Apple: But we know what's best for you. By the way, our records show you haven't had your morning Kool-Aid yet. Here you go *slides cup across table*
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.
U.S. Government Official Questions Apple Over iPhone Battery Slowdowns
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple: But we know what's best for you. By the way, our records show you haven't had your morning Kool-Aid yet. Here you go *slides cup across table*
There’s nothing substantially wrong, as you claim. You would need data on the total number of devices affected vs total devices in use in order to make such a claim.
You don’t, which is why your post is rubbish.
Then why did Apple introduce the power management "feature"? I doubt they'd even recognize this with a software fix if there wasn't a substantial issue. Basically, Apple has the numbers, and deemed that they needed a fix, that alone should be enough to prove something is wrong.
Your defense is that an individual user should have the same access to the data Apple has access to, which is not possible. You can't ask an impossible question then say nothing is wrong because we can't provide data we don't have access to.
Honestly it would have been really easy to provide a little banner in the Settings app that had a yellow warning icon next to the battery option and when tapped it explained that the phones performance was being restricted due to the Battery being degraded.
This is very similar to the "Service Battery" warning that you receive on a Mac when it goes below a certain health rating. We need to stop treating consumers like dumb-asses.
Well, unless it's just a lot of posturing, all the critics here want the option. So allow them to disable it. If the phone reboots, powers off, crashes, etc it's their fault then. After 10 years of having nothing to pin "planned obsolescence" on some feel they've found the smoking gun. So let them disable it and determine for themselves whether this is a valuable option.
How is it a "lie" when Apple itself bothered to create a shifty software workaround meant to address that issue alone?
You're trying a bit too hard to disprove what's already public knowledge.
Apple made a change to account for defective batteries, not to progressively slow down all phones based on device/battery age.
You’re trying to hard to fabricate an issue where there isn’t one.
Never had a phone or any electronic device really, besides iPhone just shut down on me. My other phones would simply drop to 1% quicker which at least gives me an indication on when i need to charge it. If a phone just shuts off at like 20% or 30% something is clearly wrong elsewhere.
My crappy old Sony Vaio from like 2008 cant hold a charge for more than 10 minutes but it shows „10 minutes remaining / percentage dropps rapidly“ at least
Last edited:
Sorry, I never once claimed a single user should have access to the same data Apple does. Don’t make things up you think I said or imply I said.
I said you can’t make broad sweeping conclusions WITHOUT any data. Like claiming it’s a widespread issue or that it affects millions of users (which is what numerous people on MR are doing).
What I'm saying is the data you're asking for is data no one but Apple would have ... how is any individual user on this forum supposed to have access to "percentage of devices are affected" or "total number of devices affected vs total devices in use" which is what you said in your posts. I'd imagine only Apple has access to that kind of information.
Apple has the data you're looking for ... and for them to issue a software fix, that data has to be substantial enough to require a fix. While that might not make it millions of users, it's above whatever threshold Apple deems necessary for a fix to be implemented.
Wrong. The issue is that Apple knowingly fitted their phones with cheap small batteries, knew about the issue (shutdowns) since the 6 generation, and instead of using better battery tech or being transparent they mitigated it by quietly slipping a software "fix". And to those affected, in-store battery diagnostics ran fine, and the Apple Genius' genius advice to the phantom slowdowns has been "meh, buy a new one" at best.
Point is, iPhones shouldn't need such a workaround so early in their lifespan, and Apple should have been upfront.
Anyway, let's not repeat ourselves again.
>>For the Christmas quarter last year, Apple sold a record 74.5 million iPhone 6 models. Ives and Munster are looking to see if Apple offers guidance in the call that would top 75 million for iPhone 6S. -- Oct 26, 2015 https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/10/26/how-many-iphones-did-apple-sell/74633802/
That's just one quarter for the iPhone 6. For a 3+ year old phone, you would have to assume at least 1 percent of users have a battery that falls below the threshold to be throttled, and is therefore subject to this problem. If you assume 100 million iphone 6 (way low number), 1% affected (way low number), that means 1 million users affected. I'll assume the same way low numbers for the iPhone 6S, over two years old and also subject to being throttled. Therefore, 1 million + 1 million = two million, which means, yes "it affects millions of users."
