Class Action Lawsuit Accuses Apple of Crippling iPhone 4s With iOS 9 Update

[iGeek2014]

Exactly this. My mother has it on her iPad Mini and it's now a joke to use. Completely unusable and Apple flaunt the following:

I say that's false advertising. There's no disclaimer to tell me it doesn't apply to older models.

Source: Trusted Reviews.

It has been designed to get the most out of the last-generation A7 processor found in the iPhone 5S, iPad Air and iPad mini 2 Retina. That means even if you’re not making the upgrade to the iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus or the upcoming 2014 iPad generation, you’ll still get a better gaming experience.

So although iOS 8 is compatible with earlier phones like the iPhone 5C, iPhone 5 and iPhone 4S, you won't see any difference in games after downloading iOS 8.

Given the debacle around the iPad 3 being LTE capable in the UK and further back the iPhone providing a full web experience (sans Flash) I'm very surprised the ASA never picked up Apple on this!

 

[vbedia]

Some people think a 6 year old hardware cellphone must handle current software nicely and smoothly... I think they are wrong supposing that

 

[Ray Brady]

You are deluded. Of course your iPad Air 2 has no issues. It's the latest iPad device! Now try iOS 9 on an iPad Mini.

iOS 9 works fine on my iPad Mini. It also works fine on my iPhone 4S, and on my iPod Touch 5G. I also just installed El Capitan on a 2009 Mac Mini, and it's working without a hitch as well.

 

[roadbloc]

Some people think a 6 year old hardware cellphone must handle current software nicely and smoothly... I think they are wrong supposing that

In that case Apple are wrong for pushing the update for them. Marketing it as a perfect update that will improve performance. Especially when downgrading is next to impossible.

 

[jkichline]

Nobody forced you to move to iOS 7.

Actually from a developer standpoint, Apple sort of did. They make it difficult to support older versions of iOS which means that the developer community soon drops support for older iOS devices. This means that eventually those apps stop working on older devices or are no longer available. Eventually in you need to update just to keep using the device as you once did.

 

[ptb42]

The article provides a link to the filing. In it, you can find the email address of the attorney(s).

Take a look at their website, and you will learn everything you need to know: http://www.bgandg.com/.

 

[4jasontv]

Apple's and oranges. What is the benefit to Apple? Poor user experience could be just as likely to make someone leave Apple's ecosystem than to buy a new Apple device.

I am in the process of considering a platform transition from Apple to Microsoft, and my biggest obstical is losing the thousands I have spent in software over the years. The fact that I can't run iPad apps on a surface pro is more likely to keep me with Apple if replacement windows software can not be found. My investment in the ecosystem far outweighs the crummy experience.

Except nobody will be able to prove that EVERY older device has performance issues with iOS 9. My iPad Air 2 has no issues running iOS 9.

They don't have to prove every device, they only have to support the idea that Apple profits when their actions disrupt some users.

 

[H2SO4]

Amazon is a different story, a large part of their revenue comes from other sellers that use their platform as a base for sales. So amazon pointing to other sellers isn't really the same as a store telling customers to go to the store on the other side of the street instead because they are cheaper (if it isn't the same owner).

Yes it is. They are saying. You can buy it from us at X price or you can buy it from another seller, (that gets all the profit), for less.

 

[H2SO4]

I am denying it

Only to yourself.

 

[vmistery]

Exactly, free "promo"

I don't get what you mean? Apple also used to charge for OS updates, also even if I had not taken the offer Windows 7 is still security supported until 2020, far beyond what snow leopard was, even vista gets updates till 2017. All I am saying is Microsofts OS support on laptops and desktops is actually very good value.

 

[AustinIllini]

This is not the point. They dont want to use the software on different terms. The problem here is that the ad says "faster performances" while in this case it actually provides "slower performances", and this is false advertising.

Where does it say "Your 4 year old iPhone will be faster?

