Consumer Group Sues Apple in Belgium and Spain Over iPhone Throttling

[nitramluap]

no. a phone that randomly shuts down would cause the user to buy a new phone.

Except they never ‘randomly’ shut down. They shut down when there was a HEAVY demand on the battery which couldn’t deliver.

My iPhone 6S did this to me before the update once or twice - the battery was old, the weather was very cold. The iPhone clearly couldn’t handle the task I requested and just shut off. I booted to see the battery was fine and everything was OK. Tried the same App again -> shut off.

I simply *assumed* there was a fundamental problem with the hardware and was due to replace it when Apple came out with a fix & (belated) explanation. The iPhone 6S worked fine for me for a further year until I sold it... and the owner of it STILL has it working today, albeit with a degraded battery (but no shutdowns).

People... SMH...

 

[s66]

"Test Aankoop" [Dutch] / "Test Achat" [French] (for those in the US that's our "Consumer Reports" out here in Belgium) is just flexing their muscle.
Unfortunately there's way too many precedents of Apple losing this one while they should have won it and should look like true heroes for prolonging the life of their iPhones instead of being fined for allegedly doing the opposite of what they in fact did.
Shame on all those that attack them for making the affected iPhones usable of a much LONGER time as their batteries wore out.
[batteries DO wear out, nothing wrong with that]
And no they could not have explained it, as shown by all the comments in here that STILL do not get it. The general public would even be FAR worse in getting it than the apple haters on here.

We had both an iPhone 6 and an iPhone 6S that did do the shutdown when tasking them too much, so those got saved and were passed on the family members for years after Apple improved these devices through a software update.

Again something to be ashamed of for living in Belgium.

 

[farewelwilliams]

mmmh... back in the days you were complaining about degraded battery life on your iPhone 6 plus but never mentioned any slowdown or shutdown. Your posts are still there.

mmmh...because when i have problems with my iPhone, i document and complain about every single issue on MacRumors because MacRumors is a one stop shop for all iPhone complaints, right? RIGHT?

🤦‍♂️

 

[s66]

I thought class action lawsuits do not exist in Europe? Or maybe that's just Germany

Unfortunately the "class action" is in something that the EU is pushing under the guise of consumer protection.

See more here:

From the horses mouth:

News

European Commission - Policies, information and services

ec.europa.eu

The lawyer's view:

Class Actions in Europe

Jones Day is monitoring class action developments across the various jurisdictions, with an eye on the European legislation that will likely become the yardstick over the years to come.

www.jonesday.com

And sadly Germany too has them

 

[Schizoid]

Well done everyone, enjoy your €12 each

 

[farewelwilliams]

Except they never ‘randomly’ shut down. They shut down when there was a HEAVY demand on the battery which couldn’t deliver.

My iPhone 6S did this to me before the update once or twice - the battery was old, the weather was very cold. The iPhone clearly couldn’t handle the task I requested and just shut off. I booted to see the battery was fine and everything was OK. Tried the same App again -> shut off.

I simply *assumed* there was a fundamental problem with the hardware and was due to replace it when Apple came out with a fix & (belated) explanation. The iPhone 6S worked fine for me for a further year until I sold it... and the owner of it STILL has it working today, albeit with a degraded battery (but no shutdowns).

People... SMH...

no, it’s dependant on how old the battery was. if the battery was extremely old, the iPhone would randomly shut down because background tasks would randomly start, causing a jump in voltages in which a battery couldn’t deliver.

 

[CalmCruiser]

Shame on them leaches

 

[FCX]

As mentioned earlier, it was in the release notes.

I read it at the time and thought it seemed like a good idea. It is troubling that so many feel it should cost Apple billions of dollars because a) people don't read release notes like they should, and b) they didn't feature this particular change in giant bold print and splashy commercials. Truly a disgusting outcome.

 

[robbietop]

Talk about being late to the party. This has already been resolved in the US.

 

[PlutoMac]

Apple deserves all the fines they can get for this, hopefully they learned a bit about transparency. Like it was said, they would have avoided all the trouble by simply being open about it. I still remember my iPhone 5 becoming slower with each update and rumours about throttling being louder and louder (fans blatantly denying such thing is even possible, of course)... until Apple was caught.

That is CORRECT, Apple is in the business to sell products. By throttling the batteries in iPhones and not letting the consumer (who pays their outrageous salaries and funds the Board of Directors) know about it or to disable the throttling altogether, is pure deception and should not only be pointed out, but Apple should be heavily fined for the con game perpetrated by the World's LARGEST and MOST TRUSTED Company. I find their LACK of transparency and their "Who cares?" attitude to be disgusting at best. We all seem to give Apple such high ratings for honesty and looking out for their customers. But in reality since Tim Cook took over the company, Apple has become Microsoft in many ways. Too bad, because they still make the BEST Electronic Devices and Software in comparison to the competition. Apple really does not need to POOP all over their customers just to sell more iPhones via deception and hiding the real motives for such poor business practices. Apple under Steve Jobs was far more honest and truthful. The disasterous fiasco of all their "UPGRADED" device operating systems recently is strong evidence of that. Too bad..................

