4 ms·

Apple literally was caught using software upgrades to make older devices perform worse. https://www.npr.org/2020/11/18/936268845/apple-agrees-to-pay-113-millio

Apple literally was caught using software upgrades to make older devices perform worse. https://www.npr.org/2020/11/18/936268845/apple-agrees-to-pay-113-million-to-settle-batterygate-case-over-iphone-slowdowns https://www.npr.org/2020/11/18/936268845/apple-agrees-to-pay... But this about more than just Apple. It is about corporates in general. I don't think a "corporates are evil" mantra explains everything - or even anything useful. Product Designers are humans, CEOs are humans, all the employees are humans.(Unless ... Aliens ... :-) ) Some humans are better at whatever task than others, but all are operating under their motivational influences. Get enough people together under one banner, someone will do something poor under that banner's name.

least 6y ago
> Apple literally was caught using software upgrades to make older devices perform worse. ...which if you bothered to read even the article you linked, you'd know had to do with ensuring that battery voltage wouldn't drop low enough for the device to randomly shut itself off, a result which itself became a problem due to the actual longevity of their devices. You can certainly argue that they should have communicated this with their customers, though I'd argue that the vast majority would not notice nor care, while a lot more people would certainly notice their devices randomly shutting off.
- a4isms 6y ago
  Another case of a lie--or misunderstanding due to reposting clickbait without engaging critical thinking--circumnavigating the globe at internet speed while the truth is still putting on its pants.
- GeekyBear 6y ago
  More interesting is to look at what Google did for Nexus Phones with the same issue. >If you're among those affected, your phone will randomly shut down and completely die, even though your battery indicator might have said you had plenty of juice left. It's not a simple system crash, because your phone will stay dead until you connect it to a charger https://android.gadgethacks.com/news/nexus-6p-battery-randomly-dying-its-not-just-you-0175625/ https://android.gadgethacks.com/news/nexus-6p-battery-random... Instead of fixing the issue, Google's solution was to tell you to buy a new phone.
  - _carbyau_ 6y ago
    To paraphrase the original GP: "corporations can't be trusted" My point was that Apple is a corporation and so deserves the same suspicion as all the rest. You've just added another data point to "corporations can't be trusted". Yep, Google is a corporation and can't be trusted either.
    - GeekyBear 6y ago
      Sorry, but there is quite a bit of difference between "we don't like the way you explained your fix for the issue" and "screw you, buy a new phone".
      - _carbyau_ 6y ago
        I think you and I are making different points rather than arguing over one. You seem to be saying Apple is better than [insert other corporation here] in some way. I see that as irrelevant. I am saying that corporations - in the larger picture - can't be trusted. Apple, and in this case Google, behaving poorly reflects that.
        GeekyBear 6y ago
        We certainly see things very differently if you think "screw you" and "here, let me fix your out of warranty phone" are even remotely the same thing.
        _carbyau_ 6y ago
        The fact Apple lost the court case suggests it ultimately wasn't "here, let me fix your out of warranty phone".
        GeekyBear 6y ago
        No, it was the fact that Apple fixed people's out of warranty phone so that it wouldn't suddenly go dead that suggests they fixed it. Google, on the other hand, lost it's court case after refusing to fix a known defect that had Nexus phones die while reporting they had more than a 50% charge remaining, and staying dead until you connected them to a charger. >Nexus 6P owners eligible for up to $400 from Huawei and Google in class action settlement https://www.androidcentral.com/nexus-6p-owners-eligible-400-huawei-and-google-class-action-settlement https://www.androidcentral.com/nexus-6p-owners-eligible-400-...
- _carbyau_ 6y ago
  Reading articles isn't a problem. Apples approach to "assuming everyone's device behaves the same way" (quotes because I don't honestly think any qualified engineer would make that assumption.) was wrong. Some people use their phones less. My father doesn't turn his phone ON unless he wants to make a call.(Frustrating though that is...) This makes a difference to battery performance as they don't just age out sitting in a box but through use as well. But here's Apple's take: https://www.apple.com/au/batteries/why-lithium-ion/ https://www.apple.com/au/batteries/why-lithium-ion/ " For instance, you might use 75 per cent of your battery’s capacity one day, then recharge it fully overnight. If you use 25 per cent the next day, you will have discharged a total of 100 per cent, and the two days will add up to one charge cycle. It could take several days to complete a cycle. The capacity of any type of battery will diminish after a certain amount of recharging. " Some people used their phone a lot and had batteries replaced - either through Apple or not. And some human within Apple signed off on a solution to effectively make everyones older phone worse. What else could they have done? Well, from my original NPR link: "Starting in 2018, iPhone users have been able to better control an iPhone's battery life and check on the health of the battery, along with allowing users to turn off iPhone battery throttling" Make no mistake, Apple acted poorly. But they do better now. Whether that is because they were caught or not, we will never know. I like many of the things Apple does. I have a lot of respect for their trailblazing. Screens seemed stuck in 1920x1080 hell until Apple unplugged screen development again. But they are a corporation like any other and can't be trusted.
