44 ms·

Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

306 points by BostonFern 6y ago

iJohnDoe 6y ago
As usual, it doesn’t seem like the end consumer benefits from these settlements. I would like to see one time where the end user receives a free iPhone if their model was included in the lawsuit.
- post_break 6y ago
  Free iPhone? You're lucky to get a free battery out of Apple after they got caught.
  - iJohnDoe 6y ago
    Agreed. That’s my point. It says people received $25. This settlement amount goes to lawyers and the states.
    - CamelCaseName 6y ago
      There has to be some incentive to take up these cases. I imagine the success rate and frequency of prevailing against Apple in court is quite low.
  - jamesgeck0 6y ago
    The batteries weren't free, just $29 instead of $79.
- RKearney 6y ago
  You're free to opt-out of the class action and use your own funds to launch a legal case against Apple and ask for however much you want.
ajsharp 6y ago
Ok, how do I um...get that money??
- pkaye 6y ago
  > As part of Wednesday's settlement, $113 million will be distributed among the states, including California, Tennessee and Pennsylvania. The funds will cover attorneys' fees and will be used to fund future consumer protection investigators. You will get nothing by the looks of it.
  - system2 6y ago
    Sweet justice. We get scammed, corporate pays a fine, lawyers get rich.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - csharptwdec19 6y ago
      Which honestly is pretty sad/absurd. Honestly, a voucher for 1 free battery replacement usable at any-time for every class member would have been a fair-enough settlement IMO. - Would mitigate damages to the class - Relatively low cost to Apple, but enough to make a dent and deter future shenanigans. Considering a no-name battery can be had for 6$, I will assume that Apple's cost for a genuine one is that number. (could be lower, could be a little higher but doubt it.)
  - AmericanChopper 6y ago
    Has any consumer ever been adequately compensated by a class action suit?
    - pkaye 6y ago
      The Google Nexus 6 has some fatal flaw and went into a bootloop after a year of use. As part of the class action settlement, I got most of the purchase price back. I liked that phone a lot though...
kahrl 6y ago
0.00565% of Apple's $2T market cap.
- loeg 6y ago
  Does that seem inappropriately high or low for "batterygate?"
  - jimnotgym 6y ago
    Well if what the prosecutors say is true I would say it was low. They alleged that Apple deliberately deceived consumers. We will never know if that is true because Apple apparently don't think it is worth clearing their name
  - system2 6y ago
    Knowing they scammed millions of people, it is extremely low.
Karunamon 6y ago
Worth mentioning here is that this wasn't just about the "sneaky" fix for battery degradation, it was about doing this without notice, and having internal tooling that would deny a replacement (even at full retail price) if the battery was above an arbitrary health threshold (but still low enough to cause throttling). Before Apple changed their tune, if you read about this, and went into an Apple store for a replacement, they absolutely would not give you one, even if you paid full retail for it. This left people in a no-win situation. The only way you could get a working device was to have a third party replacement done (and kill your warranty) or shell out for a new phone.
- bgirard 6y ago
  > it was about doing this without notice, and having internal tooling that would deny a replacement (even at full retail price) if the battery was above an arbitrary health threshold (but still low enough to cause throttling). Do you have a source for that? This would change my opinion on this story. Reminds me of hot coffee where it sounded a bit ridiculous until you got the full story.
  - filoleg 6y ago
    They are correct in a sense that it was doing it "without notice". But they had a good reason to do the slowdowns, no malice needed, their one and only big mistake here was doing it without a notice. The reason they did it was to prevent battery degradation and bad battery life by throttling the CPU. Except back then, iPhone CPUs weren't overperforming monsters they are today, so the slowdown was fairly noticeable. And when done without a notice or reason, you get a perfect publicity shitstorm. In fact, this feature actually still exists for iPhones, except it now officially exists in settings and can be disabled. It throws a notification on yours screen and auto-activates if your battery degrades below certain level, but it can be disabled (so you can choose whether to prioritize performance or preventing battery from further degradation) by a simple click in a settings menu. And it also explains exactly and in very simple language what this feature does. It isn't hidden behind a million menus either, it is right there in settings => battery => battery health. EDIT: to clarify, Apple throttling was not only done to prevent it from holding less charge due to battery degradation. Battery degradation to a certain level also led to iPhones rebooting randomly. And apparently it was not that rare of an issue, because the reason I posted this edit in the first place was due to seeing more than a few comments in this thread mentioning that it had happened to them.
ptudan 6y ago
As of two years ago, apple had sold 2.2 BILLION iphones. The cost of this scam per phone was $.05.
- gpm 6y ago
  This isn't the only cost. There was also another $500 million us settlement, a $27 million dollar fine from France, and probably others, and probably more outstanding liability.
  - xchip 6y ago
