Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why are people freaking out about this now? It's obvious that the feature simply hadn't been implemented for those phones yet, not being necessary because they still had relatively new batteries.

Now that they're over a year old, they might start needing the feature so Apple has implemented/enabled it.

There's nothing to be upset about here.
 
Really!? That's a ridiculous assumption, you've got to be kidding right!? First of all those issues didn't exist prior to iOS 11 update on iPhone 6. Secondly, Apple claims it as a feature to keep a much better user experience so their phone won't shut down but cripple them down to the point of almost not tolerable for some users thus ended up buying a newer phone. It has nothing to do with safety and exploding iPhone it's just a battery declining it's capacity. And most of all this issue is for an old battery most likely over a year old battery, Note 7 is affected with a new battery a bad design from Samsung that ended up exploding.

That's what happens when you don't manage the power draw from a battery. They become over the counter grenades and you get banned from boarding flights.
 
At what battery % can we walk into an Apple Store with our phones and demand that we get a $29 replacement? I've got 27 days left on my 1 year warranty on my X and I'm at 95% capacity. It would be nice to get a new battery before that program ends on 12/31.
 
At what battery % can we walk into an Apple Store with our phones and demand that we get a $29 replacement? I've got 27 days left on my 1 year warranty on my X and I'm at 95% capacity. It would be nice to get a new battery before that program ends on 12/31.
It’s 80% but I believe they have bypassed your battery having to be that low because of the scandal until December.
 
As someone who worked for an apple store the answer to your question is no people do not know this. I can't tell you how many people who came in with batteries that had lost capacity and did not understand why that happened. Same with computers and they have had the info to display charge cycles for a long time. Most people understand their battery used to work one way and now doesn't work another. The thought of it wearing out does not occur to them.
This feature should be user controlled not Apple deceiving some customers into buying a new phone when they can just have a battery replaced to fix the problem. All this battery degradation is fully understandable and shouldn't be used as an excuse to slowdown and shutting down phones. Apple can intergrate a charge cycle info into iOS if they wanted to, to show people they use their phone a lot and they charge it too much. Everybody understands it, that's a law of nature the more you use I the faster you wear it down. Not a lame excuses how lithium technology blah, blah, blah... It doesn't matter even old battery technology or future battery technology this will have the same effect, eventually you gonna wear it down and it depends how much you use them. It may last longer in the future but eventually you gonna wear it down and it needs a replacement.
 
I'm fairly certain that the 'maximum capacity' information is incorrect. My 6s Plus claims it has 84% remaining, but it gets about half of the battery life that it did when I bought it, and I bought it used.

That’s exactly how I feel too. My 6s is an year old. Bought new. Battery will drop below 20% at about 2pm if I start my day at 7am on full charge. The largest use of phone in that time is an hour and a half of Bluetooth audio, and an hourly so of emails and general browsing in that time. Not too much calling and almost no video watching.
 
It’s 80% but I believe they have bypassed your battery having to be that low because of the scandal until December.

So does that mean at 95% I can get a $29 replacement or not? I plan on using this phone for at least 2 more years and don't want to get stuck with problems a year from now.
 
Sure. But folks, remember that only apple seems to have this problem - no other smartphone manufacturer seems to have an issue where battery degradation requires slowing the phone in order to prevent reboots.

Can you provide a source for this claim? Because I have seen phones of other brands than Apple with degraded battery randomly reboot or shutdown. I've even seen laptops do it.
 
Totally fine with me. Better than a phone becoming unusable, but of course they've should've been disclosing it and allowing users to toggle it on and off from the beginning.
Huh? You are ok with them doing this instead of engineering a phone to last more than a year or two without needing to be slowed down?

Really, it can be done and one very easily, just make the battery easy for the end user to change, problem solved. And don't tell me that they can't do that and make the phone completely water proof, there are plenty of digital cameras that prove that wrong.
 
So does that mean at 95% I can get a $29 replacement or not? I plan on using this phone for at least 2 more years and don't want to get stuck with problems a year from now.

