UK Legal Action Seeks Damages for 25 Million iPhone Users Over 'Throttling' Devices With Degraded Batteries

[ponzicoinbro]

What a joke of a lawsuit. With newer iOS and Apple's support for older devices, they introduced basically what computers have been doing for years. Apple's other options were not to support older devices and forcing people to buy newer ones or simply shutting their phones to make the UX even worse.

I mean the only solution is too disable all the transparency effects and animations when a battery and capacitors become old but who the hell wants that.

Most people are happy getting a new computer or phone after a few years.

Old batteries are not the only problem. Who wants an old CPU or wireless chip that after 5-6 years has been exploited by hackers and can’t be patched?

People have to move forward to new devices and new operating systems. If they want to collect some vintage items that’s fine but they shouldn’t expect to be able to use them forever with amazing speed and security.

That’s like me wishing I could install Ventura on a 2006 MacBook and demanding it should work perfectly.

 

[jlc1978]

Had Apple simply not made the software update available to older phones people would whine how Apple wasn’t giving them the update even if their phones could run them with reduced performance. Apple should have done a better job of explaining the we upgrade but punishing them for supporting older phones is ludicrous.

 

[koruki]

self righteous w@nkers these lawyers are

 

[BootsWalking]

Had Apple simply not made the software update available to older phones people would whine how Apple wasn’t giving them the update even if their phones could run them with reduced performance. Apple should have done a better job of explaining the we upgrade but punishing them for supporting older phones is ludicrous.

"Old phones?" The shutdown problem on the iPhone 6 became widespread within two years after the phone was released.

 

[cupcakes2000]

That’s like me wishing I could install Ventura on a 2006 MacBook and demanding it should work perfectly.

there are plenty of threads around here recently which allude to people wanting something exactly like that, and being terribly upset with Apple on a personal level, that they’re not given what they’re entitled too.

 

[simnew]

This will undoubtedly fail - which would you rather have. An old phone that you know is several years old and you know from past experience is only really supported for 5 years and the manufacturer who keep the software updated many times per year, decides its better to throttle the phone under certain operations to prevent a restart.... Hmmm which would I prefer ?

Of course ideally, the battery life would be better and apple would fit bigger batteries and climate change shouldn't happen, but hey - wake up. The world isn't like that and as a UK person I would be surprised if this went anywhere

 

[Muttznuttz]

I'm sure I had my 6S battery replaced, courtesy of Apple at the time. Maybe a recall?
Either way, never had a problem with that phone. I used it for years.

 

[wanha]

This whole saga was not about what Apple did, but that Apple did not proactively communicate this with customers and explain why it was being done (so phones wouldn't inadvertently turn off under heavy load).

One company's PR blunder is one lawyer's path to riches. Such is the world we live in.

 

[darkpaw]

So the guy who's initiated this is going to get, what, £30 himself? Was it really worth it?

 

[Schizoid]

Great, I’ll spend my 2 quid on a litre of unleaded!

 

[sofila]

Every single Apple fan forgetting Apple denied paid battery replacement requests for this model before, "not eligible according to our standards"

 

[Mitochris]

I do not understand these cases. I had a phone that constantly died in the cold weather, and it was super annoying. it Was clearly due to an old battery, so their solution to throttle the iPhone to allow longer usage for older phones was a good solution. Yes, they could have made it a feature, and be open about it, but people claiming that they were damaged by 5is is ridiculous. For a consumer to be greedy and thinking that they need a new phone instead is just silly.

 

[Wildkraut]

Very good UK, make these B's pay for fooling your citizens!
👍💪🇬🇧

 

[Wildkraut]

Apple told The Guardian: "We have never, and would never, do anything to … degrade the user experience to drive customer upgrades. 🤣

Cough, Cough, Stage Manager, Spit, Slime, Cough... Sorry, I'm still coughing from the corona infection i had last week...

 

[XXPP]

Those claims are absurd. Apple fixed older phones.

 

[cupcakes2000]

Every single Apple fan forgetting Apple denied paid battery replacement requests for this model before, "not eligible according to our standards"

“Apple fan”? These forums are deteriorating rapidly. Can it just not be someone who agrees or disagrees without it needing to be labelled a fan or a hater? Ffs.

 

[ksec]

OK,

How about pulling out of UK?

 

[mikebenton]

Apple, being one of the largest companies in the world, is always being sued for what appears to be any reason that can be thought of. At the end of the day, the only folks who benefit are the attorneys (from both sides). Governments, people, corporations (patent trolls)....they all want a piece of the pie.

If this was about a phone that caught fire in your pocket and caused physical harm...fine. But no, this is about the fact that my app took .4 seconds to open when I clicked on it versus .2 seconds. So what is going to resolve this? Let's sue Apple for lots of money so attorneys get paid. This is dumb.