    fines should be measured in $ per user.
    - gpm 6y ago
      I agree... but I don't care enough to figure out how many users are actually covered under each of those fines (under the relevant jurisdiction and having bought the relevant product).
    - Karunamon 6y ago
      Or per-device at least. Or barring that, a flat percentage of profits.
  - itsthetruth 6y ago
    Damn bro. That's like $0.25/phone! Sending Tim Cook my thoughts and prayers.
CapriciousCptl 6y ago
So, I'm somehow developing a pro-Apple bias these days. This whole batterygate to me is kind of based on conjecture-- that Apple slowed old phones with the intention to sell more new ones. If there's any supporting evidence, or anything that's come up in discovery that Apple acted in bad faith, I'd possibly change my (admittedly biased) mind. But really, slowing the phones down to extend battery life is a reasonable tradeoff and there's just not a preponderance of evidence suggesting Apple acted in its own interests and hurt existing users. The main problem is this "feature" wasn't out in the open, but again, it just doesn't seem that bad to me.
- ponker 6y ago
  When there's a rich kid in town, everyone will turn him upside down to see what change falls out of his pockets. Apple is where Apple is because it doesn't put all of its features "out in the open." I don't want 500 config settings for my phone and a lot of other's don't either. If you want to run a webserver on your phone that's cool, there are products for you, but some people want the idiotproof solution.
- xahrepap 6y ago
  I own an iPhone because I got sick of these kinds of issues I was having with my Pixel phones. (would last ~1yr of perfect bliss. Then the honeymoon ends and the phone would just behave like crap). I decided to give another brand a shot. I'll tell you what will really tick me off in another year or so... If my device is, without warning, notification, ability to change, etc, purposefully nerfing itself for ANY REASON. That will make me really upset. Especially since I can't just pop the back off and toss a new battery in there. Good faith or not. It's an anti-consumer move. If my battery even pretended to be removable, you might convince me otherwise. But gluing the battery in under a glued in screen and then throttling my device based on the battery's age... Just really bothers me.
  - manfredo 6y ago
    So it'd have been better to just let people's phones crash on startup and become 100% unusable?
markdown 6y ago
Yet they're still ignoring Flexgate which affects devices made across a number of years. I paid an arm and a let for a Macbook Pro (that's what they cost in my country), only to have it turned into a paperweight by a manufacturing defect that Apple acknowledges but won't remedy except for devices made in 2016. https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-sued-over-macbook-pro-flexgate-what-you-need-to-know https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-sued-over-macbook-pro-f... https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/20/apple-faces-another-flexgate-lawsuit/ https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/20/apple-faces-another-fle... https://support.apple.com/13-inch-macbook-pro-display-backlight-service https://support.apple.com/13-inch-macbook-pro-display-backli... EDIT: Astounding to see I'm getting downvotes here. I mean, what kind of mindset must one have to see regular people getting screwed over by a multibillion dollar corporation like this, and then side with the corporation. It boggles the mind.
- zodiakzz 6y ago
  I am in the same boat with a 2017 Macbook Pro that I bought in late 2018 :( It is the most expensive thing I've ever bought in my life. Apple is asking for 65% of the original price just to replace the display.
- iamcreasy 6y ago
  I upvoted you. I have had people downvoting me as well for sharing an experience with Lenovo where they took about 100 days to repair my motherboard within warranty period. Sigh.
- rahilb 6y ago
  In my experience it's better to go to an 'Authorized Service Provider' for repair. They have an incentive to do repairs and get paid, and it's quite easy for them to get Apple to pay the repair cost. E.g. on my machine that had the Keyboard repeating issue I also received a topcase as there was some slight de-lamination. Seems your model was affected (at least nominally) by the same keyboard issue so just send it in for a repair of the keyboard and also note the other issues; they will likely be repaired for free.
j3th9n 6y ago
The big winners are the attorneys who's fees are now covered.
stevespang 6y ago
Evil Apple. No doubt attorneys will get 99% of the $113 M and users will get offered a silly coupon . . .
iabacu 6y ago
I think it's clear Apple intentionally* degrades software quality on older iphone/mac models in order to drive purchase of newer hardware. I've been considering switching away from Apple hardware, not because of hardware quality, but because of software. * By pushing software updates optimized to new hardware with obvious regressions on older models.
- thirdsun 6y ago
  > I think it's clear Apple intentionally* degrades software quality on older iphone/mac models in order to drive purchase of newer hardware. I don't think that's clear at all. > * By pushing software updates optimized to new hardware with obvious regressions on older models. New software can come with increased hardware requirements, yet customers want to benefit from new software. It's a compromise. You could simply not update if you're worried about that. > I've been considering switching away from Apple hardware, not because of hardware quality, but because of software. I'm sure software updates long after your device's release won't be a concern with the competition. You probably simply won't receive any.