 

[beanbaguk]

iOS 9 works fine on my iPad Mini. It also works fine on my iPhone 4S, and on my iPod Touch 5G. I also just installed El Capitan on a 2009 Mac Mini, and it's working without a hitch as well.

I would genuinely love to see that. I've cleared my mothers 1st generation iPad mini and started again, however the device is slow and unresponsive in many applications.

My experiences with iOS 9 on an older device have been very poor. For the record, on a newer device (such as my 6S, they're absolutely fine).

 

[RickInHouston]

Isn't apple all about user experience? Wouldn't their countless comments to this regard go against them with a case like this?

 

[bogg]

I don't get what you mean? Apple also used to charge for OS updates, also even if I had not taken the offer Windows 7 is still security supported until 2020, far beyond what snow leopard was, even vista gets updates till 2017. All I am saying is Microsofts OS support on laptops and desktops is actually very good value.

I'm saying it was free as a promo, once the promotion ends people who haven't upgraded yet will need to pay

 

[vkd]

Fantastic argument. I do hope that the plaintiffs win and receive substantial compensation.

 

[vmistery]

I'm saying it as free as a promo, once the promotion ends people who haven't upgraded yet will need to pay

Ah gotcha, well yes, what I was attempting to say though was although you might not get the bells and whistles of a new upgrade MS do support their old Operating systems for a long time. IF Apple wanted to for example they could still offer security updates for iOS7

 

[sracer]

I wish my iPad 2 could go back to iOS 6. They literally destroyed the device forcing us to move to iOS 7 without the ability to go back. Biggest mistake I ever made was upgrading the iPad 2. Now it is a slow mess of crashes.

I know that many will harrumph about how poor little Apple is the target of frivolous lawsuits but as we've seen time and time again, Apple is so big that they are reluctant to respond to customer complaints until a lawsuit is filed (or a serious threat of one being filed).

One possible good thing that could come from a lawsuit like this is Apple providing a way for customers to be able to downgrade to a previous version of iOS for their devices. Highly doubtful that Apple will do this, because to do so would potentially make 10's millions of iOS devices functional again (or far more usable than their current state).

Yeah, I know there will be those in response who will trot out those well-worn strawmen:
(A) developers will be unable to provide support for their apps on multiple versions of iOS. Answer: Nothing needs to change. Whatever the latest version of the app was supported on that particular version of iOS would continue to be available "as-is".

(B) fragmentation. (related to "A") There is already fragmentation since not all devices that are capable of upgrading have upgraded, and not all devices are capable/allowed to upgrade.

(C) security. By allowing devices to downgrade, Apple would be allowing customers to expose themselves to security flaws in those previous versions of iOS. Again, there are still devices running older versions of iOS (out of choice or necessity).

(D) Customer complaints of reduced functionality. People will complain that they downgraded to a previous version of iOS and are now unable to use the latest version of their apps. The answer for those people: upgrade.

Downgrading iOS wouldn't necessarily need to be a highly visible option where the uninitiated customer might easily stumble upon. Apple could make it "as-is" just to make it clear... not that there would be many devices that could downgrade that would still be covered by warranty.

The last time customers made a lot of noise, a LOT of noise, was regarding Apple automatically downloading the iOS updater/installer to devices whenever a new version was available. One could not prevent the updater from downloading. There were ways to temporarily delete the installer but it would eventually reappear. Defenders of Apple claimed that it would be too difficult, cause too many issues, and cause confusion for customers. But Apple DID respond to that and it was in iOS 8 that they provided an option that would prevent the installer from downloading.

Apple does listen, but sometimes not so willingly.

 

[SnowLeopard OSX]

Apple should allow users to revert the software if it doesn't perform as they see fit. It's actually kind of absurd how Apple releases software updates for certain phones that have glaring issues with the hardware. It's an indirect way of telling the customers to go **** themselves and cough up more money for a newer, more updated iPhone.

It's ridiculous. The lawsuit, if anything, shines light to that.

 

[vbedia]

Marketing it as a perfect update that will improve performance.

