Apple could be subject to criminal charges in France over phone slowdowns

[johnbanks]

 

Source: http://mashable.com/2017/12/28/apple-iphone-criminal-charges-france

Apple might be subject to the criminal charges in France for slowing down their iPhones. Really?   Now, this is how it's gonna work?

[Jsmith2211]

yay

[DrMacintosh]

When to corporate lawyers are trying to make the argument that something that helped the consumer was actually hurting the consumer........

 

Jesus

 

 

[Ginger_]

16 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

When to corporate lawyers are trying to make the argument that something that helped the consumer was actually hurting the consumer........

 

Jesus

 

 

Maybe good intentions, but they should never be pushing the cpu so hard that slight fluctuations in the battery can cause the whole thing to crap out. Its just a big scheme of let's make this device look and feel spectacular when people first buy it, and who gives a shit after a year, they'll buy a new one, but of course not tell anyone their doing it til it blows up in their face. 

 

Its like selling a car that always runs at 5k rpm. Going to be fast and get where you need quick, til things start breaking because your pushing everything too hard all the time.

 

In my opinion, they absolutely deserve to be sued. 

[Valentyn]

8 minutes ago, Ginger137 said:

Maybe good intentions, but they should never be pushing the cpu so hard that slight fluctuations in the battery can cause the whole thing to crap out. Its just a big scheme of let's make this device look and feel spectacular when people first buy it, and who gives a shit after a year, they'll buy a new one, but of course not tell anyone their doing it til it blows up in their face. 

 

Its like selling a car that always runs at 5k rpm. Going to be fast and get where you need quick, til things start breaking because your pushing everything too hard all the time.

 

In my opinion, they absolutely deserve to be sued. 

Issue is, when the battery in a car is degraded the car doesn't start. Same happened with some iPhones, and the Nexus 6P and other phones. Battery issues and device simply shuts off.

It's a weird choice; keep the phone working; albeit slower; or let it die. 
If Apple added a setting to pick between the two; which would the average user choose, before deciding they need to replace the battery?

 

Apple also did tell people, in iOS 10.2.1 update notes, and on the support articles, and support app all of which are free. There's even a warning in the Battery section of settings. Which was added with the update that introduced this curfuffle.

 

Could they have added more? Yes, and they are; the issue is the average consumer doesn't know anything, and doesn't read update notes, or information anyway. So even after the update how many will actually look into their Battery Section, or free support?

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207453

 

Quote

What the notice says
On an iPhone running iOS 10.2.1 or later, this notice might appear in Settings > Battery: “Your iPhone battery may need to be serviced.”  

Why the notice appears

Using diagnostics in iOS, we've detected that the battery in your iPhone may need to be replaced. When a battery gets closer to the end of its lifespan, the amount of charge and the ability to provide power reduces. As a result, a battery may need to be charged more and more frequently and your iPhone might experience unexpected shutdowns.

This isn’t a safety issue, it’s just to let you know that your battery may need to be replaced. You can continue to use your iPhone until you have your battery checked. 

There are various factors that can affect the performance and lifespan of your device’s battery, including number of charge cycles, age of your battery, and exposure to extreme heat or cold. Learn more about maximizing battery life and lifespan.

Get help

To get help with a battery replacement, take your iPhone to an Apple Authorized Service Provider or Apple Retail Store.* You can also contact Apple Support.

All rechargeable batteries have a limited number of charge cycles and might eventually need to be serviced. Apple’s one-year warranty, AppleCare+, and consumer law include service coverage for a defective battery. If your battery doesn't have service coverage, Apple offers a battery replacement service for a fee.
 

 

[Ginger_]

Just now, Valentyn said:

Issue is, when the battery in a car is degraded the car doesn't start. Same happened with some iPhones, and the Nexus 6P and other phones. Battery issues and device simply shuts off.

It's a weird choice; keep the phone working; albeit slower; or let it die. 
 

If Apple added a setting to pick between the two; which would the average user choose, before deciding they need to replace the battery?

The problem is that they intentionally degrade the battery quicker and make the whole thing constantly degrading. Apple cpus are clocked so high that they constantly push the limits of the battery, killing it faster and slowing the device quicker. 

 

It doesn't take a genius to tell that it's to get release day hype about how quick it is, and no one pays attention to how it slows down over time. That is the problem. Lower clocks to stop pushing the battery so hard, means a longer lasting battery and longer lasting fast performance.

 

Also, maybe if they freaking told people to replace their battery and their phone would be fine than telling them to spend 100x more on a new phone.

[Godlygamer23]

And somehow companies that let the phones shut off are getting off the hook? Neither option is ideal, but again, battery degradation is something you cannot avoid, and Apple chose the lesser of the two evils, though as some have mentioned, they should've said something to users...but is it really a surprise that a company has kept something a secret? 