  - iabacu 6y ago
    Sure, then freeze the software of older devices and only release security fixes. No revamp of look-and-feel and other random software features that only makes sense for the new models.
- mlindner 6y ago
  > I think it's clear Apple intentionally* degrades software quality on older iphone/mac models in order to drive purchase of newer hardware. Completely false. What's clear is that most posters on hacker news don't understand basic battery chemistry. Apple made a decision to help customers and got blamed for it because they didn't properly explain what they were doing. You can only please people so much.
- audunw 6y ago
  But this case shows the exact opposite. They updated phones to last longer without unexpected shut-downs. If they didn't do that update, many people who experienced these shut-downs outside of warrenty would change their old phone for a new ones. You can usually live with a slightly slower phone when the battery is low, but a phone that randomly dies on you? Not so much. To be clear, Apple still messed up, because they didn't communicate this at all. They could have also put in a slightly larger battery to begin with. But in the tech world, Apple isn't the worst in pushing people to upgrade hardware, which is illustrated by the fact that people use iPhones longer before upgrading than Android users. That's the one upside of Apples crazy App Store margins... they really don't need to push new hardware on you to make a shitload of money (while for Android that money goes to Google rather than hardware manufacturers) Apple could do better - WAY better - but I think it's a bit naive to think that this could possibly change, and is worth complaining about. The only way it would, if there was somehow significant money in spending lots of time optimizing OS updates for old devices. But most people like upgrading their phones anyway. For Apple to change, consumers must change first. I don't think there's much hope for government regulation here either. It's a problem that's too complex to regulate.
thewileyone 6y ago
A $113M fine to Apple is like slapping someone in the face with one goose feather ... ridiculous.
- disown 6y ago
  Apple's market cap is $2 Trillion. Apple settling for $113M is like someone worth $2 million settling for $113. I don't think anyone at Apple is losing any sleep over this.
ConcernedCoder 6y ago
Last update recently applied to my iphone 6 is doing it again... touchscreen lockups to the point of frustration ( can't scroll, can't type when messaging, etc... ), whereas 2 months ago it wasn't a problem... seems to me every product cycle for apple soon causes degredation of older phone's perceived GUI performance, and what a coincidence, just in time for Christmas!
intricatedetail 6y ago
Did Apple still got profit?
mthoms 6y ago
Interesting side note: Apple has completely wiped their battery-gate "apology"[0] letter from their website. It simply doesn't exist any more. If you visit that URL, you're immediately redirected (301) to a general battery information page which (surprise!) has no mention of the surrounding controversy. Make of that what you will. [0] It was only an apology in the "we're sorry you got upset" sense but it was something. Here's the URL: https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/ Here's the content that used to be at that page: https://web.archive.org/web/20171229003922/https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/ https://web.archive.org/web/20171229003922/https://www.apple... For those that need it, here's some context: https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/28/apple-apologizes-for-not-being-clearer-about-slowing-down-iphones-with-older-batteries/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/28/apple-apologizes-for-not-b...
xchip 6y ago
What is the fine amount per user? I bet is going to be $5
- pessimizer 6y ago
  I bet it's less than the profit made from people upgrading their iPhones early, or not sending them in for battery replacement while they were still under warranty.
atlgator 6y ago
Is this not still happening though? My iPhone 8+ is incredibly sluggish on the latest iOS.
- acdha 6y ago
  Look in the Battery section of Settings. The health will be displayed and there is an indicator if performance is being throttled due to battery degradation.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
rasz 6y ago
still less than what they made on "oh yeah your phone is old and slow, but totally not broken!!1. Let me upgrade you for only $499.95" bullshit up-sell
diebeforei485 6y ago
The good news is - partly as a result of this, anyone can get a genuine battery replacement by paying $79 to Apple or an AASP. If you have a phone that's an iPhone 8 or later, you can definitely skip upgrading this year and get a battery replacement instead.
mlindner 6y ago
What nonsense. A case of idiots in court rooms winning out over from not understanding physics. Apple never did anything wrong here.
itsthetruth 6y ago
Cool where's my check? Oh wait...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
maffydub 6y ago
From the BBC coverage (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54996601 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54996601): > The tech titan also agreed for the next three years to provide "truthful information" about iPhone power management across its website, software update notes and iPhone settings. Great! They must be truthful for the next 3 years... and then?
svntid 6y ago
apple became such a bad greedy actor. shame