  - least 6y ago
    The throttling of the cpu was tied directly to the health of the battery [1], not simply by the device you were using. There is plenty of things to be critical of Apple and any corporation for and you don't need to spread misinformation in order to do so. You can even be critical about how they approached this, but your original claim that you doubled down on is simply false. [1] https://twitter.com/_inside/status/942817814531969024 https://twitter.com/_inside/status/942817814531969024
    - _carbyau_ 6y ago
      Your twitter link didn't shed much light for me on this particular issue but: With yourself and a coincidental comment making such reasonable corrections I investigated further. Posted below for posterity, not necessarily you. The reddit post that started it all: https://www.reddit.com/r/iphone/comments/7inu45/psa_iphone_slow_try_replacing_your_battery/ https://www.reddit.com/r/iphone/comments/7inu45/psa_iphone_s... Finally, from the horses mouth:https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208387 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208387 "iOS 11.3 and later improve this performance management feature" and "iPhone 8 and later use a more advanced hardware and software ..[snip].. As a result, the impacts of performance management may be less noticeable on iPhone 8 and later." My conclusion: It is true that Apple was only targeting phones with dodgy(to a degree of approximation) batteries. OTOH, Apple does a better job now. Both in execution and communication. Whether Apple would have reached this achievement without batterygate is unknowable. My apologies for spreading misinformation, thank you for your patience.
deergomoo 6y ago
> Apple literally was caught using software upgrades to make older devices perform worse You've literally just proved the point the parent comment was making. The same outcome is not always equal to the same behaviour. The devices throttled themselves because worn batteries could not handle the sudden power spike needed by the CPU. You can very easily verify this by turning off the software fix on an affected phone—start pushing it and it literally just shuts off. Apple still behaved deplorably here: as soon as this software kludge was triggered, it should have popped up a warning saying "hey your battery is no good, go get it replaced. Your phone will perform way slower in the meantime". They undoubtedly sold more iPhones by not doing so. But they didn't slow down perfectly functional old phones, they slowed down phones which were effectively faulty.
- _carbyau_ 6y ago
  I don't think I proved the parents case at all. I was supporting the idea that corporations can't be trusted. Apple was held up as some kind of paragon exception to this. It isn't. 1. slowing devices without telling anyone what they were doing. 2. assuming all their older devices were in the same state or had the same use cases. Replaced your phone battery recently? Who cares, you go slow anyway. The combination of 1+2 combined with a loyal fanbase (or trapped in the ecosystem depending on your views) does seem awfully suspicious regarding manipulated obsolescence and worth investigation. The article linked has Apple losing a court case in this regard. So the point still stands, don't trust corporations, including Apple. If you want to say that Apple is better than other corporations. Well that is a different point. You still can't trust them.
  - deergomoo 6y ago
    > assuming all their older devices were in the same state or had the same use cases. Replaced your phone battery recently? Who cares, you go slow anyway Sorry to be nitpicky, but this is actually not the case. The whole reason this was initially discovered was because someone on reddit ran Geekbench before and after a battery replacement and got a huge performance increase. Not telling users is inexcusable, but phones where the battery was fully functional continued to run at full speed regardless of age. > You still can't trust them On this point I 100% agree!
ako 6y ago
They didn't perform worse. It was a trade off between cpu performance and battery performance. They choose longer battery life over raw cpu performance. I think that's a valid tradeoff to make for a device that should last through the day on a single battery charge.
- _carbyau_ 6y ago
  Worse is subjective, I accept. Battery life vs speed vs reliability. Different people cut it different ways. I think the issue was that everyone got the one solution without Apple telling them. So for a lot of people, it was perceived as worse.

