3 ms·

> You seem to have gone from outright falsehoods - "They even mentioned the change in the original release notes for the iOS update" It was in the note as far

> You seem to have gone from outright falsehoods - "They even mentioned the change in the original release notes for the iOS update" It was in the note as far as I'm aware. You're saying that as if I'm trying to spread misinformation. I don't appreciate that at all. It's very rude. > mischaracterisation "Replacing the battery would have fixed the issue... It's not like they were holding it back." That's not a mischaracterization. You absolutely could have gotten your battery replaced. There were even tons of 3rd party services that were offering battery replacement along with screen replacement. It's not like it was some sort of dark secret or as if they banned you from replacing your battery. > and now you've moved on to "what about the other guys!?" deflection. I think people should be angry that other manufacturers weren't doing anything to extend the life of their batteries. I see that as worse than using techniques to manage battery life (which the operating system is doing at all times by the way - same with your GPU).

mthoms 7y ago
It's a mischaracterization because as you've been informed, there was no known connection between CPU speed and battery health. Even among Apple employees. So while your statement is technically true, it's irrelevant and misleading. Of course battery replacements have always been available! How does that change anything at all? You aren't addressing the central accusation (which is the secrecy). You aren't bringing anything new or interesting to the discussion. Sorry, if I've been rude. But you've been corrected a couple times without acknowledging it, and continue being slippery by arguing a position without addressing the core accusation. I wouldn't say that's rude but it's frustratingly bad etiquette. >I think people should be angry that other manufacturers weren't doing anything to extend the life of their batteries. I see that as worse than using techniques to manage battery life Sure. I've never owned another smartphone and can't comment on how those customers feel. You're probably right. At any rate it's not relevant to how Apple treated its own customers is it? Try to reply while addressing the central accusation. That the throttling itself is a perfectly valid solution but it was wrong to not inform consumers it was happening. That it was wrong to have customers with $700 phones and $100 AppleCare be told by Apple Genius's that they were imaging the slowdown and nothing could be done... except buy a new phone. Now, I'm not 100% convinced Apple had nefarious intentions in withholding the info from staff and customers. But, neither you, nor I, will ever know that. All we have to go on, is the facts of what happened and how people were treated. It seems like a black and white, open and shut case to anyone objective. People were lied to, plain and simple. How can you defend that?

mthoms 7y ago

It's a mischaracterization because as you've been informed, there was no known connection between CPU speed and battery health. Even among Apple employees. So while your statement is technically true, it's irrelevant and misleading. Of course battery replacements have always been available! How does that change anything at all? You aren't addressing the central accusation (which is the secrecy). You aren't bringing anything new or interesting to the discussion. Sorry, if I've been rude. But you've been corrected a couple times without acknowledging it, and continue being slippery by arguing a position without addressing the core accusation. I wouldn't say that's rude but it's frustratingly bad etiquette. >I think people should be angry that other manufacturers weren't doing anything to extend the life of their batteries. I see that as worse than using techniques to manage battery life Sure. I've never owned another smartphone and can't comment on how those customers feel. You're probably right. At any rate it's not relevant to how Apple treated its own customers is it? Try to reply while addressing the central accusation. That the throttling itself is a perfectly valid solution but it was wrong to not inform consumers it was happening. That it was wrong to have customers with $700 phones and $100 AppleCare be told by Apple Genius's that they were imaging the slowdown and nothing could be done... except buy a new phone. Now, I'm not 100% convinced Apple had nefarious intentions in withholding the info from staff and customers. But, neither you, nor I, will ever know that. All we have to go on, is the facts of what happened and how people were treated. It seems like a black and white, open and shut case to anyone objective. People were lied to, plain and simple. How can you defend that?