batteries that can supply the needed power requirement.

Option 2 is obviously unacceptable. Option 3 works only for countries with a strong apple store retail presence; users in other countries or who are not comfortable with letting a third party do this are essentially out of luck. Option 4 appears to be what Apple is trying to do, what with news of them looking to design their own power management chips, but it doesn't address the current, immediate issue. Option 5 is still doable with the larger iPhone models (and indeed, it seems the plus models have not been affected as much as the smaller iPhone models), but unless you are willing to make the iPhone 8 and SE much thicker and heavier or drop them altogether, I don't see how this is feasible.

What this means is that in the short term at least, throttling your iPhone is still the most reasonable option with the best risk/reward in terms of the user experience of the hundreds of millions of iPhone users around the world overall, which is incidentally the one Apple went with. Every other option results in a major user experience tradeoff in one way or another. Obviously, some tech-savvy user is going to claim that replacing the battery is no mean feat for him, but don't forget - Apple doesn't make this sort of decision based on what is most convenient for a few tech-savvy individuals lurking around in Macrumours, and they rightfully shouldn't.

In a nutshell, the more I analyse the situation, the more I believe Apple is simply trying to make older iPhones usable the best way they can. You can argue that maybe they went about it the wrong way, and in hindsight they probably did, but it doesn't make their motives any less pure. It's not planned obsolescence, it's not greed, it's just Apple doing that their customers pay them to do - make the tough calls for them so they don't have to. And the downside of having to constantly second-guess what your users want is that sometimes, you just guess wrong.
 
$500 million is a slap on the wrist seeing that they made billions from people being "forced" to upgrade their slowed down devices to newer ones that were actually usable. Despicable.

No one was or is forced to upgrade anything.

I have frequent gripes and a love/hate relationship with Apple. Really don't consider myself a fanboy....but this is one of those things where this was actually a great engineering feature that Apple just wasn't forthcoming enough with. Most phones would just start flaking out when their batteries start to degrade....this actually allows you to get much longer life out of a battery by compromising cpu voltage to prevent failure. The huge push to accuse Apple of malice on this is a perfect example of the scourge that is ignorant populism.

Spot on. It only benefitted the lawyers who, as usual, get a huge paycheck out of all of this on both sides.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithBN
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.