Quebec Superior Court authorizes class action against Apple

[Soppro]

21 hours ago, Phill104 said:

On the "Planned Obsolescence" front I actually think Apple fare better than many of the Android based phones. At least the OS should run for 5 years to a "secure" standard. You cannot say the same about many Android devices especially on ones where side loading is prevented.

I agree, this argument about planned obsolescence against Apple is complete bollocks. They've consistently supported their phones for the longest time of any smartphone manufacturer! This, in turn, means newer iOS versions being run on older devices, which naturally causes slowdowns due to additional functionality incorporated into the OS requiring more and more computational power.

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, Soppro said:

I agree, this argument about planned obsolescence against Apple is complete bollocks. They've consistently supported their phones for the longest time of any smartphone manufacturer! This, in turn, means newer iOS versions being run on older devices, which naturally causes slowdowns due to additional functionality incorporated into the OS requiring more and more computational power.

The battery health monitoring and performance compensation is still an issue though. I don't actually disagree that it should exist, on a technical level is a great idea and function to have, but the introduction of it was rather poor and not explained or communicated. When you know the effects it will have you should be required, honestly you shouldn't have to be required to actually do this, to notify customers of these changes and in a manor that is public and easily found. I would argue a press release to the more typical tech publications should have been issued to explain the why and when.

 

Another matter I have an issue with is that it shouldn't actually be an issue, though the above OS function should still be implemented. Phones do not need to be as thin as they are, not saying greatly thicker either, but this is a problem because of the battery design (capacity and current draw). Bigger battery would lessen the impact of degradation over time leading to a longer service life at the required current output capability for peak performance, with a likely side effect of bend gate never happening.

[Franck]

If you relate the same issue about limiting to a car it's the exact same thing as if you go to your dealer for season check-up and they limit your RPM to 1,500 just because your engine is old or your transmission is close to theoretical lifetime to make sure they last.

[leadeater]

18 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

They actually do, and have been for years. Apple only includes 5W bricks in the box anyway, so the phone is essentially always trickle charging. 

 

The iPhone has been able to charge with higher wattage bricks for as long as I can remember. My personal favorite is the 10W iPad Charger. Apple will charge the phone at full speed until they hit 80% and will go into trickle mode until the cell hits 100%. 

 

For iPhones with quick charge support, the iPhone will only quick charge up to 50%, beyond that the charging speed slows down significantly and starts trickle charging at 80% again. 

 

Apple is taking these power management features even further in iOS 13 with a feature called Optimize Battery Charging. The main purpose of this is to stop charging the phone when it hits 80%. The feature uses machine learning to figure out your sleep cycle and will only charge up to 100% when you need it so that the cell is 100% full for the shortest possible time. 

 

For example, you go to sleep at 10PM and wake up at 7AM. Your phone will have charged to 80% and then held off charging until around 6:30AM before starting to charge again. 

Lithium ion batteries also prefer to limit the depth of discharge so it's better to charge your phone more often than let it get down to 20%-30%. There is reserve capacity anyway but it's still better to have more charge cycles at a lower depth of discharge than fewer at higher depth of discharge. Other battery chemistry types can, often, prefer the opposite.

https://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/how_to_prolong_lithium_based_batteries

[CarlBar]

2 hours ago, Soppro said:

I agree, this argument about planned obsolescence against Apple is complete bollocks. They've consistently supported their phones for the longest time of any smartphone manufacturer! This, in turn, means newer iOS versions being run on older devices, which naturally causes slowdowns due to additional functionality incorporated into the OS requiring more and more computational power.

 

I'd like to point out again that regardless of how long apple supports a phone for compared to everyone else the courts can still decide they should support it for longer than they do. Or that said support shouldn't have to include battery degredation mitigations so early or a whole bunch of other stuff.

[Sirmyself]

9 hours ago, Phill104 said:

No, mentioning a single comparison phone is not required, nor is the point.

 

This is about the ethos of a brand or platform and not specific devices. The court case is regarding the longevity, are users being forced into upgrades or additional costs due to deliberate methods on the part of the vendor. It could be argued that putting non removable batteries in any device is planned obsolescence for instance. This is now the majority of all phones so not unique to Apple. It could also be argued that not supporting an OS after a set length of time is also planned obsolescence, yet in the case of some Android devices that can be as short as two years, while all Apple devices have so far been supported for 5 years or more.

 

There is a perception that Apple are the bad boys, and that perception in my opinion is misplaced in many ways, or at best poorly reasoned. Apple are far from perfect, but are no different to their competitors.

There are more than 15 android phones in the span of a year and only 2 or 3 iPhones. You can't group "many" android phones in an argument like you did. if you compare the iPhone with a bad android phone, you're not saying the android phone is bad, you're saying the iPhone is bad but you could find a worse android phone. If you compared the iPhone with a specific model or even a specific brand, I would consider your argument complete. But the only thing you did is say there are android phones worse than the iPhone without even factoring there prices.

The iPhone has a bad reputation for its battery life because compared to other phones with the same price, they are worse, most of the time. That said, I understand the value of the iPhone is not in its battery life and more in the features and apples ecosystem that is just superbly designed. I just don't care about those because I want my phone to last more than a day on a single charge, which I never achieved with an apple device.

[realpetertdm]

Apparently Apple knows what's "best" for their products (lol), forces their practices on user's machines, and think it's all good because it had "good intentions".

 

It doesn't matter if Apple had good intentions or not, the fact remains: they slowed down products without *any* notification to the end user - making it look like their phones are getting old and possibly needing an upgrade.

 

I don't want Apple deciding what's best for me. I want Apple to say "We think this will help X but harm Y, do you want to do this?" and give users the choice.

 

The entire Batterygate fiasco could have never happened if Apple had given users choice.