You can have it replaced but I'd suggest against it unless you're having serious battery drain at 95%. The battery replacement price only goes to $49 starting next year. So you could have it replace later instead of wasting your money now when you don't have any issues.
[doublepost=1541009444][/doublepost]
Huh? You are ok with them doing this instead of engineering a phone to last more than a year or two without needing to be slowed down?

Really, it can be done and one very easily, just make the battery easy for the end user to change, problem solved. And don't tell me that they can't do that and make the phone completely water proof, there are plenty of digital cameras that prove that wrong.

You're seriously comparing a 3 lbs camera engineering to a 6 Oz iPhone?
 
You can have it replaced but I'd suggest against it unless you're having serious battery drain at 95%. The battery replacement price only goes to $49 starting next year. So you could have it replace later instead of wasting your money now when you don't have any issues.
[doublepost=1541009444][/doublepost]

You're seriously comparing a 3 lbs camera engineering to a 6 Oz iPhone?


Thanks for the clarification. I'll probably wait until the end of the year and see where my iPhone's battery is at and then decide from there.
 
Can you provide a source for this claim? Because I have seen phones of other brands than Apple with degraded battery randomly reboot or shutdown. I've even seen laptops do it.
I haven't ever seen this issue with any other phone or laptop and I am an IT Manager, so I work with A LOT of these devices.

Now I have seen them shutdown or reboot when the battery charge gets too low and perhaps there is an argument that could be made to suggest throttling when the charge gets below something like 15%. Which is exactly what many Android manufacturers are doing now.

Consider it this way, lets say you drive an electric car, we will use the Nissan Leaf as an example because they make it easy to see if your battery is degraded in any way. Your battery degrades to say 70% of its original capacity and it is no longer under warranty. You understand that the battery doesn't have full capacity, but you are ok with that as is still allows you to drive the distances you need to. Well, Nissan then pushes out an update to your car that says is the battery is degraded to below 80% the maximum speed the car will be allowed to drive is 45 MPH. When you confront Nissan about it, they say they had to do it to prevent the car from randomly shutting off, which is BS, as the various safety commissions wouldn't have allowed the vehicle on the road if it did something like that.

On the other hand, you get down to less than 5% charge remaining, then Nissan says we are slowing the car down so you can make it to a charging station and that would make sense.

Now let's go back to them slowing the car down to 45 MPH, obviously you would think something is wrong with the car and take it in to have it looked at. Nissan says that the car is just old and needs to be replaced with a new car completely to the tune of $25,000+, they don't bother to tell you that just changing the battery for $6,000 or less would fix the problem and bring the car back to its original performance. You press and find out that they are doing this intentionally, but not until after you needlessly replaced a car that was perfectly functional in all other respects. You would scream and yell that they intentionally ripped you off, which they did.

Now the question is why isn't Apple held to that same standard? Because they are Apple and people want to believe they can do no wrong, even though they clearly do.
[doublepost=1541010152][/doublepost]
You're seriously comparing a 3 lbs camera engineering to a 6 Oz iPhone?

Umm? I would never lug around a 3 pound camera and an iPhone weighs more than 6 OZ. Most waterproof camera only weigh about 2-3 Oz more than an iPhone. So yes, I will compare them.
 
Wait what? Am I understanding this right? Apple will possibly throttle, I mean manage, my 8 plus with iOS 12.1?

Nooooooooooo!

Let me go update to iOS 12 noooowwwwwwww!

And stay put!

Lol
 
Umm? I would never lug around a 3 pound camera and an iPhone weighs more than 6 OZ. Most waterproof camera only weigh about 2-3 Oz more than an iPhone. So yes, I will compare them.

iPhone Xs weighs 6.24 Oz according to Apple. And which 9 Oz waterproof camera are you referring to here? I'm assuming a GoPro?
 
Last edited:
Temperature 40% charge 100% charge
0°C 98% (after 1 year) 94% (after 1 year)
25°C 96% (after 1 year) 80% (after 1 year)
40°C 85% (after 1 year) 65% (after 1 year)
60°C 75% (after 1 year) 60% (after 3 months)

So charge cycles and ambient temperature make a HUGE difference in life of a battery. And since no one keeps their devices at 0°C (freezing point) and factoring most charge the battery to 100% each time, a 20% degradation after 1 year per the chart is proven by science. It's not simply "Apple said"

On the flip side, I wonder if keeping our phones in insulating cases is killing the battery life?