306 points by BostonFern 6y ago

As usual, it doesn’t seem like the end consumer benefits from these settlements. I would like to see one time where the end user receives a free iPhone if their model was included in the lawsuit.

post_break 6y ago
Free iPhone? You're lucky to get a free battery out of Apple after they got caught.
- iJohnDoe 6y ago
  Agreed. That’s my point. It says people received $25. This settlement amount goes to lawyers and the states.
  - CamelCaseName 6y ago
    There has to be some incentive to take up these cases. I imagine the success rate and frequency of prevailing against Apple in court is quite low.
- jamesgeck0 6y ago
  The batteries weren't free, just $29 instead of $79.
RKearney 6y ago
You're free to opt-out of the class action and use your own funds to launch a legal case against Apple and ask for however much you want.

ajsharp 6y ago

Ok, how do I um...get that money??

pkaye 6y ago
> As part of Wednesday's settlement, $113 million will be distributed among the states, including California, Tennessee and Pennsylvania. The funds will cover attorneys' fees and will be used to fund future consumer protection investigators. You will get nothing by the looks of it.
- system2 6y ago
  Sweet justice. We get scammed, corporate pays a fine, lawyers get rich.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - csharptwdec19 6y ago
    Which honestly is pretty sad/absurd. Honestly, a voucher for 1 free battery replacement usable at any-time for every class member would have been a fair-enough settlement IMO. - Would mitigate damages to the class - Relatively low cost to Apple, but enough to make a dent and deter future shenanigans. Considering a no-name battery can be had for 6$, I will assume that Apple's cost for a genuine one is that number. (could be lower, could be a little higher but doubt it.)
- AmericanChopper 6y ago
  Has any consumer ever been adequately compensated by a class action suit?
  - pkaye 6y ago
    The Google Nexus 6 has some fatal flaw and went into a bootloop after a year of use. As part of the class action settlement, I got most of the purchase price back. I liked that phone a lot though...

kahrl 6y ago

0.00565% of Apple's $2T market cap.

loeg 6y ago
Does that seem inappropriately high or low for "batterygate?"
- jimnotgym 6y ago
  Well if what the prosecutors say is true I would say it was low. They alleged that Apple deliberately deceived consumers. We will never know if that is true because Apple apparently don't think it is worth clearing their name
- system2 6y ago
  Knowing they scammed millions of people, it is extremely low.