 

[PlutoMac]

What’s worrisome is that these lawsuits are going through by the millions of dollars.
In the future, if another similar situation ever happens, Apple might decide to just let the battery or phone die instead of applying a patch that would protect it and let it last longer, because the well-intended approach has backfired spectacularly for years on now.

A little bit of HONESTY and TRANSPARENCY from Apple would have gone a hell of a long way in terms of customer trust and faith. Let the customer decide if he/she wants to purchase a new battery or not or purchase a new iPhone or not. Under the guise and deception of service the customer's needs, Apple has managed to tarnish its once stellar sheen.

 

[I7guy]

That is CORRECT, Apple is in the business to sell products. By throttling the batteries in iPhones and not letting the consumer (who pays their outrageous salaries and funds the Board of Directors) know about it or to disable the throttling altogether, is pure deception and should not only be pointed out, but Apple should be heavily fined for the con game perpetrated by the World's LARGEST and MOST TRUSTED Company. I find their LACK of transparency and their "Who cares?" attitude to be disgusting at best. We all seem to give Apple such high ratings for honesty and looking out for their customers. But in reality since Tim Cook took over the company, Apple has become Microsoft in many ways. Too bad, because they still make the BEST Electronic Devices and Software in comparison to the competition. Apple really does not need to POOP all over their customers just to sell more iPhones via deception and hiding the real motives for such poor business practices. Apple under Steve Jobs was far more honest and truthful. The disasterous fiasco of all their "UPGRADED" device operating systems recently is strong evidence of that. Too bad..................

Do you (or did you) own any Apple products? Were you "conned" into buying a new iphone? There is a good reason, Apple managers make "outrageous salaries."

 

[bergert]

i had a 6+ and i experienced it.

apple implemented it on the 6 first and then the 6s since the batteries were still fresh.

My 6s shut down on several occasions as it run out of battery. As such, I am OK with anything that preserves battery life. Once I was in front of a Car2Go (temp around freezing) when it died, could not start the rental. Had to walk a mile, with my heavy bags from the supermarket, to next taxi stand. Could not call the taxi as the battery was empty. I am totally ok with slowdown = waaaaay better than shutdown.

My 6s bought in 09/2015 - more than 5 years, this is planned obsolescence for Android users?

 

[The Cappy]

It is because Apple did not explain to iphone owners what they were doing so when the update was implemented and iphone owners saw the phone had battery issues, it would prompt one of two things happening, getting a new battery or getting a new phone. Getting a new phone is what 'planned obsolescence' is all about, in that by introducing the power management feature, Apple 'planned' for owners of older iphones to ditch their old iphones due to battery issue an purchase a new one.

Maybe. But if they hadn't done it, the phone would have started simply crashing every time you launched certain apps. And they'd have sued about that too.

 

[movieator]

Good to see the US doesn't have a monopoly on frivolous lawsuits.

 

[bergert]

Maybe. But if they hadn't done it, the phone would have started simply crashing every time you launched certain apps. And they'd have sued about that too.

wait - crashing repeatedly is normal for 800 Million PC users. Crashing is perfectly ok.

Not OK, is doing a deliberate slowdown to prevent a crash. And giving only a vague description in the release note - lawyers feast! This means Microsoft = good guy, Apple = bad guy.

PS: you revel in the thought of success, Apple paying, but it never occurs to you that this cost is just added on top of the price of new devices.

 

[steve09090]

Where is the data? The fact that Apple was even caught doing this by one person is enough data. If you're here to deny that a slowed down iPhone does not entice people to upgrade to a newer one, well then there is not much to discuss here.

If you’re here to suggest that slowing down the phone is more likely to entice people to upgrade to a newer one than a phone shutting down at random times then there is not much to discuss here.

 

[SteelMacMac]

How does an update to preserve battery life amount to "planned obsolescence"?

Preserving battery life would seem to me to be quite the opposite. 🤔

An uninformed opinion. If you take the time to study the details you may find that you are being misled, but if you have already decided that's not the case you will remain the uninformed opinion.

 

[sofila]

mmmh...because when i have problems with my iPhone, i document and complain about every single issue on MacRumors because MacRumors is a one stop shop for all iPhone complaints, right? RIGHT?

🤦‍♂️

It's just a matter of reliability. Take it easy.

 

[Smigit]

Apple have been open about this since the very first time they admitted it, years ago. And they also (openly, or transparently) said they would continue to do this in 2018 with the iPhone 8 and then the iPhone X. There is NOT a lack of transparency, there are just opportunistic lawyers taking advantage of Apple and their attempts to continue the life of an iPhone.

Maybe they should just let the iPhones crash and then people can make up their own mind whether they upgrade or just accept that batteries don't last for ever. But Apple won’t do that, because they have transparently tried to keep these devices lasting longer. If people (like some of the whingers here) can't accept that, they can go buy a grandpa phone.