Also I find that the degradation of batteries tends to degrade the cold weather battery life. My current iPhone has an 81% battery health but it seems to last a quarter of that in cold temperatures.
 
Apple's batteries are very good these days (unlike the iPhone 6 days). My iPhone X, which I've had for a year still has 95% battery health, and yes, I use it A LOT.
 
The iPhone X battery is crap. I’m down to 90% after 10 months. I’m thinking to get it replaced before the prices go back to $69.
Yup. I have not even had mine for a year and I am down to 97% already. 8 months and I have lost 3% capacity.. what a joke.
 
The elephant in the room is why Android manufacturers don’t need to do this. I have a collection of both iOS and Android devices, weighted a bit more to the iOS side, but I have several Android devices which are quite old (3+ years), which have never been throttled, and bench the same as they always have ... perhaps with a couple of percentage point differences due to software installations, aging storage, etc.

Every one of these devices use Lithium Ion batteries.

For that matter, so do laptop computers, tablet computers, and an array of other consumer electronic devices.

That iPhones and iPhones alone uniquely need to be throttled to such a dramatic degree is something that makes little sense. Unless the battery technology in use is somehow inferior.

I remember years back having an iMac upgraded with “Apple Memory” from Apple, only to open it up and discover that they were cheap Hynix memory modules. This is a company that screams about its processors from the top of the highest mountain, number of cores, clock speed, etc, as well as storage space, but when it comes to the amount of RAM in a device, suddenly declares “Specs don’t matter!”

That Mac devotees have to suspend disbelief in order to remain in the tribe is more or less a foregone conclusion, and despite the endless stream of alternative justifications for their behavior, this is most likely what we are witnessing here.

And while Apple may get away with it, each time they do, they burn ever so slightly more goodwill in the process. Even in religion, there is often a point where even the most evangelized eventually go “oh come on, this is too much”!

There have been a few studies (of varying quality) performed on the Apple faithful, and their results are interesting. It’s perhaps that most obvious example of consumerist brainwashing we’ve seen, at least in the last 50 years, with perhaps the most fascinating aspect being that the strongest believers are absolutely, positively convinced that they are anything other than brainwashed. This is probably a common trait among all religions, though. I’ve known some extremely religious people, yet not one of them were anything other than hostile to the notion that they were brainwashed.

I once read on these very forms a user that said “Apple asks me not to care how much RAM is in my device, and I honor their request!”

When confronted with things like this, what can you say? It’s like arguing Christianity with a Christian. Nlobody’s mind is ever changed.

It is almost unfathamoable that group of people have accepted Apple’s iPhone-slowing explanation. Then again, if Apple said they slowed the phones to save Sperm Whales by mitigating energy usage, they’d believe that too, and even champion it as yet more evidence of the benevolence of Apple.

In the end, though, it’s the religious faithful that hold computing back.

If people refused to accept this nonesense, we’d have better devices today, and we know they are possible. The iPad Pro would probably have 10GB of RAM, iPhones would have a stylus option, and it’s doubtful that anyone’s phone would be slowed.

Alas, the religious faithful keep standards lower for everyone, as Apple has a certain number of guaranteed sales regardless of what they release. I mean, why blow your entire technological wad in one release when the people will wet themselves over the fact that new phones now come in black. BLACK! Ohhhh, I love love love love love black! I gots to get me one of those!

Specs, though? Eh, don’t matter.

In the end, the 10% gets what the 90% will accept. They are right when they say “most people only care about” ... but with major companies constantly leaving out the wants of the creative class and the technological elite, in favor of the average people, a certain dumbing-down of technological potential is sure to follow, and IMHO, we’ve seen this trend accelerate in recent years.

Apple throttles phones to sell more phones. And grass is green and the sky is blue.

That this statement is even controversial, with some even steadfastly denying it, is something that psychologists and sociologists will study for years to come.
 
