Seriously, I noticed my 7 Plus slowing down in the weeks leading up to iPhone 8 and X announcement.
What troubleshooting steps did you follow once you noticed that?
Seriously, I noticed my 7 Plus slowing down in the weeks leading up to iPhone 8 and X announcement.
If I'd been aware at the time that it was the state of the battery that was causing the shutdowns, I would have insisted on a warranty replacement. Which I guess is why Apple kept it quiet to prevent a deluge of battery replacement claims.Apple recognized that iPhones unexpectedly shutting down on users is not a good experience, and starting with iOS 10.2.1, it quietly implemented a power management feature to prevent these shutdowns. The update was released in January 2017, and a month later, Apple said it saw a major reduction in shutdowns.
I have zero reason not to believe it. I got new battery in my 6s and it shows 1848 Mhz everytime now. Thats plenty of proof for me to believe.
If that's true, then CPU Dasher X isn't working properly. The CPU isn't going to run at max clock speed all the time.
Yeah they could add a new switch and label it 'Random shutdown' off/on. Or just add the feature to the existing Low power mode and add to the description "Phone may also randomly shut down at any given time"Just give me the option to switch off the throttling.
May want to re-read the info regarding this topic. The throttling was not added to 'give new features' but for an entirely different reason.Conclusion: Apple shouldn't allow older phones to update to newer iOS if they can't support it. just release updates for security. Throttling phones down in order to give new features isn't an experience. I love Apple products but i'm calling lies with Apple's statement.
That's how all languages have evolved over time. Go back 500 years and people will still be talking English, but you wouldn't be able to understand them because none of it is pronounced the same now as it was then.
Little video on it here.
Here's what you need to know: Just keep your phone plugged in at all times of the day, even if its charged.
The only time I let my phone off the charger is when I'm sleeping at night, or out and about.
Yeah they could add a new switch and label it 'Random shutdown' off/on. Or just add the feature to the existing Low power mode and add to the description "Phone may also randomly shut down at any given time"
May want to re-read the info regarding this topic. The throttling was not added to 'give new features' but for an entirely different reason.
Are you being sarcastic?according to apple it was a feature added in 10.2.1 for the 6/6s
Are you being sarcastic?
I cant imagine youre falling for the ancient PR line of "its a feature not a bug"
Good points, but remember Apple is in the business of making money. Of course they could have designed a removable cover, but they want you to upgrade to a new phone, not replace the battery in your existing one. How many people would have kept their old phones if they could easily replace the battery themselves? I'd bet a lot.I don't think Apple did this to screw over their customers either. But it does irritate me in a massively huge way to know that I upgraded to yet another slowed-down iPhone (currently a 6s Plus) when I could have just upgraded the battery. So yes, Apple did screw up, and the $30 replacement is a step in the right direction.
Apple also could have avoided this by simply designing a phone that has a removeable battery. They already have the most secure OSs, and while they aren't fool-proof, they are largely idiot-proof. I find it very hard to beleive that Jonny Ive - for all his talent - couldn't design an iPhone that has that one feature.
But bear in mind that this used to be a company that was about both form and function. Not anymore. Sad.
why do you think that?
It's going to be near impossible to prove in court that Apple slowed down devices so that customers would upgrade. Doesn't mean there won't be some damages awarded because they didn't inform customers or because performance was impacted. But proving they did it to cause upgrades is a much tougher task for prosecutors.
At the end of the day Apple could have let phones shut down randomly (which could cause customers to upgrade) or they could have implemented measurers such as they did which affects performance, at times (and which could cause customers to upgrade).
They only failing I can see so far is in the secrecy of what was done. Because it doesn't appear to me that this is even a battery (or other component) design flaw limited to one model of iPhone. But if there is a design flaw and the software "fix" is a coverup then it will be brought to light in the court hearings.
I think many people here still misunderstand what it going on
First, Samsung doesn’t have special battery technology. The chemistry is exactly the same. They deplete the same way. There is no way to change it except to use a different battery chemistry. It is very likely that Samsung and other manufacturers use similar power management methods.
Second, Apple uses batteries made in Japan.
Lastly, relax, most of the time it takes a seriously beat battery for power management to engage throttle. Get it replaced for $30. The amount of hyperbole on here makes it seem crazy that a heavily used battery cycled at least daily for three years should wear out... 500 cycles is a lot for a lipo battery.
iPhone: quality parts that work in sync for safety, security and performance (yes that’s battery too).
Users: “hey I hate my phone shutting off.”
Apple: “ok we’ll make it so that at peak load usage, if it would shut off before, now will just slow slightly.”
User: “how dare you slow my phone during rare usage events! Just invest billions into new battery tech like Samsung!”
smh.
You forgot the following questions:
1. Why is the throttling being applied just last year, after 10 years of iPhones? What happened to the 5s for example.
Is your phone affected by this ? I suspect it's not or you wouldn't be making up times like that. Try the following sequence and time it (just by counting off the seconds):or the app that you were loading took 0.03 second longer to load