 

Companies should be more transparent, especially when it comes to user devices, but Apple chose the lesser of two evils. Battery size isn't even a consideration here. The battery will still degrade, though maybe at a slower rate. 

[Godlygamer23]

Just now, Ginger137 said:

The problem is that they intentionally degrade the battery quicker and make the whole thing constantly degrading. Apple cpus are clocked so high that they constantly push the limits of the battery, killing it faster and slowing the device quicker. 

So you want the chip to just be bigger and consume potentially more power or the same? Look, people want high performance devices, and this is how Apple has achieved it. Keep the hardware footprint lowish, and ramp up clocks. I'm not convinced having a bigger chip(with lower clocks) while achieving the same performance would actually make a difference. 

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

And somehow companies that let the phones shut off are getting off the hook? Neither option is ideal, but again, battery degradation is something you cannot avoid, and Apple chose the lesser of the two evils, though as some have mentioned, they should've said something to users...but is it really a surprise that a company has kept something a secret? 

 

Companies should be more transparent, especially when it comes to user devices, but Apple chose the lesser of two evils. Battery size isn't even a consideration here. The battery will still degrade, though maybe at a slower rate. 

Battery size is an issue since they (supposedly) aren't throttling the Plus models, which have much larger batteries. IMO the devices should last at least two years without throttling given an average user load (whether or not the throttling occurs in that timeframe under an average use case or a heavy use case is still unknown from the data I've seen).

[Godlygamer23]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

Battery size is an issue since they (supposedly) aren't throttling the Plus models, which have much larger batteries. IMO the devices should last at least two years without throttling given an average user load (whether or not the throttling occurs in that timeframe under an average use case or a heavy use case is still unknown from the data I've seen).

Some people use their devices for long periods of time. My sister is still using a 4s - battery degradation will still be a problem.

[Valentyn]

Just now, Ginger137 said:

The problem is that they intentionally degrade the battery quicker and make the whole thing constantly degrading. Apple cpus are clocked so high that they constantly push the limits of the battery, killing it faster and slowing the device quicker. 

 

It doesn't take a genius to tell that it's to get release day hype about how quick it is, and no one pays attention to how it slows down over time. That is the problem. Lower clocks to stop pushing the battery so hard, means a longer lasting battery and longer lasting fast performance.

 

Also, maybe if they freaking told people to replace their battery and their phone would be fine than telling them to spend 100x more on a new phone.

Can you or anyone prove they intentionally degrade them?

 

Batteries degrade overtime; that's what they do. Are you stating that Google also Intentionally degraded their battery in the Nexus 6P? Or OnePlus doing it for the One?

 

They also do tell people if they need to replace the battery, I linked you the article showing it; it was introduced with the same update that start saving batteries at the expense of performance.
Also anyone can call Apple Care for FREE, and get a free diagnostic over WiFi that tests the battery condition; whether they're in or out of warranty. If they're in Warranty they get a free battery replacement. If not they are charged.

 

All the information is there for consumers; they need to also take some responsibility to educate themselves about the features and settings of their own devices.

[79wjd]

Just now, Godlygamer23 said:

Some people use their devices for long periods of time. My sister is still using a 4s - battery degradation will still be a problem.

I'm fine with the battery degrading (and how Apple chose to handle it), but it should still last more than a year or so, and a bigger battery would help push the problem further down the road. 

[Godlygamer23]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

I'm fine with the battery degrading (and how Apple chose to handle it), but it should still last more than a year or so, and a bigger battery would help push the problem further down the road. 

I'm not really going to argue on timescale, because my main thing here is that Apple chose the right thing, and that's what I'm really arguing. Yeah, bigger batteries should be used.

[Valentyn]

5 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

I'm fine with the battery degrading (and how Apple chose to handle it), but it should still last more than a year or so, and a bigger battery would help push the problem further down the road. 

I think it points more to an issue with the 6 and 6s; and the batteries used in them.

None of the iPhone I've used have had similar issues really, and at one point Apple did have a free replacement program for the 6s' if they unexpectedly shut down.

https://www.apple.com/support/iphone6s-unexpectedshutdown/

 

So Apple has at first simply services the device, and replaced for free; then introduced an update to prolong the life of all their devices with battery issues.

And now even offered drastically reduced Out of Warranty repairs.

Nevermind Consumer Law helping people in other countries where all defects are repaired or  replaced up to 6 years.

https://www.apple.com/ie/legal/statutory-warranty/

 

They've been doing a lot to try and help consumers really when you weigh it up compared to issues with some other phone makes.

[Ginger_]

8 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

So you want the chip to just be bigger and consume potentially more power or the same? Look, people want high performance devices, and this is how Apple has achieved it. Keep the hardware footprint lowish, and ramp up clocks. I'm not convinced having a bigger chip(with lower clocks) while achieving the same performance would actually make a difference. 