 

[Saturnine]

I don't know why this is so polarising.

The facts as presented are clear. Apple slowed down phones with older batteries. Their reasoning for doing so was because phones with degraded batteries could no longer provide peak voltage. Without peak voltage, the phone would shut down if the processor attempted to draw too much power.

To me, that seems quite reasonable. Having a phone run more slowly is preferable to having one that shut down.

What should be investigated is whether phones were slowed down more than necessary in order to encourage users to purchase new phones. And were the measures Apple took to replace older batteries fair and reasonable in terms of cost and difficulty. If Apple is found to be at fault in either of these things, then they probably should provide some form of compensation.

If, however, there is no investigation into how much the phones were slowed and the complainants are basing their case solely on the fact that phones were purposely thottled, then I'm not sure Apple should be found to have done anything wrong. In fact, allowing phones to crash or shut down probably would have encouraged more users to upgrade sooner. In that sense, it seems to have been quite a generous decision by Apple.

 

[bluecoast]

Apple could’ve avoided all of these lawsuits if they had simply been honest about it.

I can’t help thinking though that they weren’t honest.

My feeling is that they felt that it was one of those ‘happy solutions’ where crashes could be prevented but consumers would also feel that it was time to upgrade.

And then to make it even worse, in the update that introduced battery health, they showed how it was very easy for them to explain what was going on and to give consumers the choice to turn the throttling on or off.

And that’s the problem essentially.

 

[sofila]

“Apple fan”? These forums are deteriorating rapidly. Can it just not be someone who agrees or disagrees without it needing to be labelled a fan or a hater? Ffs.

I agree with you, these forums are deteriorating. Not so rapidly, at least I didn't notice this "speed" in 16 years.
About labels for who agrees or disagrees...if you haven't noticed this is happening since forever, why interrupt such a lovely habit

 

[kiranmk2]

I don't know why this is so polarising.

The facts as presented are clear. Apple slowed down phones with older batteries. Their reasoning for doing so was because phones with degraded batteries could no longer provide peak voltage. Without peak voltage, the phone would shut down if the processor attempted to draw too much power.

To me, that seems quite reasonable. Having a phone run more slowly is preferable to having one that shut down.

What should be investigated is whether phones were slowed down more than necessary in order to encourage users to purchase new phones. And were the measures Apple took to replace older batteries fair and reasonable in terms of cost and difficulty. If Apple is found to be at fault in either of these things, then they probably should provide some form of compensation.

If, however, there is no investigation into how much the phones were slowed and the complainants are basing their case solely on the fact that phones were purposely thottled, then I'm not sure Apple should be found to have done anything wrong. In fact, allowing phones to crash or shut down probably would have encouraged more users to upgrade sooner. In that sense, it seems to have been quite a generous decision by Apple.

I think you are missing the point. It's not that Apple throttled the phones to prevent shutdowns as batteries aged; it's that they didn't tell anyone that's what they were doing. Think of people whose phone seemed to get noticably slower just a couple of years after they bought it. They could well have paid £700 for a new phone thinking that the phone just wasn't up to running the latest iOS version. If Apple had told people the phone throttles because of the aging battery, that person would have had the choice to replace their battery for 10% the cost of a new phone and regain a sizable chunk of performance. It would then be up to individuals to chose how to proceed: a new battery or a new phone.

At the end of the day, I'm all for personal choice - provided the consumer has all the information about the choices, which Apple was witholding.

 

[polyphenol]

Great, I’ll spend my 2 quid on a litre of unleaded!

Where's that cheap fuel?

 

[sofila]

And were the measures Apple took to replace older batteries fair and reasonable in terms of cost and difficulty.

This is / has been / was polarising.
Before the news spread far and wide, Apple did not allow you to replace the battery, even for a fee. And many, unsuspecting, have bought a new phone.
To tell the truth, this practice continued even after, at least until the first lawsuit became public

 

[Christoffee]

What a joke of a lawsuit. With newer iOS and Apple's support for older devices, they introduced basically what computers have been doing for years. Apple's other options were not to support older devices and forcing people to buy newer ones or simply shutting their phones to make the UX even worse.

I don’t think this is the whole story.

I had a degraded 6S battery and throttled performance. I went to an Apple shop and their diagnosis showed the battery was absolutely fine and suggested a new phone. You could see the battery percentage going down minute by minute, but they refused to put a new battery in. Even if I paid, a new battery was not on offer. So I got it replaced at a local repair shop and I got years more out of my phone.

That’s in contrast to the Apple of today. I rocked up with an old SE for a new battery and even though battery health was 85% it was a no-questions-asked replacement.

They were doing something wrong.