iPhone slow-down

[Floridian]

The news in the U.S. is that older iPhones have been slowed down. Does that affect iPhones in Japan? I have an SE but haven't noticed any changes.

 

[Sudsy]

The news in the U.S. is that older iPhones have been slowed down. Does that affect iPhones in Japan? I have an SE but haven't noticed any changes.

It's only if the battery is in bad shape, and even then only when the phone is doing something processor intensive. If you've been using it correctly (not running the battery flat, charging it to full when you charge it, etc.) then your battery is probably in good condition. You can also fix the issue by getting the battery replaced.

 

[Wwanderer]

An app which will report your battery's condition and presumably tell you whether or not the processor has been slowed down is promised sometime soon. According to Apple the slow down is to prevent the phone from shutting down completely and with little or no warning when its battery fails.

-Ww

 

[TheScientist]

Its almost shocking to me that people imagine Apple is fucking them over about this (non) issue.

Phones like any battery operated electronics with intelligent battery management are known to be sensitive to battery condition. Anyone who can't grasp this I have to wonder how they manage to get dressed in the morning.

 

[User#8628]

Its almost shocking to me that people imagine Apple is fucking them over about this (non) issue.

Phones like any battery operated electronics with intelligent battery management are known to be sensitive to battery condition. Anyone who can't grasp this I have to wonder how they manage to get dressed in the morning.

True. I used to have an old model samsung and after having it for a while the battery went empty in about 6 hours of not using it or one hour of using it.

I had problems with iphone too but not that extreme, but just changed the battery and now its ok again

 

[JaquesAfrog]

Anyone who can't grasp this I have to wonder how they manage to get dressed in the morning.

You just described 90% of the world's population about most things. If breathing wasn't an automatic reflex... there would be a lot less humans.

 

[impish]

It affects all iPhone everywhere. If you have an iPhone 6 or less go to the apple store pay their discounted ¥3000 get a new battery and problem is solved. Or don't....

 

[MikeH]

It affects all iPhone everywhere. If you have an iPhone 6 or less go to the apple store pay their discounted ¥3000 get a new battery and problem is solved. Or don't....

Last time I checked it for someone in the office they asked 8.800 yens for the battery change. Is there some discount program going on now?

 

[Wwanderer]

Last time I checked it for someone in the office they asked 8.800 yens for the battery change. Is there some discount program going on now?

Yes, a direct result of bad publicity about the intentional slow-down feature.

-Ww

 

[MikeH]

Yes, a direct result of bad publicity about the intentional slow-down feature.

Thanks, found it now even in the Apple's site. They announce it to be 3.200 yens with details to follow.

https://www.apple.com/jp/iphone-battery-and-performance/

 

[Desktop]

The problem is most will think after upgrading that the only solution is to buy a new phone.

 

[TheScientist]

intentional slow-down feature.

The problem is most will think after upgrading that the only solution is to buy a new phone.

There is no conspiracy here FFS.

 

[Wwanderer]

There is no conspiracy here FFS.

I agree, and fwiiw I am a HUGE Apple fan/devotee, going back to the Apple II+ (long before the Macintosh personal computer was introduced, for the kids in the room).

That said, I think their customers have a legit complaint that the company not only did not tell anyone that their phones were being slowed down, not even when anecdotal rumors and worries about old phones running slow were widely circulated. This no doubt caused people to worry needlessly that there was something wrong with their phone...that it had a virus. or whatever. Apple also did not give its iPhone customers the option to turn off the slow-down feature, something that might well make sense in some situations (e.g., when someone was planning to but the newest model phone when it came out the next month/week or when there was some major temporary need for the phone to run as fast as possible).

In any case, the iPhone has taken at least a minor PR black eye due to the slow-down feature.

-Ww

 

[TheScientist]

going back to the Apple II+

Same here. Eventually it was tricked out with a lower case chip, an 80 column card and a RAM card. Most people here won't understand any of that or why those ad-ons were interesting or desirable.

Apple also did not give its iPhone customers the option to turn off the slow-down feature, something that might well make sense in some situations (e.g., when someone was planning to but the newest model phone when it came out the next month/week or when there was some major temporary need for the phone to run as fast as possible).

You really don't want to give customers an option to do something that will potentially damage their phones, even when a new model is coming out soon. Remember that there is a big secondary market for handsets. Theres really no way to know if someone did this before and the handset now being sold again is damaged or potentially damaged. Also what if the foolish person then decides *not* to buy the newest handset for whatever reason? Now they've possibly damaged their phone and sure as hell won't blame themselves for doing so.

In any case, the iPhone has taken at least a minor PR black eye due to the slow-down feature.

Bunch of bitching and whining but the stock price doesn't reflect any black eye.

 

[Wwanderer]

You really don't want to give customers an option to do something that will potentially damage their phones, even when a new model is coming out soon.

