To be fair that's a pretty big thing to screw up. I commend Apple for a lot (see my last 3 comments), but I think they cross the line of too-voodoo too frequently. I think they'd do well to dispel more magic.
Apple's change did the right thing. It fixed a ton of older phones which before were rendered unusable since they would experience random shutdowns due to naturally degraded Li-Ion batteries.
Every manufacturer should implement the kind of fix Apple did (and I'm sure at this point, they have).
They even mentioned the change in the original release notes for the iOS update.
I still think they could've (and should've) been more transparent.
Android has been doing it for years, and it's always been toggleable. If Apple didn't want to implement a toggle that's fine, but they could have easily indicated to the user that their device's battery has degraded, that batteries are replaceable, and that performance can be restored by replacing said battery.
The problem with how Apple did it originally was that it was completely opaque to the user. As far as the average user was concerned, their phone was slowing down for no reason.
The Battery Health menu should have been implemented from the start, and the controversy probably would have been completely avoided.
They certainly do, I have seen it often. I'm not even sure what to do with old phones. I don't know of any recycling places. I usually just let them sit in a stack in a draw. I once had a phone come with a bag to mail for recycling but I haven't seen something like that for a while.
They were holding it back. That's what the several hundred million dollar lawsuit they settled was about. And their public apology. And the hundreds of articles in the tech press.
Apple's own front-line staff (ie genius's) were not informed of the throttling. So if you complained of a slow phone you were told you were imagining it, or it was an inevitable part of the newer more complex OS upgrades.
At any rate, you were told there was nothing you could do.
I think people apply a double standard when talking about Apple since they are the de-facto industry leader. The battery degradation issue is something that affects nearly all Li-Ion battery powered devices.
This includes all Android phones, PC laptops, etc.
People have such low expectations of the other products by default that no standards are applied and no quality is expected.
This is the issue. We apply (rightfully so) a far higher standard when assessing the industry leader (Apple) but we apply no standard at all to the competition which frequently gets away with the same kinds of issues (and also issues that are much much worse).
I think what you're saying overall is true to a small extent due to how Apple have positioned themselves. But this ...
> we apply no standard at all to the competition which frequently gets away with the same kinds of issues (and also issues that are much much worse)
... is total BS. Google and Samsung are never, ever, given a free ride when they mess up. Come on. Let's not be hyperbolic.
> The battery degradation issue is something that affects nearly all Li-Ion battery powered devices. This includes all Android phones, PC laptops, etc.
Irrelevant. It's not a question of whether the throttling is a valid solution to a technical limitation (it is). The problem is that (a) there were no major manufacturers throttling CPU speed due to battery health in phones, tablets or laptops before this. It was not a known practice. And (b) since Apple actively hid the throttling from everyone, including it's own employees, very few people were aware that a simple battery replacement would bring the phone back to like-new performance.
You seem to have gone from outright falsehoods - "They even mentioned the change in the original release notes for the iOS update" to mischaracterisation "Replacing the battery would have fixed the issue... It's not like they were holding it back." and now you've moved on to "what about the other guys!?" deflection.
It puzzles me how some people will so blindly defend Apple without critically looking at the facts. Just admit it was a mistake and looked really, really bad.
Apple has. Why not you?
And for the record, I'm a very happy Apple customer. I've used their computers exclusively since 2005 and their phones exclusively since 2010. I rely on their products and ecosystem to earn a living. But I'm not blind and I'm not stupid.
> 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).
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?
What they failed to do was show the user a message saying "Your phone has been slowed down due to an old battery, get a battery replacement at an apple store to restore the original speed"
Absolutely no one is going to assume their phone is slow due to an old battery.
