Talk about drastic!

Apple throttled your iPhone by cutting its speed almost in HALF!

"After replacing the battery, Geekbench showed that the scores had nearly
doubled."

http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/12/is-apple-slowing-down-iphones-with-aging-batteries.html

On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 15:28:50 +0000 (UTC), harry newton
wrote:

Talk about drastic!
Apple throttled your iPhone by cutting its speed almost in HALF!

"After replacing the battery, Geekbench showed that the scores had nearly
doubled."

http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/12/is-apple-slowing-down-iphones-with-aging-batteries.html

Sure, but if Apple did NOT reduce consumption somewhere as the battery
aged, you would complain that the iPhone battery didn't survive the
warranty period or operate the advertised number of hours.

What I find disgusting is that Apple did not make the feature optional
and controlled in the settings.

When we're done complaining about the evil Apple, we can then switch
our focus to the evil Google, which extends runtime and battery life
by disabling display intensive features and reducing OLED display
brightness if it detects a weak battery.
https://www.google.com/patents/US8407502
See the "Summary" section. The phone still works, but all the fancy
features are disabled and you can't see what you're doing (only red
LED's are active). This might be a serious problem for someone on
Viagra, who's vision is shifted towards blue, and doesn't see any red.

Cutting features to enhance battery life is nothing new. Palm has a
patent for saving battery power by switching from battery guzzling
color, to a more economical monochrome:
"Method and Apparatus for Selectable Display Mode for Intelligently
Enhancing Battery Life"

Meanwhile, Intel offers CPU's that self-throttle if they draw too much
power, get too hot, or are in danger of turning off before the end of
the movie or big game. Most of the technology was inherited from
Transmeta:
"Adaptive power control"
https://www.google.com/patents/US7100061
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmeta

I'm sure if I dig some more, I'll find other patents for ways to
generate longer battery life numbers at the expense of other features.

Hmmm... my battery is low and old. Maybe that's why I'm losing at
Solitaire?

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Wednesday, 27 December 2017 16:48:57 UTC, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 15:28:50 +0000 (UTC), harry newton
wrote:

Talk about drastic!
Apple throttled your iPhone by cutting its speed almost in HALF!

"After replacing the battery, Geekbench showed that the scores had nearly
doubled."

http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/12/is-apple-slowing-down-iphones-with-aging-batteries.html

Sure, but if Apple did NOT reduce consumption somewhere as the battery
aged, you would complain that the iPhone battery didn't survive the
warranty period or operate the advertised number of hours.

What I find disgusting is that Apple did not make the feature optional
and controlled in the settings.

When we're done complaining about the evil Apple, we can then switch
our focus to the evil Google, which extends runtime and battery life
by disabling display intensive features and reducing OLED display
brightness if it detects a weak battery.
https://www.google.com/patents/US8407502
See the "Summary" section. The phone still works, but all the fancy
features are disabled and you can't see what you're doing (only red
LED's are active). This might be a serious problem for someone on
Viagra, who's vision is shifted towards blue, and doesn't see any red.

Cutting features to enhance battery life is nothing new. Palm has a
patent for saving battery power by switching from battery guzzling
color, to a more economical monochrome:
"Method and Apparatus for Selectable Display Mode for Intelligently
Enhancing Battery Life"

Meanwhile, Intel offers CPU's that self-throttle if they draw too much
power, get too hot, or are in danger of turning off before the end of
the movie or big game. Most of the technology was inherited from
Transmeta:
"Adaptive power control"
https://www.google.com/patents/US7100061
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmeta

I'm sure if I dig some more, I'll find other patents for ways to
generate longer battery life numbers at the expense of other features.

Hmmm... my battery is low and old. Maybe that's why I'm losing at
Solitaire?

Apple phones are very much aimed at people that know nothing about technology and don't want to learn. They're idiot proofed partly by key useful features not being available. One can criticise them, but tbh I reckon they know their market.


NT

He who is Jeff Liebermann said on Wed, 27 Dec 2017 08:48:50 -0800:

Sure, but if Apple did NOT reduce consumption somewhere as the battery
aged, you would complain that the iPhone battery didn't survive the
warranty period or operate the advertised number of hours.

Fair enough observation but the Materials Science experts seem to be
inferring a different take on that same sentiment, by stating that Apple
batteries were sold with intolerable (and unadvertised) performance decay.

They "clearly came with intolerable performance decay." says The Verge.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/21/16806582/apple-battery-slowdown-science

What I find disgusting is that Apple did not make the feature optional
and controlled in the settings.

