U.S. Government Investigating Apple's Power Management Features That Slow Older iPhones

[skinned66]

This is why Apple will win all the cases claiming planned obsolescence. Nobody can prove this was done with malicious intent to force people to upgrade. For that you’d need to know what percentage of devices are getting throttled AND if the owner of that device bought a new iPhone only for that specific reason (they didn’t upgrade to get the newest features, better cameras, wireless charging, FaceID or because their carrier had a promotion).

You’d also have to show that the majority of devices are affected. Planned obsolescence requires this.

Further, Apple is doing $29 battery replacements. This restores full performance and is the exact opposite of planned obsolescence as it extends the life of devices for another couple years.

Yeah, I'm not holding my breath on any of that either.

I don't think the $29 battery replacements absolve Apple of any past wrongs; it's an atonement - and a temporary one at that. It does nothing for a lot of people who have upgraded.

Of course that brings us back to intent. Nobody can prove it at the moment, and I believe it's unlikely to be proven. The most proof of guilt we have is the $29 battery replacement which is no proof at all.

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

Because Steve Jobs laid down such a good legacy that anyone would have been able to keep growing the profits, and the recent success hapened despite Tim Cook's horrendous management style. He has the classic corporation manager attitude that has lead so many creative departments to destruction.

And yet, if you look at Apple, they've actually accelerated AFTER Jobs death. It's clear Cook is the one responsible for that hockey stick curve. Sorry bud, you're wrong in your assumptions.

 

[jarman92]

None that I'm aware of. Of course, you're missing the point. Whether that's deliberate is something I'm unable to determine. I would explain it to you, but you're ostensibly capable of going back through the posts yourself.

I’m not missing any point. You said “terms of use sorta take a back seat to the law,” which implies there is some law that was broken here; I’m asking what law you’re referring to. I guess logical self-consistency takes a back seat to your condescension.

 

[scrapesleon]

waste of time

 

[jarman92]

CPU's are hardware as well. Lets say Apple sells you a device with 3 gigs of ram, then uses software to disable 2 gigs..does that make it a better comparison for you. I'm willing to bet you wouldn't be a happy camper either.

If I wanted to buy a phone with the performance of a 5S I could have saved several hundred dollars and just bought a 5S.

But again, that’s not what happened. Apple didn’t disable part of the CPU. They added software to dynamically throttle the CPU when the battery is low/degraded/old to prevent unexpected shutdowns. When the CPU has enough power it runs as normal, and when the battery is replaced everything works like new.

 

[duervo]

But Tim Cook said it was the users’ fault for not reading the release notes

This is what the user saw when their device detected that the 10.2.1 update was available for download:

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/gordonkelly/files/2017/01/iOS-10.2.1.jpg

Note: There is no mention of the changes related to unexpected device shutdowns due to battery issues. Not even in the referenced URL, in that notification, that referred the user to the list of security fixes that were included in iOS 10.2.1.

It should come as no surprise that the US government is now looking into the matter with regards to how Apple disclosed the changes to their customers. “Clarifying” the release notes after initial release, which is at best what has happened here, may not be sufficient, and Apple could end up getting in trouble here. Of course it could also be found that doing a clarification after-the-fact is sufficient and nothing will happen, but I doubt it, because if that were the case then there probably wouldn’t be any investigation to begin with.

 

[bmark]

What law did Apple break?
[doublepost=1517344630][/doublepost]
What law did they break? Apple doesn’t guarantee specific hardware performance.

France is investigating Apple for what they consider fraud. Nothing will happen in the US except the class action suits will move forward. Throttling is a despicable move where the likes of Samsung would pull a maneuver like this. Apparently Apple has sunken to their level with this debacle.

 

[Ladybug]

But again, that’s not what happened. Apple didn’t disable part of the CPU. They added software to dynamically throttle the CPU when the battery is low/degraded/old to prevent unexpected shutdowns. When the CPU has enough power it runs as normal, and when the battery is replaced everything works like new.