I don't agree with this. The owner of a phone should be able to do whatever he/she pleases with it, and indeed in most respects they can. There are many ways a phone can be damaged, both physically and with software, and there is nothing to prevent the owner from doing so if they wish. There is nothing special about pushing the battery harder than is optional for its lifetime; it is just one of a host of ways of pushing the envelope of a device's performance with potential bad effects.

But even if one buys your argument that Apple shouldn't have allowed users to disable the slow-down "feature", the software could still easily have informed them that the slow down was occurring and why and that it could be reversed by replacing the battery (precisely what the company has now announced that it will do along with an apology to users for not doing so sooner). I know a fair number of people who replaced their iPhones with newer models despite it being financially painful for them; they had no idea that the much cheaper option of replacing the battery would have solved their problem. In other words, whether it was the company's intention or not (we can all have our own opinion on that) the information Apple withheld from its customers resulted in iPhone sales that otherwise would not have happened.

Remember that there is a big secondary market for handsets. Theres really no way to know if someone did this before and the handset now being sold again is damaged or potentially damaged.

I am fairly sure that this is technically incorrect. Pushing the battery hard damages the battery not the phone, and there are apps available which will assess battery status and "health", and these have been around for quite a long time. Indeed it is exactly such software that is used by iOS to determine when to slow down the processor and by how much. So there definitely is a way to know.

Bunch of bitching and whining but the stock price doesn't reflect any black eye.

Not very relevant. Lot of factors influence stock prices and with the market in its current state, it would take a lot more serious "injury" than a black eye to make much of an impact. The issue may or may not affect future iPhone sales. My guess is not too much since Apple has now taken steps to correct what it acknowledges was a problem/mistake. There will be, are already I believe, class action law suits, and if Apple loses, those cold at least sting a bit.

-Ww

 

[TheScientist]

The owner of a phone should be able to do whatever he/she pleases with it, and indeed in most respects they can.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you may have just not phrased that well. Theres lots of things a phone handset could be adjusted for that users should not have access to including but not limited to radio signal strength, IMEI number, etc. Despite the arguments of the EFF/FSF types, a phone is not a general purpose computer. If nothing else the simple fact that it is active in the public radio spectrum debunks that idea entirely.

There are many ways a phone can be damaged, both physically and with software, and there is nothing to prevent the owner from doing so if they wish.

Apple or other handset vendors can't prevent users from dropping their phones, putting the handsets through the laundry or other things which cause accidental damage. As for software aside from jailbreaking type activity, the handset manufacturers do in fact limit what users can do with software. Apple has in fact increased the limitations of what apps can do over time. I used to have a netstat app but that no longer works as at some point iOS stopped allowing direct access to the TCP stack from apps. The reason was explained in one of the iOS security guides some years back, had to do with sandboxing IIRC.

I know a fair number of people who replaced their iPhones with newer models despite it being financially painful for them; they had no idea that the much cheaper option of replacing the battery would have solved their problem.

Hard for me to address this beyond the fact that if they didnt notice that their batteries no longer held a charge and were completely unaware of both 1st and 3rtd party battery replacement services, I gotta wonder about them.

I am fairly sure that this is technically incorrect. Pushing the battery hard damages the battery not the phone,

See here and the linked articles. You are partly correct regarding the nature of lithium ion batteries but remember the battery is part of the phone after all. There was another article which I can't find now going over the issue of pushing the CPU performance harder when the handset is cold and how the temperature difference actually does cause hardware issues under certain circumstances.

there are apps available which will assess battery status and "health", and these have been around for quite a long time. Indeed it is exactly such software that is used by iOS to determine when to slow down the processor and by how much. So there definitely is a way to know.

Battery life and battery health are two different things. iOS uses an internal system call set for throttling the CPU, thats been documented. Whats different with the battery monitor apps is not all show you health. See this article. None of the 3rd party apps can over ride the OS in this matter.

There will be, are already I believe, class action law suits, and if Apple loses, those cold at least sting a bit.

My bet is these class action lawsuits will come to nothing, just ambulance chasing lawyers doing what they do.

 

[MikeH]

All this fuss just makes me appreciate my own decision of never buying a phone without removable battery.

 

[Wwanderer]

Hard for me to address this beyond the fact that if they didnt notice that their batteries no longer held a charge and were completely unaware of both 1st and 3rtd party battery replacement services, I gotta wonder about them.

I think you are getting confused on this point. It was not that the batteries in their phones didn't hold a charge well; they did...exactly because the batteries were being preserved/protected by the intentional slow-down "feature". What they noticed was that their phones were running slower than previously, and since Apple (iOS) failed to inform them of what was happening and why, they had no particular reason to suspect the batteries. So, they attributed it to a host of other possibilities.