Lawsuits argue Apple had to keep the permanent throttling to far less than
half the advertised speeds (from 1,400MHz to 600MHz) secret if the reason
was they didn't want to honor warranty claims.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/20/16800058/apple-iphone-slow-fix-battery-life-capacity

When we're done complaining about the evil Apple, we can then switch
our focus to the evil Google, which extends runtime and battery life
by disabling display intensive features and reducing OLED display
brightness if it detects a weak battery.

This is only related if it was done secretly, permanently, and drastically.

https://www.google.com/patents/US8407502
See the "Summary" section. The phone still works, but all the fancy
features are disabled and you can't see what you're doing (only red
LED's are active).

Is this slowdown drastic (far more than half the advertised speeds)?
Is it secret?
Is it permanent (for any given battery)?

This might be a serious problem for someone on
Viagra, who's vision is shifted towards blue, and doesn't see any red.

As of December 11th, 2017, that problem may increase!
https://www.goodrx.com/blog/generic-viagra-in-2017-sooner-than-expected/

Cutting features to enhance battery life is nothing new. Palm has a
patent for saving battery power by switching from battery guzzling
color, to a more economical monochrome:
"Method and Apparatus for Selectable Display Mode for Intelligently
Enhancing Battery Life"

Is this slowdown drastic (far more than half the advertised speeds)?
Is it secret?
Is it permanent (for any given battery)?

Meanwhile, Intel offers CPU's that self-throttle if they draw too much
power, get too hot, or are in danger of turning off before the end of
the movie or big game. Most of the technology was inherited from
Transmeta:
"Adaptive power control"
https://www.google.com/patents/US7100061
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmeta

Is this slowdown drastic (far more than half the advertised speeds)?
Is it secret?
Is it permanent (for any given battery)?

I'm sure if I dig some more, I'll find other patents for ways to
generate longer battery life numbers at the expense of other features.

IF they're not secret, permanent, and drastic (throttled to far less than
half the claimed CPU speeds), then they're relevant.

Otherwise they're just red herrings.

Hmmm... my battery is low and old. Maybe that's why I'm losing at
Solitaire?

Nope. It's why that huge power outage a week ago by PG&E was caused by the
winds coming from the north instead of from the south like they usually do
where you live!

Seriously though ... since you are generally old-school and balanced, do
you really consider Apple's secret, permanent, and drastic (the cpu is
chopped to far less than half the claimed speeds) is equivalent to a
temporary, slight, and obvious slowdown?

Really?

wrote on 12/27/2017 12:04 PM:
On Wednesday, 27 December 2017 16:48:57 UTC, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

I'm sure if I dig some more, I'll find other patents for ways to
generate longer battery life numbers at the expense of other features.

Hmmm... my battery is low and old. Maybe that's why I'm losing at
Solitaire?

Apple phones are very much aimed at people that know nothing about technology and don't want to learn. They're idiot proofed partly by key useful features not being available. One can criticise them, but tbh I reckon they know their market.

Even the unsophisticated user can tell when his phone is getting slow. Many
people will then trade it in not knowing this could easily be fixed.

--

Rick C

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms,
on the centerline of totality since 1998

He who is harry newton said on Wed, 27 Dec 2017 17:05:03 +0000 (UTC):
Fair enough observation but the Materials Science experts seem to be
inferring a different take on that same sentiment, by stating that Apple
batteries were sold with intolerable (and unadvertised) performance decay.

They "clearly came with intolerable performance decay." says The Verge.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/21/16806582/apple-battery-slowdown-science

Apple basically admitted today they permanently chopped CPU speeds in half
because they were trying to secretly mask defective batteries that they
didn't want to pay for in-warranty claims.

December 28, 2017
A Message to Our Customers about iPhone Batteries and Performance
https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/

They desperately try to convince Apple gullibles that all batteries require
the need to be secretly, drastically, and permanently throttled (to half
the original CPU speeds) with this clever marketing document posing as an
engineering white paper.

iPhone Battery and Performance
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208387

Basically, what they say is that all batteries degrade but only Apple cares
enough about its customers to secretly, permanently, and drastically cut
the CPU performance in half.

The rest of the manufacturers simply replace defective batteries under
warranty. But Apple didn't want to honor the warranty claims.

Even now, they're *still* charging the customer $30 for what amounts to a
defective battery. After the end of 2018, you're ****ed again.

The phones affected after iOS 10.2.1 a
iPhone 6,
iPhone 6 Plus,
iPhone 6s,
iPhone 6s Plus,
iPhone SE,
iPhone 7, and
iPhone 7 (after iOS 11.2)

The secret is never to update iOS and this wouldn't have happened to you.