I think is pretty transparent and a good deal to make an iPhone feel like new again. https://support.apple.com/en-au/iphone/repair/service/battery-power

The lawsuit is regarding the devices launched prior to Apple being caught and admitting to the functionality. The article specifically calls out these handsets, which all pre date the iPhone X.

The lawsuits cover owners of iPhone 6, 6 Plus, 6S and 6S Plus and alleges Apple engaged in unfair and misleading commercial practices. The lawsuits ask for compensation of on average at least 60 euro for each affected consumer in Belgium and Spain.

As I mentioned in my post, the issue was not that Apple implemented this change, it’s that they did not inform customers and this resulted in misleading support as Apples internal processes didn’t relay vital information to support staff. The lawsuit does not appear to be concerned with devices released after Apple finally documented the change and implemented a battery upgrade program to assist impacted users.

This is not an opportunistic money grab for buyers of current devices, it’s compensation for users impacted by undocumented changes and inappropriate support services for devices purchased prior to Apple making any disclosure.

 

[Unsupported]

An uninformed opinion. If you take the time to study the details you may find that you are being misled, but if you have already decided that's not the case you will remain the uninformed opinion.

"The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what’s true."

- Carl Sagan

😉

 

[farewelwilliams]

It's just a matter of reliability. Take it easy.

That makes no sense.

 

[s66]

Thanks for not reading what I wrote.

You’re making assumptions about the subjection observations of people you don’t know.

The feature didn’t turn the device into a brick suddenly. Performance was only “throttled” at key moments in time when the battery may not have been able to support a given operation/activity.

In other words, were all these people really doing things on their phone which caused speed to be “throttled” so often and so significantly that they felt they must get a new phone because it wasn‘t “fast enough” anymore?

You have no idea. You’re just jumping on a sloganeering bandwagon because it feels good and righteous (which is a lot of what’s wrong with discourse in society today, actually).

You don’t know, but that’s not a possibility you probably entertain often, from the sound of it. As for me? I don’t know either. But I’m doubtful the infrequently adjusted speed of the devices, for the vast majority of normal, casual phone users, did not make the devices seem unusable to the point of requiring replacement. People look for excuses to drop money on new expensive devices all the time, regardless of whether they truly “need” it. Sadly, in this consumeristic world, this sort of activity is what passes for fulfillment, as we lose sight of the meaningful things in life.

I used an 6S at that time. It was affected in the sense that it turned itself off at the most inconvenient moments. Without the battery being empty, it shut down when you tried to use it. I never could predict why or when it would happen at the time. I knew the battery was not all that great anymore, but it turned itself off before the battery had no more charge.
I was looking for a replacement phone when a software updated fixed it for me. In fact the software update saved me from either buying a new phone or going through the motions of trying to get it repaired somehow.

Apple are the heroes in this story, not the villains.

I did use the program from Apple to replace the battery for cheap at some point afterwards.

The phone then lasted till I got an iPhone X (which I switched to due to features, not due to my old one being slow). Sure the X was faster - one expects that but until I used the newer the old one felt more than fast enough. (Going to a faster machine is always ok, going backward: ouch that hurts)
My niece got the old 6S eventually and used it till the battery was completely gone and she got herself an iPhone 11 as replacing the battery was not economically sound anymore IMHO, moreover the software was way too old to continue to use on a device you have so much sensitive stuff stored on anyway.

Anyway those doing this class action ought to be ashamed of themselves.
There's far, far worse planned obsolesce out there that is in fact intentionally making people replaced things way too soon. But the iPhone 6 and 6S: sorry those were saved from being obsolete by Apple, not made obsolete at all.

 

[djgamble]

You guys saying people are whining for nothing are all nuts. Apple likely had good intentions but the end effect after the update was for people to think their phones were out of date and slow and so they decided they probably needed a new one, instead of a battery replacement

- Because they didn’t know the throttling was happening!!! -

Agreed. Further to this... the throttle wasn't switched on/off pursuant to your battery's capacity. It was switched on (and stayed on) after a software update. It didn't matter how old/new your battery was, or whether you got it replaced. This update maliciously throttled your phone.

IMO Apple's excuse doesn't checkout. It's a retrospective excuse that their lawyers cooked up as a legal defence after they were caught with their pants down.

Apple knows 100% that there's no code saying 'if [battery health] < [value] then [throttle phone'. The algorithm is 'if phone model = [iphone 6...etc] then [throttle phone]'.

If your battery's gone bung within the period of its warranty and Apple's trying to disguise that (so you don't ask them for a new one) then that's a whole new can of worms! Either way, the purpose was never to help customers. It's not like they were sued $$$ for handing out free battery replacements!

 

[willyx]

If you’re here to suggest that slowing down the phone is more likely to entice people to upgrade to a newer one than a phone shutting down at random times then there is not much to discuss here.

No, a phone shutting down randomly and for no comunicated reason is likely to give you a bad reputation as a company and presumably a lot of under warranty claims, as opposed to a phone slowing down its performance.