least 6y ago

> Apple literally was caught using software upgrades to make older devices perform worse. ...which if you bothered to read even the article you linked, you'd know had to do with ensuring that battery voltage wouldn't drop low enough for the device to randomly shut itself off, a result which itself became a problem due to the actual longevity of their devices. You can certainly argue that they should have communicated this with their customers, though I'd argue that the vast majority would not notice nor care, while a lot more people would certainly notice their devices randomly shutting off.

a4isms 6y ago
Another case of a lie--or misunderstanding due to reposting clickbait without engaging critical thinking--circumnavigating the globe at internet speed while the truth is still putting on its pants.
GeekyBear 6y ago
More interesting is to look at what Google did for Nexus Phones with the same issue. >If you're among those affected, your phone will randomly shut down and completely die, even though your battery indicator might have said you had plenty of juice left. It's not a simple system crash, because your phone will stay dead until you connect it to a charger https://android.gadgethacks.com/news/nexus-6p-battery-randomly-dying-its-not-just-you-0175625/ https://android.gadgethacks.com/news/nexus-6p-battery-random... Instead of fixing the issue, Google's solution was to tell you to buy a new phone.
- _carbyau_ 6y ago
  To paraphrase the original GP: "corporations can't be trusted" My point was that Apple is a corporation and so deserves the same suspicion as all the rest. You've just added another data point to "corporations can't be trusted". Yep, Google is a corporation and can't be trusted either.
  - GeekyBear 6y ago
    Sorry, but there is quite a bit of difference between "we don't like the way you explained your fix for the issue" and "screw you, buy a new phone".
    - _carbyau_ 6y ago
      I think you and I are making different points rather than arguing over one. You seem to be saying Apple is better than [insert other corporation here] in some way. I see that as irrelevant. I am saying that corporations - in the larger picture - can't be trusted. Apple, and in this case Google, behaving poorly reflects that.
      - GeekyBear 6y ago
        We certainly see things very differently if you think "screw you" and "here, let me fix your out of warranty phone" are even remotely the same thing.
        _carbyau_ 6y ago
        The fact Apple lost the court case suggests it ultimately wasn't "here, let me fix your out of warranty phone".
        GeekyBear 6y ago
        No, it was the fact that Apple fixed people's out of warranty phone so that it wouldn't suddenly go dead that suggests they fixed it. Google, on the other hand, lost it's court case after refusing to fix a known defect that had Nexus phones die while reporting they had more than a 50% charge remaining, and staying dead until you connected them to a charger. >Nexus 6P owners eligible for up to $400 from Huawei and Google in class action settlement https://www.androidcentral.com/nexus-6p-owners-eligible-400-huawei-and-google-class-action-settlement https://www.androidcentral.com/nexus-6p-owners-eligible-400-...
_carbyau_ 6y ago
Reading articles isn't a problem. Apples approach to "assuming everyone's device behaves the same way" (quotes because I don't honestly think any qualified engineer would make that assumption.) was wrong. Some people use their phones less. My father doesn't turn his phone ON unless he wants to make a call.(Frustrating though that is...) This makes a difference to battery performance as they don't just age out sitting in a box but through use as well. But here's Apple's take: https://www.apple.com/au/batteries/why-lithium-ion/ https://www.apple.com/au/batteries/why-lithium-ion/ " For instance, you might use 75 per cent of your battery’s capacity one day, then recharge it fully overnight. If you use 25 per cent the next day, you will have discharged a total of 100 per cent, and the two days will add up to one charge cycle. It could take several days to complete a cycle. The capacity of any type of battery will diminish after a certain amount of recharging. " Some people used their phone a lot and had batteries replaced - either through Apple or not. And some human within Apple signed off on a solution to effectively make everyones older phone worse. What else could they have done? Well, from my original NPR link: "Starting in 2018, iPhone users have been able to better control an iPhone's battery life and check on the health of the battery, along with allowing users to turn off iPhone battery throttling" Make no mistake, Apple acted poorly. But they do better now. Whether that is because they were caught or not, we will never know. I like many of the things Apple does. I have a lot of respect for their trailblazing. Screens seemed stuck in 1920x1080 hell until Apple unplugged screen development again. But they are a corporation like any other and can't be trusted.
- least 6y ago
  The throttling of the cpu was tied directly to the health of the battery [1], not simply by the device you were using. There is plenty of things to be critical of Apple and any corporation for and you don't need to spread misinformation in order to do so. You can even be critical about how they approached this, but your original claim that you doubled down on is simply false. [1] https://twitter.com/_inside/status/942817814531969024 https://twitter.com/_inside/status/942817814531969024
  - _carbyau_ 6y ago
    Your twitter link didn't shed much light for me on this particular issue but: With yourself and a coincidental comment making such reasonable corrections I investigated further. Posted below for posterity, not necessarily you. The reddit post that started it all: https://www.reddit.com/r/iphone/comments/7inu45/psa_iphone_slow_try_replacing_your_battery/ https://www.reddit.com/r/iphone/comments/7inu45/psa_iphone_s... Finally, from the horses mouth:https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208387 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208387 "iOS 11.3 and later improve this performance management feature" and "iPhone 8 and later use a more advanced hardware and software ..[snip].. As a result, the impacts of performance management may be less noticeable on iPhone 8 and later." My conclusion: It is true that Apple was only targeting phones with dodgy(to a degree of approximation) batteries. OTOH, Apple does a better job now. Both in execution and communication. Whether Apple would have reached this achievement without batterygate is unknowable. My apologies for spreading misinformation, thank you for your patience.