On 12/27/2017 11:48 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

This might be a serious problem for someone on
Viagra, who's vision is shifted towards blue, and doesn't see any red.

Wait, what?

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 22:36:07 -0500, bitrex
wrote:

On 12/27/2017 11:48 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

This might be a serious problem for someone on
Viagra, who's vision is shifted towards blue, and doesn't see any red.

Wait, what?

Cyanopsia or blue tinted vision
https://io9.gizmodo.com/why-viagra-tints-your-vision-blue-1685176169
https://www.zmescience.com/science/biology/why-viagra-makes-you-see-blue-0423432/

Executive summary: Viagra makes your world blue because an enzyme
that regulates activity in your crotch happens to be very similar to
an enzyme that regulates activity in your eyes.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:22:09 -0500, rickman wrote:

Even the unsophisticated user can tell when his phone is getting slow. Many
people will then trade it in not knowing this could easily be fixed.

I had a customer phone me today asking if I could find her a cheap
used iPhone 6 for her daughter, who was complaining that her iPhone 5
was "worn out". No sooner had she read that Apple was slowing down
older phones to preserve battery life, the daughter magically
discovered that her phone was suffering from "a slow battery" and the
phone was in need of an upgrade. This might eventually be beneficial
to Apple sales.



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

This is the same troll with the smoke machine and the BMW.

Don't feed the troll.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

He who is Jeff Liebermann said on Thu, 28 Dec 2017 20:34:09 -0800:

Executive summary: Viagra makes your world blue because an enzyme
that regulates activity in your crotch happens to be very similar to
an enzyme that regulates activity in your eyes.

So the plumbing in the crotch opens up the world to your eyes?

Anyway, Jeff - did you read the fantastically *cleverly worded* apology
from Apple yesterday?

December 28, 2017
A Message to Our Customers about iPhone Batteries and Performance
https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/

What you have to admire is how utterly *cleverly* worded the "apology" is.

Just like a smart kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar, they are
clever in what they admit and what they don't admit even though everyone
knows they did it, not for the planned obsolescence (that was just a
bonus), but because they put the wrong battery in the wrong phone and
didn't want to honor the warranty.

Like all Apple Apologists, they can't come clean.

So they essentially apologized for the "misunderstanding". Heh heh.

They apologize for the "mis communication", heh heh...

And then they try to say all kids have their hands caught in the cookie
jar, with their idiotic white paper on batteries - which completely skirts
the issue that no other manufacturer on the planet was caught secretly,
*permanently*, and *drastically* cutting the CPU speeds (in half!).

The fact you can replace a defective battery for $38 after January still
doesn't solve the problem that they're the wrong batteries for the phones.

I *love* their clever apology - which literally screams they didn't do it
for planned obsolescence (they didn't - that was just a bonus) - and yet -
completely skirts the real reason they did it - which was they didn't want
to honor their battery warranty.

Since it's *still* the wrong battery for the phone, it's still a crime
(literally) that they force you to pay even $38 for a new battery.

Not only should the defective batteries be replaced for free, but, one year
after you put the new defective battery in the phone, you're ****ed again.

I only speak fact.

On 12/28/2017 11:34 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 22:36:07 -0500, bitrex
wrote:

On 12/27/2017 11:48 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

This might be a serious problem for someone on
Viagra, who's vision is shifted towards blue, and doesn't see any red.

Wait, what?

Cyanopsia or blue tinted vision
https://io9.gizmodo.com/why-viagra-tints-your-vision-blue-1685176169
https://www.zmescience.com/science/biology/why-viagra-makes-you-see-blue-0423432/

Executive summary: Viagra makes your world blue because an enzyme
that regulates activity in your crotch happens to be very similar to
an enzyme that regulates activity in your eyes.


Interesting, never knew about that side effect. I'll report back my
empirical findings after the upcoming New Year's weekend

On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 11:32:05 -0500, bitrex
wrote:

On 12/28/2017 11:34 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 22:36:07 -0500, bitrex
wrote:

On 12/27/2017 11:48 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

This might be a serious problem for someone on
Viagra, who's vision is shifted towards blue, and doesn't see any red.

Wait, what?

Cyanopsia or blue tinted vision
https://io9.gizmodo.com/why-viagra-tints-your-vision-blue-1685176169
https://www.zmescience.com/science/biology/why-viagra-makes-you-see-blue-0423432/

Executive summary: Viagra makes your world blue because an enzyme
that regulates activity in your crotch happens to be very similar to
an enzyme that regulates activity in your eyes.