Karunamon 6y ago

Worth mentioning here is that this wasn't just about the "sneaky" fix for battery degradation, it was about doing this without notice, and having internal tooling that would deny a replacement (even at full retail price) if the battery was above an arbitrary health threshold (but still low enough to cause throttling). Before Apple changed their tune, if you read about this, and went into an Apple store for a replacement, they absolutely would not give you one, even if you paid full retail for it. This left people in a no-win situation. The only way you could get a working device was to have a third party replacement done (and kill your warranty) or shell out for a new phone.

bgirard 6y ago
> it was about doing this without notice, and having internal tooling that would deny a replacement (even at full retail price) if the battery was above an arbitrary health threshold (but still low enough to cause throttling). Do you have a source for that? This would change my opinion on this story. Reminds me of hot coffee where it sounded a bit ridiculous until you got the full story.
- filoleg 6y ago
  They are correct in a sense that it was doing it "without notice". But they had a good reason to do the slowdowns, no malice needed, their one and only big mistake here was doing it without a notice. The reason they did it was to prevent battery degradation and bad battery life by throttling the CPU. Except back then, iPhone CPUs weren't overperforming monsters they are today, so the slowdown was fairly noticeable. And when done without a notice or reason, you get a perfect publicity shitstorm. In fact, this feature actually still exists for iPhones, except it now officially exists in settings and can be disabled. It throws a notification on yours screen and auto-activates if your battery degrades below certain level, but it can be disabled (so you can choose whether to prioritize performance or preventing battery from further degradation) by a simple click in a settings menu. And it also explains exactly and in very simple language what this feature does. It isn't hidden behind a million menus either, it is right there in settings => battery => battery health. EDIT: to clarify, Apple throttling was not only done to prevent it from holding less charge due to battery degradation. Battery degradation to a certain level also led to iPhones rebooting randomly. And apparently it was not that rare of an issue, because the reason I posted this edit in the first place was due to seeing more than a few comments in this thread mentioning that it had happened to them.

ptudan 6y ago

As of two years ago, apple had sold 2.2 BILLION iphones. The cost of this scam per phone was $.05.

gpm 6y ago
This isn't the only cost. There was also another $500 million us settlement, a $27 million dollar fine from France, and probably others, and probably more outstanding liability.
- xchip 6y ago
  fines should be measured in $ per user.
  - gpm 6y ago
    I agree... but I don't care enough to figure out how many users are actually covered under each of those fines (under the relevant jurisdiction and having bought the relevant product).
  - Karunamon 6y ago
    Or per-device at least. Or barring that, a flat percentage of profits.
- itsthetruth 6y ago
  Damn bro. That's like $0.25/phone! Sending Tim Cook my thoughts and prayers.

CapriciousCptl 6y ago

So, I'm somehow developing a pro-Apple bias these days. This whole batterygate to me is kind of based on conjecture-- that Apple slowed old phones with the intention to sell more new ones. If there's any supporting evidence, or anything that's come up in discovery that Apple acted in bad faith, I'd possibly change my (admittedly biased) mind. But really, slowing the phones down to extend battery life is a reasonable tradeoff and there's just not a preponderance of evidence suggesting Apple acted in its own interests and hurt existing users. The main problem is this "feature" wasn't out in the open, but again, it just doesn't seem that bad to me.