Its apparent we disagree on what is acceptable here and what's not. You might be ok with what Apple did but many of us are not.

Apple started this by saying it was only a small percentage of 6 and 6S devices that were affected. I checked my serial numbers on their site and they excluded my 6S, then they applied an update to all iPhones whether we had issues or not. I'm not buying this story no matter how they try to spin it. If only a small amount of devices were affected there is no good reason to apply it to everyone's phones.

I am happy this is being investigated.

 

[nebo1ss]

This has gotten beyond absurd.

Apple can do whatever they want with managing CPU and battery performance on any device at any time. It is beyond insane to suggest that anyone outside of Apple has any right to any particular level of CPU performance at any given time.

Tim Cook has embarrassed Apple by admitting wrong where none existed and has opened the company to undue scrutiny.

You have a law degree and experience practicing law to back up that statement.

 

[jarman92]

Its apparent we disagree on what is acceptable here and what's not. You might be ok with what Apple did but many of us are not.

Apple started this by saying it was only a small percentage of 6 and 6S devices that were affected. I checked my serial numbers on their site and they excluded my 6S, then they applied an update to all iPhones whether we had issues or not. I'm not buying this story no matter how they try to spin it. If only a small amount of devices were affected there is no good reason to apply it to everyone's phones.

I am happy this is being investigated.

I believe the explanation was that unexpected shutdowns were occurring on a small number of devices, they looked into it, and realized the issue was the CPU drawing too much power from degraded batteries. They then issued the update to ensure the problem didn't spread.
But regardless, I think most people agree Apple's communication was quite poor. What makes absolutely no sense in any context is the idea that Apple did this intentionally, and accusations on this forum of illegality are similarly baseless.

 

[UsernameAlreadyInUse]

I've heard of brand loyalty, but this is just absurd. Apple has been toggling your phone's performance for years while making you believe your phone is nearing the end of its life! They never included a disclosure when users update their iOS, not because they simply forgot, but because they did not want to!

It is absolutely imperative that Apple be investigated on this issue. This is a precedent-setting case that will significantly influence the way businesses interact with consumers for years, even decades, to come. The fact that the investigation is concerning a company as big as Apple makes it just as important to follow through. To prove that no corporation is too big to fail.

 

[Act3]

Probably less than 0.001% of owners will experience shutdowns. Shutdowns just an excuse to justify throttling and pushing a hardware upgrade. Oh, also get to avoid a battery recall. How nice. Follow the $$$ trail and it’s crystal clear.

well they could likewise introduce code to cause the phone to shutoff on purpose when battery gets to certain health if the throttle toggle is turned off to "prove" that they actually were doing the consumer a favor with the throttling

Hard to trust them now

 

[CarlJ]

The appropriate reaction lies between those two extremes.

Best answer by far. Apple made the best decision they could, given the hardware they have in the field (they've painted themselves into a bit of a corner by continually going for thinner over things like battery capacity), but they screwed up big time by not being more upfront about the situation.

 

[bighype]

Tim Cook is slowly but surely destroying Apple.

 

[deanthedev]

All of the iPhone 6/6s will be affected with current iOS version. Eventually the phone will be throttled if the battery isn't replaced at some interval unknown to the user.

Yes. Eventually after years and years all iPhones will be affected. That doesn’t mean there’s a case here. Planned obsolescence requires specifics, including a time frame. You can’t claim they’ll all fail eventually as a basis for a planned obsolescence case.

 

[bmark]

Probably less than 0.001% of owners will experience shutdowns. Shutdowns just an excuse to justify throttling and pushing a hardware upgrade. Oh, also get to avoid a battery recall. How nice. Follow the $$$ trail and it’s crystal clear.

Exactly, it's all about their super upgrade cycles which are diminishing because they screwed up making a notched iPhone.

 

[Brandhouse]

So you're claiming Apple/Google/Samsung/etc. are barred by law from "altering" devices after sale with software updates that users must download and install themselves? Guess we better shut down Silicon Valley now then.