The real likelihood is that the total numbers across 6, 6S, 7, and the plusses, looking at total sales, and a sliding percentage impacted based on phone age, the real totals are probably more in the range of well over 20-50 million users being affected. But like others have said, we don't have the data, only Apple does.
That doesn’t seem to stop a large number of posters claiming this is a widespread issue.
[doublepost=1515607896][/doublepost]
Where’s your data to show Apple fitted iPhones with “cheap small batteries”?
Are you only capable of telling lies to try and prove a point?
No repeating going on here. You’ve gone from telling one lie (iPhones can’t last a year without being affected) right into another lie (Apple is using cheap batteries). All without one shred of evidence/data to back your claims.
They are lucky if they are not made to compensate people who actually *bought a new $800 phone* due to the slowness. After all, the in-store geniuses were not stating that a battery replacement would fix the slowness, like they should have been.
Yes, that’s what they should have done. Apple’s new GC just keeps fumbling the ball when it comes to strategizing the company responses to these “trust” issues.
Obviously you haven't been paying attention.
Apple stated that they will replace ANY battery for $29 in ANY iPhone 6, 6s or 7 (I think), REGARDLESS OF TEST RESULTS.
Do try to keep up.
Well then you obviously didnt follow stories of people on this board, claiming that apple didnt want to change their batteries because of over 80% capacity.
iPhone X 64 GB: $999
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 64 GB: $949
Yeah, Apple's WAAAAY out of line, price-wise.
I for one will be watching with raised pitchfork and hope the govt sticks it to them. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve always been enamored with Apple products but it hasn’t colored my vision so much that I can’t call a spade a spade when I see it. And the secret throttling and low quality batteries that last only a year is a big one. The worst part is being told you need to upgrade to fix the problem. Until just before the next launch. It’s obvious to me and the apologists make me laugh and cringe at the same time. Better quit doing this Apple or you can suck it. New Samsung’s are just around the corner and I’m due for an upgrade. Yeah, I’ve switched before around 4 when they didn’t launch larger screens soon enough and I voted with my wallet but I came back. Now it’s a trust issue. I wish they straighten up but if not soon, I’m outy
That was before they changed their policy, which they did after about 2 days.
Do try to keep up.
Both are correct. In the past, they wouldn't change the faulty batteries because of passed test results (happened to me personally with my 6 about 5-6 months ago), even though the phone was having the shutdowns before the infamous iOS update, and got slower after the update.
Now with all the publicity, they have said they will change the battery regardless, and that just happened with my brother this weekend. They had a 6S and 7, both passed the tests, but were able to get new batteries for $29.
And nothing attached to the FM Antenna inputs, HAHA, Yourself!
[doublepost=1515610428][/doublepost]
And yet they consistently whip all over the Snapdragon and Exynos (sp?) SoCs in Benchmarks.
[doublepost=1515610568][/doublepost]
No.
What is REALLY means is that, even at $79, Apple is LOSING MONEY on battery replacements.
There is NO other RATIONAL explanation.
[doublepost=1515610706][/doublepost]
Would you take random CPU execution and possible memory corruption, too?
Because that's EXACTLY what you would be risking.
[doublepost=1515611005][/doublepost]
As does my over 38-month old iPhone 6.
It actually EXCEEDS the average of GeekBench 4 scores for that model in the CPU tests, and is only down by about 100 pts. (they say anything below 500 pts down should be ignored), plus the battery's health shows 93%.
For example me. Occasional (and, based on the current battery level, perfectly predictable!) shutdowns are much better than a phone that is always (even when on external power) sluggish.