ponker 6y ago
When there's a rich kid in town, everyone will turn him upside down to see what change falls out of his pockets. Apple is where Apple is because it doesn't put all of its features "out in the open." I don't want 500 config settings for my phone and a lot of other's don't either. If you want to run a webserver on your phone that's cool, there are products for you, but some people want the idiotproof solution.
xahrepap 6y ago
I own an iPhone because I got sick of these kinds of issues I was having with my Pixel phones. (would last ~1yr of perfect bliss. Then the honeymoon ends and the phone would just behave like crap). I decided to give another brand a shot. I'll tell you what will really tick me off in another year or so... If my device is, without warning, notification, ability to change, etc, purposefully nerfing itself for ANY REASON. That will make me really upset. Especially since I can't just pop the back off and toss a new battery in there. Good faith or not. It's an anti-consumer move. If my battery even pretended to be removable, you might convince me otherwise. But gluing the battery in under a glued in screen and then throttling my device based on the battery's age... Just really bothers me.
- manfredo 6y ago
  So it'd have been better to just let people's phones crash on startup and become 100% unusable?

markdown 6y ago

Yet they're still ignoring Flexgate which affects devices made across a number of years. I paid an arm and a let for a Macbook Pro (that's what they cost in my country), only to have it turned into a paperweight by a manufacturing defect that Apple acknowledges but won't remedy except for devices made in 2016. https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-sued-over-macbook-pro-flexgate-what-you-need-to-know https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-sued-over-macbook-pro-f... https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/20/apple-faces-another-flexgate-lawsuit/ https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/20/apple-faces-another-fle... https://support.apple.com/13-inch-macbook-pro-display-backlight-service https://support.apple.com/13-inch-macbook-pro-display-backli... EDIT: Astounding to see I'm getting downvotes here. I mean, what kind of mindset must one have to see regular people getting screwed over by a multibillion dollar corporation like this, and then side with the corporation. It boggles the mind.

zodiakzz 6y ago
I am in the same boat with a 2017 Macbook Pro that I bought in late 2018 :( It is the most expensive thing I've ever bought in my life. Apple is asking for 65% of the original price just to replace the display.
iamcreasy 6y ago
I upvoted you. I have had people downvoting me as well for sharing an experience with Lenovo where they took about 100 days to repair my motherboard within warranty period. Sigh.
rahilb 6y ago
In my experience it's better to go to an 'Authorized Service Provider' for repair. They have an incentive to do repairs and get paid, and it's quite easy for them to get Apple to pay the repair cost. E.g. on my machine that had the Keyboard repeating issue I also received a topcase as there was some slight de-lamination. Seems your model was affected (at least nominally) by the same keyboard issue so just send it in for a repair of the keyboard and also note the other issues; they will likely be repaired for free.

j3th9n 6y ago

The big winners are the attorneys who's fees are now covered.

stevespang 6y ago

Evil Apple. No doubt attorneys will get 99% of the $113 M and users will get offered a silly coupon . . .

iabacu 6y ago

I think it's clear Apple intentionally* degrades software quality on older iphone/mac models in order to drive purchase of newer hardware. I've been considering switching away from Apple hardware, not because of hardware quality, but because of software. * By pushing software updates optimized to new hardware with obvious regressions on older models.