deergomoo 6y ago

> Apple literally was caught using software upgrades to make older devices perform worse You've literally just proved the point the parent comment was making. The same outcome is not always equal to the same behaviour. The devices throttled themselves because worn batteries could not handle the sudden power spike needed by the CPU. You can very easily verify this by turning off the software fix on an affected phone—start pushing it and it literally just shuts off. Apple still behaved deplorably here: as soon as this software kludge was triggered, it should have popped up a warning saying "hey your battery is no good, go get it replaced. Your phone will perform way slower in the meantime". They undoubtedly sold more iPhones by not doing so. But they didn't slow down perfectly functional old phones, they slowed down phones which were effectively faulty.

_carbyau_ 6y ago
I don't think I proved the parents case at all. I was supporting the idea that corporations can't be trusted. Apple was held up as some kind of paragon exception to this. It isn't. 1. slowing devices without telling anyone what they were doing. 2. assuming all their older devices were in the same state or had the same use cases. Replaced your phone battery recently? Who cares, you go slow anyway. The combination of 1+2 combined with a loyal fanbase (or trapped in the ecosystem depending on your views) does seem awfully suspicious regarding manipulated obsolescence and worth investigation. The article linked has Apple losing a court case in this regard. So the point still stands, don't trust corporations, including Apple. If you want to say that Apple is better than other corporations. Well that is a different point. You still can't trust them.
- deergomoo 6y ago
  > assuming all their older devices were in the same state or had the same use cases. Replaced your phone battery recently? Who cares, you go slow anyway Sorry to be nitpicky, but this is actually not the case. The whole reason this was initially discovered was because someone on reddit ran Geekbench before and after a battery replacement and got a huge performance increase. Not telling users is inexcusable, but phones where the battery was fully functional continued to run at full speed regardless of age. > You still can't trust them On this point I 100% agree!

ako 6y ago

They didn't perform worse. It was a trade off between cpu performance and battery performance. They choose longer battery life over raw cpu performance. I think that's a valid tradeoff to make for a device that should last through the day on a single battery charge.

_carbyau_ 6y ago
Worse is subjective, I accept. Battery life vs speed vs reliability. Different people cut it different ways. I think the issue was that everyone got the one solution without Apple telling them. So for a lot of people, it was perceived as worse.