I have two iPhone 5s's. The performance is pretty good on iOS 9 and imo is better than iOS 8.
While no one can predict the outcome, I hope the suit gets tossed.
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.
Class Action Lawsuit Accuses Apple of Crippling iPhone 4s With iOS 9 Update
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While no one can predict the outcome, I hope the suit gets tossed.
The difference being that back then Apple allowed you to restore back to 3.1.3 if you chose. They actually still allow any iPhone 3G to go to older versions, which they should be doing for every iPhone.
I'll tell this to my mom when she asks why her iPhone is slow after doing what Apple recommends.
"Why wouldn't you go online and search about iOS 9 and buy a new device every year? Why didn't you just jailbreak to get rid of the annoyances? You're not tech savvy like me? Not everyone in the world is tech savvy?? SOME PEOPLE KNOW LESS ABOUT TECHNOLOGY THAN ME?????"
What the heck is the matter with your 2010 iMac? I've got an old 27in 2.93 i7 with 16gb of ram, the 1gb video card and a 3tb DIY Fusion drive. 256gb OWC SSD and a 3tb WD HDD. I should be good to go for a while.
You don't have to buy a new one every year, just every half a decade. Heck, you don't even have to go for the latest model, the 5S still has another few years under it's belt.
And if not, then there are plenty of ways to optimise iOS 9 to make it run faster and smoother on the 4S. I'm sure you could sort that out for her.
Or do you think suing the company is the more reasonable approach?
My iPhone 4S became useless under iOS9. The only thing it can run without crashing is the clock, which means my iPhone 4S is now a fantastically designed alarm clock next to my bed.
Got a Moto G3. Been happy since. It's really, really snappy.
Got a Moto G3. Been happy since. It's really, really snappy.
The idea of demand restriction is ridiculous. It first started when reporters basically made up a reason why not enough toys were produced by Christmas. It's a stupid idea created by the clueless.
Natural resource people restrict supply to keep prices high, not to restrict demand. When the ultra high end does it it's not demand restriction, it's supply restriction: they'll only make X number of the product.
Apple's problems are due to production. Have you ever made hundreds of thousands of a new item? How about a few hundred million? This isn't a cabbage patch doll, this is a high fit and finish product.
I agree that it's highly unlikely any degradation in performance is not intentional. I think the key difference this time around, in the case of iOS9, is that this update was advertised and held up as containing software-related improvements to performance.
Unlike iOS7 which advertised a new look and new features and iOS8 which advertised many new features, iOS9 really was advertised as being all about optimizations and performance improvements. With prior iOS updates, I think most consumers understood that there would be some minor degradation in performance, but it was worth the trade-off for the added features. With iOS9, consumers were specifically led to believe there would no such trade-off. To me, that is the difference this time around.
I'm not sure giving users an option to revert back to an older version is a good idea. Microsoft does this with Windows as we know, but they then are forced to put out security patches for old versions for a long time. This is drain of resources, both engineering time and money. With iOS, one the benefits is how the development can be lean by leaving behind old versions quite quickly, I don't want Apple to give up that leanness. Rather, I think Apple should make a proper assessment of what consumers consider "performance" and actually test new versions of iOS against such metrics. I think the problem is in Apple's testing. Whatever their test protocols are, they obviously aren't measuring the same things consumers consider to be important.
I was responding to the comment about 2014 and prior devices. iPad Air 2 is a 2014 device.
Well if you seriously believe that then you're suggesting we're all a bunch of idiots. Is that what you're suggesting?
Using that logic, I should have trusted Apple to do that for iOS 7 and the iPhone 4 but even 7.1.2 is a bad experience on it. I can't restore it to any version but 7.1.2 so the iPhone 4 itself now has a poor experience. It didn't have a poor experience when I bought it.
Suing is only reasonable because there's no other way to make Apple do the right thing and allow their devices to be restored to the software that it originally came with. You know, the definition of "restore"?
Truly restoring would install the software that the phone had when it came out of the box. Apple won't do anything to help people with old phones which is why there is a lawsuit. All Apple has to do is literally hit a button to enable signing of old software and that will pacify anyone who hates how new versions run.