thirdsun 6y ago
> I think it's clear Apple intentionally* degrades software quality on older iphone/mac models in order to drive purchase of newer hardware. I don't think that's clear at all. > * By pushing software updates optimized to new hardware with obvious regressions on older models. New software can come with increased hardware requirements, yet customers want to benefit from new software. It's a compromise. You could simply not update if you're worried about that. > I've been considering switching away from Apple hardware, not because of hardware quality, but because of software. I'm sure software updates long after your device's release won't be a concern with the competition. You probably simply won't receive any.
- iabacu 6y ago
  Sure, then freeze the software of older devices and only release security fixes. No revamp of look-and-feel and other random software features that only makes sense for the new models.
mlindner 6y ago
> I think it's clear Apple intentionally* degrades software quality on older iphone/mac models in order to drive purchase of newer hardware. Completely false. What's clear is that most posters on hacker news don't understand basic battery chemistry. Apple made a decision to help customers and got blamed for it because they didn't properly explain what they were doing. You can only please people so much.
audunw 6y ago
But this case shows the exact opposite. They updated phones to last longer without unexpected shut-downs. If they didn't do that update, many people who experienced these shut-downs outside of warrenty would change their old phone for a new ones. You can usually live with a slightly slower phone when the battery is low, but a phone that randomly dies on you? Not so much. To be clear, Apple still messed up, because they didn't communicate this at all. They could have also put in a slightly larger battery to begin with. But in the tech world, Apple isn't the worst in pushing people to upgrade hardware, which is illustrated by the fact that people use iPhones longer before upgrading than Android users. That's the one upside of Apples crazy App Store margins... they really don't need to push new hardware on you to make a shitload of money (while for Android that money goes to Google rather than hardware manufacturers) Apple could do better - WAY better - but I think it's a bit naive to think that this could possibly change, and is worth complaining about. The only way it would, if there was somehow significant money in spending lots of time optimizing OS updates for old devices. But most people like upgrading their phones anyway. For Apple to change, consumers must change first. I don't think there's much hope for government regulation here either. It's a problem that's too complex to regulate.

thewileyone 6y ago

A $113M fine to Apple is like slapping someone in the face with one goose feather ... ridiculous.

disown 6y ago
Apple's market cap is $2 Trillion. Apple settling for $113M is like someone worth $2 million settling for $113. I don't think anyone at Apple is losing any sleep over this.

ConcernedCoder 6y ago

Last update recently applied to my iphone 6 is doing it again... touchscreen lockups to the point of frustration ( can't scroll, can't type when messaging, etc... ), whereas 2 months ago it wasn't a problem... seems to me every product cycle for apple soon causes degredation of older phone's perceived GUI performance, and what a coincidence, just in time for Christmas!

intricatedetail 6y ago

Did Apple still got profit?

mthoms 6y ago

Interesting side note: Apple has completely wiped their battery-gate "apology"[0] letter from their website. It simply doesn't exist any more. If you visit that URL, you're immediately redirected (301) to a general battery information page which (surprise!) has no mention of the surrounding controversy. Make of that what you will. [0] It was only an apology in the "we're sorry you got upset" sense but it was something. Here's the URL: https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/ Here's the content that used to be at that page: https://web.archive.org/web/20171229003922/https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/ https://web.archive.org/web/20171229003922/https://www.apple... For those that need it, here's some context: https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/28/apple-apologizes-for-not-being-clearer-about-slowing-down-iphones-with-older-batteries/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/28/apple-apologizes-for-not-b...

xchip 6y ago

What is the fine amount per user? I bet is going to be $5

pessimizer 6y ago
I bet it's less than the profit made from people upgrading their iPhones early, or not sending them in for battery replacement while they were still under warranty.

atlgator 6y ago

Is this not still happening though? My iPhone 8+ is incredibly sluggish on the latest iOS.

acdha 6y ago
Look in the Battery section of Settings. The health will be displayed and there is an indicator if performance is being throttled due to battery degradation.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

rasz 6y ago

still less than what they made on "oh yeah your phone is old and slow, but totally not broken!!1. Let me upgrade you for only $499.95" bullshit up-sell

diebeforei485 6y ago

The good news is - partly as a result of this, anyone can get a genuine battery replacement by paying $79 to Apple or an AASP. If you have a phone that's an iPhone 8 or later, you can definitely skip upgrading this year and get a battery replacement instead.

mlindner 6y ago

What nonsense. A case of idiots in court rooms winning out over from not understanding physics. Apple never did anything wrong here.

itsthetruth 6y ago

Cool where's my check? Oh wait...

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

maffydub 6y ago

From the BBC coverage (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54996601 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54996601): > The tech titan also agreed for the next three years to provide "truthful information" about iPhone power management across its website, software update notes and iPhone settings. Great! They must be truthful for the next 3 years... and then?

svntid 6y ago

apple became such a bad greedy actor. shame