The battery health feature is pretty accurate. I get the same results with coconutbattery as well as Lirim Info Lite from the App Store.

Lirim Info is an excellent tool and I suggest all of you try it out. It tells you about every single piece of hardware in your iPhone or iPad. I think the watches as well when paired.
 
Why are people freaking out about this now? It's obvious that the feature simply hadn't been implemented for those phones yet, not being necessary because they still had relatively new batteries.

Now that they're over a year old, they might start needing the feature so Apple has implemented/enabled it.

There's nothing to be upset about here.

Largely because adding these devices now makes things **more** confusing not less confusing. As, if this issue truly is driven by battery age and peak output capabilities as Apple is suggesting then it would apply to *all* of Apple's phones from day 1. Why from Day 1? Because battery age is heavily dependent on environment as well as the liner effects of time. If I lived in Arizona and spent the majority of my day working with my phone in the hot Arizona Sun. I would see a far more aged battery than the person in NY who stays in an AC room 99% of their day.

Meaning, I could end up with a battery that is at 50% capacity in 4 months given the right environmental stresses...

So, it is extremely questionable that they are adding it seemingly arbitrarily after devices are a year old...

It is also extremely questionable why this **still** doesn't qualify for a free battery replacement under Apple Care or warranty. Since it is pretty clear the battery is no longer able to properly feed the device.

I do question why this isn't an issue in other Apple products. Also, was this an issue with iPhones prior to the 6? Wonder what changed.. was it quality of batteries?

Before I get flamed, I'm not disagreeing with the fact that all hardware are consumable products that "breakdown" over time due to chemistry. More just highlighting inconsistencies across time or products.

This is the core of the question I have here. Apple has changed the way consumers are asked to understand battery "age" and "life" and aren't providing a clear enough explanation on why this change is warranted and not an intentional choice aimed at a targeted end.

Lithium batteries are not new and consumers have been using them in Laptops and other devices for well over 3 decades now. We all understand that as your battery ages and its charge capacity decreases you end up with less "runtime" meaning you'll need to hit the charger up a lot more frequently then you did when the battery was new. If that runtime gets too low to be practical you can swap the battery out.

Apple is aiming to tie the battery into Performance in a deep way where consumers are not only asked to understand the battery impact on runtime, but also its impact on device performance. The problem is Apple is applying performance limitations both when the device is hooked to power and when it isn't (and I can't understand why the direct DC line off the charger also can't supply enough "peak" power). When batteries are new and old (as noted by others in this thread you can be throttled with batteries above 90% "maximum capacity").

Hopefully Apple will eventually fully explain this issue as it is definitely acting as a strain on their brand.
 
1) One doesn't have to work at Apple to understand basic engineering concepts (which are largely math BTW since you seem to think it some black art).

2) Apple ADMITTED what occurred: under load a degraded battery couldn't provide sufficient power to meet the CPU's designed by Apple power specifications causing it to crash.

3) Basic logic from #2 either A) Apple designed the CPU with inadequate tolerances for inevitable battery degradation, or B) Apple chose a battery for it's overall system design that could not meet the CPU designed power needs after X number of recharges, or C) BOTH.
What Apple is doing in their power management is largely proprietary, even if you understand some part of the engineering of batteries.
 
Because the overall size of the battery plays a role in whether or not it can supply the proper voltage under certain conditions. The iPad battery does not have the same constraints as the smaller iPhone batteries.
I think it has more to do with the iPad batteries being multi-cell than simply being larger. Drawing power from multiple cells is easier on each individual cell IIRC. I don’t remember what the max power draw is for the A11 but the A12 can hit over 7W. That is a lot of power to sustain. Especially when it needs to ramp up quickly.
 
I think it has more to do with the iPad batteries being multi-cell than simply being larger. Drawing power from multiple cells is easier on each individual cell IIRC. I don’t remember what the max power draw is for the A11 but the A12 can hit over 7W. That is a lot of power to sustain. Especially when it needs to ramp up quickly.

The iPhone X battery is also multiple cells and is now on this program.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.