But will then render the phones insecure again as you "uninstall" all the security updates when you restore.
No thanks. I'd rather have slow and secure.
No, it's not complicated. No company that wants to sell you something would intentionally make that something more difficult to buy. Apple wants the sale now, not some possibility of a future sale because the product looks "in demand" by being out of stock. How many lost iPad Pro sales have there been because the pencil and keyboard aren't in stock? Do you really think Phil Schiller told Jeff Williams to slow down production of the pencil because showing 4-5 week shipping delay makes the product look more desirable? Dude, you seriously need to remove that tinfoil hat.
As far as the Apple Watch goes I don't doubt there were legitimate production issues when the product first launched. We know for a fact some of the review units had bad Taptic engines and had to be replaced (John Gruber had that issue). So limiting where it was sold was a function of limited supply. And Apple tried a different retail experience that perhaps over time they found wasn't working or wasn't necessary so they adjusted. So what?
You've spent "thousands" on iPad apps? Really? I didn't know there were enough good exclusive paid apps that someone could rack that much in charges just on apps...
just proves my point that intentionally engineering a crappy experience can lead to people leaving the platform, not spending more money with Apple.
Last edited:
Apple has a multitude of lawsuits against it. There attorneys probably yawn when another lawsuit is filed.
That being said, I don't think anything will come of this lawsuit; meaning it will be thrown out.
That's a BS excuse considering I can always just go buy an old iPhone like a 3G which has that less secure version of iOS on it and even restore it to older versions that are less secure than that. I can get an old device where security patches aren't even available. Apple's not locking out restores on those and they sign iPhone OS 1.1.3 on the original iPhone even though 3.1.3 is the latest for it. It's something done at the user's own risk and people savvy enough to do an iTunes downgrade will be aware of these consequences.
I have easily spent hundreds on ios apps already. $5 here, $10 there, it all adds up, especially when I purchase multiple different apps of a similar function so I can test and evaluate them side by side to see which suits my needs the best.
They really yawned at this one:
https://www.macrumors.com/2013/10/1...tic-ios-7-downloads-to-ios-6-powered-devices/
3 months later:
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2014/01/13/ios-7-1-delete-over-the-air-updates/
Agreed, this would be smart. But then it would be jailbreak-freedom for users and we know Apple wants none of that. What you are talking about is choice and freedom, instead we get shackles and walled gardens.
And for everyone screaming, give me a break and why do you still have an iPhone4S...lame. Why can't people who can't or choose to not afford the newest and most shiny iphone be able to use it without hinderance of a crippling new OS which is forced on them (any major issue and we all know the first thing apple recommends - restore/reimage which ONLY allows the newest OS).
I think this is Apple's biggest black eye - force obsolescence. They obviously don't care about the environment 1/1000000th as much as profits. If they did, an iphone could comfortably be used for nearly a decade, like a desktop can.
Apple basically does though. It is basically inevitable that your iOS device will need to be restored at some point in order to fix a problem. Apple forces the latest iOS version when a device is restored through its signing process.
Arguably the alternative of maintaining older versions of iOS isn't a good path either.
a new era is on the way!
imagine a future where we have to replace everything every 2-3 years. the smart car, the iPhone, the iPad, the washing machine everything is not performing well after a couple of years
this is the apple way you idiots! you get in debt, they only care about the apple stock
imagine a future where we have to replace everything every 2-3 years. the smart car, the iPhone, the iPad, the washing machine everything is not performing well after a couple of years
this is the apple way you idiots! you get in debt, they only care about the apple stock
Yawn. As I said Apple gets hit with lawsuit after lawsuit. Their legal bills are probably more than the largest settlement.
Ohh it's you again. I give up already!
Ugh! you just can't win with these idiots. people love to see a successful company fail like a train wreck, just so they can say i told you so.
If you read the articles, you'd see that all he asked for was $50.00 (Fifty Dollars) and a way to remove OTA download packages. It seems like he won or settled because Apple responded and actually made deleting the updates an option. I know you don't care because anything Apple does is perfect, but Apple didn't really have a defense for that ant they don't for this iPhone 4S one either.
Amazing that you know the intentions of those who file these lawsuits and those who support them.