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, Sirmyself said:

There are more than 15 android phones in the span of a year and only 2 or 3 iPhones. You can't group "many" android phones in an argument like you did. if you compare the iPhone with a bad android phone, you're not saying the android phone is bad, you're saying the iPhone is bad but you could find a worse android phone. If you compared the iPhone with a specific model or even a specific brand, I would consider your argument complete. But the only thing you did is say there are android phones worse than the iPhone without even factoring there prices.

The iPhone has a bad reputation for its battery life because compared to other phones with the same price, they are worse, most of the time. That said, I understand the value of the iPhone is not in its battery life and more in the features and apples ecosystem that is just superbly designed. I just don't care about those because I want my phone to last more than a day on a single charge, which I never achieved with an apple device.

I can group them however I wish. My point is not about the phones themselves but the software they are running. Very few Android releases get 5 years support and now some brands are also locking down the ability to side load. If after two years security updates stop for your device, whatever the brand, that is planned obsolescence. Adding code to lengthen the life of a battery is not, but I agree Apple should have been more open to users wanting to upgrade. 

[The King of the Undead]

so they get fined more than most of the people here's net worth and do not care. Old news happening again.

[Drak3]

5 hours ago, Soppro said:

They've consistently supported their phones for the longest time of any smartphone manufacturer!

This argument doesn’t really counter the concept of planned obsolescence. Apple doesn’t need to abandon devices software side (especially now that they manufacture and sell older models as budget options) to make individual products seem obsolete.

 

The battery fiasco is indicative that planned obsolescence is likely part of Apple’s strategy. They knew about battery longevity being an issue for generations and never did anything to fix the issue. Best they did was a work around, and kept it hidden from customers. Effectively, they made the conscious decision for phones to become slower over time without people really knowing about it.

[CarlBar]

10 hours ago, Drak3 said:

This argument doesn’t really counter the concept of planned obsolescence. Apple doesn’t need to abandon devices software side (especially now that they manufacture and sell older models as budget options) to make individual products seem obsolete.

 

The battery fiasco is indicative that planned obsolescence is likely part of Apple’s strategy. They knew about battery longevity being an issue for generations and never did anything to fix the issue. Best they did was a work around, and kept it hidden from customers. Effectively, they made the conscious decision for phones to become slower over time without people really knowing about it.

 

Again though in this context thats largely irrelevant on it's own. Quebec's courts are not going to say planned obsolescence is bad under all circumstances. What they can decide is that the timeframe apple set is too short, (or ok, or even more than should be expected). So really arguing over weather it''s ok is completely besides the point here.

[mr moose]

21 hours ago, leadeater said:

The battery health monitoring and performance compensation is still an issue though. I don't actually disagree that it should exist, on a technical level is a great idea and function to have, but the introduction of it was rather poor and not explained or communicated. When you know the effects it will have you should be required, honestly you shouldn't have to be required to actually do this, to notify customers of these changes and in a manor that is public and easily found. I would argue a press release to the more typical tech publications should have been issued to explain the why and when.

 

Another matter I have an issue with is that it shouldn't actually be an issue, though the above OS function should still be implemented. Phones do not need to be as thin as they are, not saying greatly thicker either, but this is a problem because of the battery design (capacity and current draw). Bigger battery would lessen the impact of degradation over time leading to a longer service life at the required current output capability for peak performance, with a likely side effect of bend gate never happening.

And this is evidenced in the difference between the 6 and the 6+, which apparently didn't have battery issues because it got a bigger battery.  So basically putting an undersized battery in a product then throttling that product to hide the fact the battery isn't lasting as long leads to many issues consumer side.

 

The point people have missed is it doesn't matter if you agree with what apple did or not,  if a consumer was caught out with a product that didn't do as advertised because the company released an update that throttled performance,  then that is a breach of consumer law. regardless what other benefits it might have.  

 

20 hours ago, CarlBar said:

 

I'd like to point out again that regardless of how long apple supports a phone for compared to everyone else the courts can still decide they should support it for longer than they do. Or that said support shouldn't have to include battery degredation mitigations so early or a whole bunch of other stuff.

 

The thing is Australia has that in consumer law too,  it is designed that way so the judge can be fair to both parties when deciding how long a product should be warranted for.   In fact it is too cumbersome to write most laws in a fashion that accounts absolutely for every eventuality or application, so they are written such that the judge jury can decide the appropriate level of action for the given circumstances.  They are not going to make apple or any phone manufacturer support a phone for 8 years, but they are sure as fuck aren't going to let apple wash their hands after 2 years on a $800 product.   As far as the battery degradation thing goes, it is likely that the judge will compare similarly priced phones to the apple phones in question and use that as the datum to determine if the degradation and size is within normal expectations of such a product before deciding if their update solution was anti consumer or not.

[Trik'Stari]

On 7/18/2019 at 8:37 AM, Sirmyself said:

I would say they don't care at all, but if the customers win, it would be a good kick. Even if they don't, if the news spread, it may eventually end up motivating other provinces or even countries to allow the same, which will certainly make the bell ring someday and force apple to improve on their service or the lifespan of their products.

I'd prefer it to be the kick humanity needs to stop freaking buying Apple products.

[Sirmyself]

3 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

I'd prefer it to be the kick humanity needs to stop freaking buying Apple products.

yeah, but my dream is realistic 

[Trik'Stari]

10 minutes ago, Sirmyself said:

yeah, but my dream is realistic 

I'd say "Just get AOC to go after Apple for using slave labor in China" but then the left would all switch to Android and the Right would switch to Apple out of spite lol

[The King of the Undead]

8 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

I'd say "Just get AOC to go after Apple for using slave labor in China" but then the left would all switch to Android and the Right would switch to Apple out of spite lol

just people being people.