No, according to jarman92, users must write their own code for any future updates once the device they've bought is taken from outside of the store it was bought.

 

[deanthedev]

Yeah, I'm not holding my breath on any of that either.

I don't think the $29 battery replacements absolve Apple of any past wrongs; it's an atonement - and a temporary one at that. It does nothing for a lot of people who have upgraded.

Of course that brings us back to intent. Nobody can prove it at the moment, and I believe it's unlikely to be proven. The most proof of guilt we have is the $29 battery replacement which is no proof at all.

How do you know anyone upgraded because of the battery?

Before this people were claiming Apple intentionally slowed devices with iOS 11 to force an upgrade.

So which is it?

 

[sterlingindigo]

Listen, power management is a bunch of BS and I'm sick of hearing about the smoke screen that is power management! I now have a new iPhone 6 and it is still slow to efn bejezuz. Same as when my iPhone 6 battery was replaced by Apple sloooooooooooow af. I hope Apple gets their asps handed to them and good. Where's my user experience when iPhone 6 was new with the original software? I tell you where it went, it went with the bloat anchor updates. Where's my resale value? Look, there it is, in the gd toilet! Rip off! $700 for a year for an iPhone? I'm not stupid enough to pay $1000 a year for the new one. Tell me where to mail this piece of crap for a complete refund!

 

[skinned66]

How do you know anyone upgraded because of the battery?

Before this people were claiming Apple intentionally slowed devices with iOS 11 to force an upgrade.

So which is it?

Based on millions of units sold, all you need are rudimentary math skills. But you can go ahead and find plenty of your own anecdotes if that's what you're looking for.

Am I speaking for "people" now? Got a chip on your shoulder? If so, take it up with someone who actually cares how you feel about it, because I don't anymore. And we were getting along just fine...

 

[BWhaler]

This is silly.

Yes, Apple is screwing up on a lot of fronts right now. Software, Siri, crappy laptops I’m looking sat you. And iTunes, don’t even think of ducking out of this list. And yes, Apple is making the Sony mistake and letting media strategy threaten the cash cows.

But what Apple is not is smarmy. I am confident this was an engineering decision, one that should have been communicated better.

Apple is still Apple at the ethics level. Even if it’s a shadow of its former self on the product front.

 

[now i see it]

7.2 YOU EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, USE OF THE iOS SOFTWARE AND ANY SERVICES PERFORMED BY OR ACCESSED THROUGH THE iOS SOFTWARE IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK AND THAT THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO SATISFACTORY QUALITY, PERFORMANCE, ACCURACY AND EFFORT IS WITH YOU.

Unfortunately Apple can cripple its devices any way it sees fit and we as a user must agree to it. The DOJ investigation is focusing on whether Apple misled its investors. That's a different narrative entirely.

 

[Mirice99]

It's a fact that Apple lied and tried to hide crippling the IPhone while falsely advertising speeds and performance levels they knew couldn't be achieved or sustained.

Oh and before some apple cultists try to defend Apple, a throttled phone or a phone that randomly shuts down with a battery apple says is in working order is crippled.

 

[TokMok3]

Glad the US gov is looking into this now.

I was wondering where they had been.

Come on dude... where else could they be.

 

[Act3]

7.2 YOU EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, USE OF THE iOS SOFTWARE AND ANY SERVICES PERFORMED BY OR ACCESSED THROUGH THE iOS SOFTWARE IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK AND THAT THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO SATISFACTORY QUALITY, PERFORMANCE, ACCURACY AND EFFORT IS WITH YOU.

Unfortunately Apple can cripple its devices any way it sees fit and we as a user must agree to it. The DOJ investigation is focusing on whether Apple misled its investors. That's a different narrative entirely.

Close but not quite.

I do find it funny that a company as rich as Apple has to try and put the entire risk on the end user and give them no means to revert to earlier software.

"THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO SATISFACTORY QUALITY, PERFORMANCE, ACCURACY AND EFFORT IS WITH YOU."