-Ww

 

[TheScientist]

I think you are getting confused on this point. It was not that the batteries in their phones didn't hold a charge well; they did...exactly because the batteries were being preserved/protected by the intentional slow-down "feature". What they noticed was that their phones were running slower than previously, and since Apple (iOS) failed to inform them of what was happening and why, they had no particular reason to suspect the batteries. So, they attributed it to a host of other possibilities.

-Ww

OK well FWIW the battery related slowdown isn't the only reason an iOS device can run "slow". Two other common causes are leaving too many tabs open in Safari and having too many photos stored on the phone itself. I've made the first mistake more than once.

 

[User#8628]

Two other common causes are leaving too many tabs open in Safari and having too many photos stored on the phone itself.

I have both and a slightly older type phone and its still super fast and up to date. I've never regretted getting an Iphone one bit.

 

[Wwanderer]

OK well FWIW the battery related slowdown isn't the only reason an iOS device can run "slow". Two other common causes are leaving too many tabs open in Safari and having too many photos stored on the phone itself. I've made the first mistake more than once.

I agree with that point, and there is also the possibility of malware slowing it down. From my perspective this reinforces the point that it would have been (and apparently soon will be) helpful to users if their phone informs them if the OS intentionally shows down the processor due battery issues.

I wonder how many other mobile phone manufacturers/OSs were/are doing the same thing and simply haven't admitted it.

-Ww

 

[meiji]

Its almost shocking to me that people imagine Apple is fucking them over about this (non) issue.

I think the real problem here beyond Apple not telling end users about this is not telling their EMPLOYEES about it. The reason a lot of people think they were getting fucked over is because the main solution Apple folks had for slowness was a new phone, not replacing the battery.

Same here. Eventually it was tricked out with a lower case chip, an 80 column card and a RAM card. Most people here won't understand any of that or why those ad-ons were interesting or desirable.

Every new Apple iMac Pro has more electronic memory (if you include SSD) than EVERY Apple II system ever shipped, all 6 million of them, combined. Insanity.

 

[TheScientist]

and there is also the possibility of malware slowing it down.

Aside from possible JavaScript implementations on the recent Spectre/Meltdown (which go far beyond iOS) there has never been any iOS malware in the wild with the exception of poisoned code/fake apps that could only be used with a jailbreak phone.

I wonder how many other mobile phone manufacturers/OSs were/are doing the same thing and simply haven't admitted it.

"Other" these days is really limited to Google since they supply the code for Android and frankly the telco implementations of Android, the only customization is their preloaded crapware. Google has been silent on this question.

I think the real problem here beyond Apple not telling end users about this is not telling their EMPLOYEES about it. The reason a lot of people think they were getting fucked over is because the main solution Apple folks had for slowness was a new phone, not replacing the battery.

While I've never worked directly for them, I've worked with them and have a lot of colleagues who have have worked deep inside. There is a huge gulf between internal systems groups and retail. Take the term "genius" very lightly when talking to store support staff.

Insanity.

I want one!

 

[hkAlone]

I think the real problem here beyond Apple not telling end users about this is not telling their EMPLOYEES about it. The reason a lot of people think they were getting fucked over is because the main solution Apple folks had for slowness was a new phone, not replacing the battery.



Every new Apple iMac Pro has more electronic memory (if you include SSD) than EVERY Apple II system ever shipped, all 6 million of them, combined. Insanity.

@meiji summarised the issue pretty well.
If Apple was telling its users they should change their batteries as it affects the performance of their telephone, it would have been really fair and would provide their customers all information to make a well informed decision.
Instead they took the debatable decision to slow down the phone without informing their users hinting them heavily to buy a new phone.

I don't think people wake up in the morning thinking "today I will be a bad guy".
It doesn't fit recent research in psychology.
Basically Apple didn't plot against its customers but they took a decision that they thought was fair with the natural biases of a human brain. They took it knowing they would have enough arguments to deny any bad intention if they were getting caught. Still if the well being of their customers was their real concerns there was another way to go.

 

[meiji]

Instead they took the debatable decision to slow down the phone without informing their users hinting them heavily to buy a new phone.

I don't think Apple speaks with one voice or thinks that deeply about all the effects about their decisions. I know a lot of folks that currently or formerly work for Apple, and it's certainly not like their phone support or Apple Retail folks are briefed in any indepth way on what choices engineering makes, and how to position that with customers. When tech people have lack of guidance from the top they usually rely on pseudo-fact from coworkers or their own personal experience. I know I did so in my IT experience.

Add to that that retail folks, while not working on commission, are very likely graded on metrics including number of customer contacts and amount of sales. Put that together and I'm not surprised at all that most Apple folk recommended buying a new phone. I've been in the computer business for a long long time and heck I didn't know that batteries behaved that way. The problem is that upper management didn't either put this out as marketing material or train their sales and support folks.[/user]