I'm obviously no hardware engineer, but the iPhone 8 is ungodly fast in benchmarks. Is any app going to utilize all that power well? Maybe, I don't know. Butif they tuned it back a bit, it wouldn't make a huge impact on performance and the battery wouldn't be as stressed, leading to a longer life and a faster phone in the long run. 

[kiska3]

10 minutes ago, Ginger137 said:

I'm obviously no hardware engineer, but the iPhone 8 is ungodly fast in benchmarks. Is any app going to utilize all that power well? Maybe, I don't know. Butif they tuned it back a bit, it wouldn't make a huge impact on performance and the battery wouldn't be as stressed, leading to a longer life and a faster phone in the long run. 

Theoretically an app could make use of the speed, so that the processor can go back to idle quicker, reducing load on the battery.

ie It would take the same amount of CPU cycles to perform one thing, but it would take longer and be more of a drain to the battery if the CPU has to sit at a clock speed for longer, than if the task can be completed 1-2 seconds faster.

[Ginger_]

5 minutes ago, kiska3 said:

Theoretically an app could make use of the speed, so that the processor can go back to idle quicker, reducing load on the battery.

ie It would take the same amount of CPU cycles to perform one thing, but it would take longer and be more of a drain to the battery if the CPU has to sit at a clock speed for longer, than if the task can be completed 1-2 seconds faster.

That's a good point. I can't remember for sure, but isn't longer,  lower current draws better on lith ion batteries than high current spikes? 

[Tenelia]

What really amazes me is that I've been crying foul over the lack of Android security and privacy, but nothing has happened to fix the ridiculous fragmentation and tons of other problems. Why are Apple fans doing something over this, but Android fans completely content to sit on their butts??

 

Come on guys. 

[Valentyn]

1 hour ago, VegetableStu said:

oh wow TIL o_o

but no front facing notifications ._. I feel like it should come up (only) in the lock screen after every restart or os update

That wouldn't be a bad idea, kinda like the little No SIM box that appears on Phones and iPads after a restart without one.

Could work if the device unexpectedly shutdown due to the battery issue. 

[jagdtigger]

2 hours ago, Ginger137 said:

That's a good point. I can't remember for sure, but isn't longer,  lower current draws better on lith ion batteries than high current spikes? 

Yep, the negative effect can be reduced with a bigger battery but all the r=1 users(/sheeps) want thin and trendy devices... Not to mention how the same uneducated masses like quick charge not knowing it shortens the lifespan of the battery.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

3 hours ago, Ginger137 said:

It doesn't take a genius

I see what you did there ...

 

 

[Matu20]

Was the slowdown actually noticeable in real life or just in benchmarks?

[Mr.Meerkat]

4 hours ago, Godlygamer23 said:

So you want the chip to just be bigger and consume potentially more power or the same?

Here's a fun fact, both the A11 and the A10 have bigger dies than their snapdragon equivalents (S835 and S820). Just in case you didn't know . 

4 hours ago, Ginger137 said:

The problem is that they intentionally degrade the battery quicker and make the whole thing constantly degrading. Apple cpus are clocked so high that they constantly push the limits of the battery, killing it faster and slowing the device quicker. 

You need to remember to account other components. In fact, in a phone, the modem and display (if its LCD) are probably more power hungry than the CPU/GPU (overall, excluding demanding games as that taxes the CPU and GPU particularly plus not that many people actually play demanding titles on their phones). This means that even if the chips were throttled to a lower but still usable state, it might not necessarily make a huge enough difference to battery life. Due batteries only being able to be cycled a couple hundred of cycles (typically 300-500) before they have degraded to an unideal state, even with the lower performance, as battery life isn't impacted majorly, the battery may degrade just as fast. 

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, Matu20 said:

Was the slowdown actually noticeable in real life or just in benchmarks?

Real enough that people noticed the performance increase after putting a new battery in, which prompted the bench marking to be carried out.

 

 

People seem to be stuck on this idea that there was nothing apple could have done to avoid this, the thing is there was,  they chose a battery that was too small for the job. 

 

 

 

 

 

[kiska3]

4 hours ago, Ginger137 said:

That's a good point. I can't remember for sure, but isn't longer,  lower current draws better on lith ion batteries than high current spikes? 

Depends, there are lithium batteries designed for high current applications

Like for example, Samsung's INR18650-25R's, these are somewhat high capacity(2500mAh) high current(with burst upto 100A) batteries that can take being discharged at 20A compared to Panasonic's NCR18650GA's which are high capacity(3500mAh) but don't take too well to high current applications(10A) but can burst to 50A. However these bursts can reduce battery capability

 

But being Apple, I am guessing they decided to ditch the "High Current" aspect of lithium battery design