I haven't seen as of today any ad that says updating to iOS 9 will improve performance on the iPhone 4S. You don't have to be a scientist to know that every time you update the OS on your device this one is going to affect your performance for the worse and this is especially true on old hardware. New OS updates add more features that pushes the old hardware further away its optimal performance.

 

[roadbloc]

I haven't seen as of today any ad that says updating to iOS 9 will improve performance on the iPhone 4S. You don't have to be a scientist to know that every time you update the OS on your device this one is going to affect your performance for the worse and this is especially true on old hardware. New OS updates add more features that pushes the old hardware further away its optimal performance.

I guess you missed this post.

Exactly this. My mother has it on her iPad Mini and it's now a joke to use. Completely unusable and Apple flaunt the following:

I say that's false advertising. There's no disclaimer to tell me it doesn't apply to older models.

Anybody reading this ad on Apple's website will assume iOS 9 improves the software to be faster. But with older models, this clearly isn't the case since a lawsuit is occurring. (And I know it isn't the case because I've had many an Apple device, not just iPhones, that have experienced major slow down due to updates and upgrades.)

 

[beanbaguk]

I haven't seen as of today any ad that says updating to iOS 9 will improve performance on the iPhone 4S. You don't have to be a scientist to know that every time you update the OS on your device this one is going to affect your performance for the worse and this is especially true on old hardware. New OS updates add more features that pushes the old hardware further away its optimal performance.

They don't specify performance on any specific device. They make a generic claim that it will improve iOS app performance (which it doesn't on older devices), and it makes iPad's more fluid and natural which it certainly doesn't.

http://www.apple.com/uk/ios/whats-new/#foundation

If you read the list of compatible devices, they include the 4S and all iPad mini models. So this implies to the consumer, the performance will improve on the listed compatible devices with iOS 9.

 

[Jsameds]

They don't specify performance on any specific device. They make a generic claim that it will improve iOS app performance (which it doesn't on older devices), and it makes iPad's more fluid and natural which it certainly doesn't.

http://www.apple.com/uk/ios/whats-new/#foundation

If you read the list of compatible devices, they include the 4S and all iPad mini models. So this implies to the consumer, the performance will improve on the listed compatible devices with iOS 9.

They'll probably say that it doesn't specify which iteration of iOS 9.

9.0 may lag, but 9.3 may be faster than 8.4.1

 

[lordofthereef]

One is not forced to upgrade unless some sort of issue comes up where a full restore is necessary, at which point options are limited.

I don't, for a second, believe that Apple is inserting code to purposely criple the devices, but froma consumer standpoint, if the end result is the same, it really doesn't matter the motives behind it. Apple has lost class acion suits (as have many others) because of how their product effected the consumer.

Is this such a case? I am torn, because as is true, updates aren' necessary, but just about any APple employee is going to tell you you should update, the OS gives you alerts (now), and there is no easy way to revert should the decision to upgrade truly cripple your device. ANd, of course, sometimes a full restore is necessary or required.

As has been said a million times before me, giving users the option to revert to an older OS would solve a lot of the complaining. IMO it was just a matter of time before such a lawsuit popped up. We will have to see how it plays out.

 

[vbedia]

I guess you missed this post.

Wrong again. I must have been missing lots of them to follow your reasoning

 

[DoctorKrabs]

I managed to install Mavericks onto my old 2006 iMac, but it's really sluggish. Anyone want to sue Apple with me?

Don't post here again until Apple forces you to stay on Mavericks. You can go back to Leopard with no trouble.

 

[sanke1]

Some people think a 6 year old hardware cellphone must handle current software nicely and smoothly... I think they are wrong supposing that

Not 6 year old iPhone 3G.

A 2 year old iPhone 5S which ran flawlessly on iOS 8 started to stutter randomly on iOS 9 with decrease in general performance.

Don't exaggerate. It's not even funny. I wish Apple loses so badly that this sets an ideal example before every other companies. Software upgrade must enhance existing hardware to call it update or upgrade. It must not be used as a tool to cripple devices to force common people to buy latest model.