agree hugely with the sibling reply, by coldtea. Also bear in mind that app developers are also reactive to Apple's choices. (If they need to optimize their s

agree hugely with the sibling reply, by coldtea. Also bear in mind that app developers are also reactive to Apple's choices. (If they need to optimize their software, they will do so. On the other hand, if they can skip optimizing by just telling users to turn on a setting, many will do just that.) I'd rather Apple make developers have to look up what an algorithm is, and spend hours - hours! - of their life turning an iterative exhaustive search into a binary search (for example), because they have to work on a slow core too, than for me to have to dig around in settings, turn on a "Force high-CPU usage" and let developers keep being lazy. This goes for Apple's developers too, and I realize their own first-party software such as the OS is too slow on the low-power core. I mentioned this above. I stand by my original comment. Bear in mind that there might be applications that use state of the art algorithms, can run, but just barely, on the high-powered cores but not on the low-power cores, and are not intermittant. I am saying that it is acceptable to have to replace battery every 24 months, or plug in the phone, if you want to keep using them. I can give you another analogy for why I don't agree with your take. Back in the day there was an "iPhone hand warmer" that drained the battery and spun the processors. These days that application would get throttled, it would not be able to warm up the phone by draining its battery. In my opinion this is correct.