Interesting, never knew about that side effect. I'll report back my
empirical findings after the upcoming New Year's weekend

At this point, I would normally scribble a variety of sexually
explicit observations and suggestions. However, this is a family
newsgroup and such things are unfortunately deemed unacceptable.

Technical details: I'm told that it's not a "blue shift" but rather a
"blue tint". Also, the color varies but is generally considered to be
cyan (between blue and green) and not blue.

Full disclosu I've never noticed the blue tint effect, probably
because I was too busy and distracted at the time.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 08:57:24 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Full disclosu I've never noticed the blue tint effect, probably
because I was too busy and distracted at the time.

And all this time I thought I was looking through the world with
rose-tinted glasses!

In article ,
says...


Sure, but if Apple did NOT reduce consumption somewhere as the battery
aged, you would complain that the iPhone battery didn't survive the
warranty period or operate the advertised number of hours.

What I find disgusting is that Apple did not make the feature optional
and controlled in the settings.


If it takes slowing down the Apple so the battery will last, the battery
is not meeting the standard. I can see it slowing down after the
battery has lasted as long as it is warranted to. There should be some
mention of that in the book that comes with it.


Seems that would be equal to a car that will only go 40 MPH after it
gets say 30,000 miles on it and is warrentied for 50,000.

He who is Ralph Mowery said on Sat, 30 Dec 2017 23:08:57 -0500:

If it takes slowing down the Apple so the battery will last, the battery
is not meeting the standard. I can see it slowing down after the
battery has lasted as long as it is warranted to. There should be some
mention of that in the book that comes with it.


Seems that would be equal to a car that will only go 40 MPH after it
gets say 30,000 miles on it and is warrentied for 50,000.

This article backs up your feelings.

Apple Deserves What It Gets From This Battery Fiasco
https://lonesysadmin.net/2017/12/29/apple-deserves-gets-battery-fiasco/

Apple iOS 11.2.5 Release: It's A Big One
https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2018/01/01/apple-ios-11-2-5-release-iphone-battery-problem-slow-down/#52fb94c53b5c

Verbatim quotes:
"We expect the iPhone X to be throttled in late 2018 with replacement
batteries for it back to full price by January 2019."

"Samsung guarantees 95% battery capacity retention for the first
two years of ownership. Meanwhile LG and Google offer two year
warranties, which also cover the battery."

"Apple's promise of a limited time price reduction (11 months) on new
iPhone batteries doesn't cut it, particularly with the swap taking
three days and no further pledge from Apple to change anything
going forward."

"Apple has admitted it slows iPhones - and coincidentally just after
the release of each new generation - to protect their already degrading
batteries from shutting off if the phone were to continue operating at
full performance."

"Not only does the well promoted title of Performance Champ suddenly
ring hollow now we know this *only lasts for one year*, but we also
know this behaviour isn't normal. HTC, Motorola, LG and Samsung are
among the major brands quick to stress they see no reason to throttle
the performance of their smartphones."

On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 5:07:41 AM UTC-5, Harry Newton wrote:
On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 08:57:24 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Full disclosu I've never noticed the blue tint effect, probably
because I was too busy and distracted at the time.

And all this time I thought I was looking through the world with
rose-tinted glasses!

Sometimes so-called 'Big Tech' is like that.

He who is JF Mezei said on Tue, 2 Jan 2018 01:14:13 -0500:

"expect" is the keyword here. Speculation by some snews media. This is
not a statement from Apple and thus useless.

The product development of the X was done with knowledge of the
batterty problems for the 6s. So it is possible that it was fixed or
significantly reduced.

I think that's wishful thinking (sans facts) for two big reasons:
1. What you hope goes diametrically against what Apple actually said.
2. Apple didn't change their power-hungry single-threaded architecture.

Backing up those two facts is this recent article:
Apple Won't Stop Throttling iPhone Performance
https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/261243-apple-cuts-battery-replacement-costs-wont-stop-throttling-iphone-performance

That article clearly says Apple "won't stop" throttling of *all* newer
iPhones after about one year to about half their original CPU speeds.

Hence, the article makes the same claim that I do which is that Apple
iPhones effectively cost a *lot* more than just the sticker price:

"The effective cost of buying an Apple device is significantly higher
than it used to be, at least for people who keep their hardware more
than a year"

And, the article reiterates that Apple outright lied to its customers:

"Apple acknowledges that it failed to properly inform users about the
changes made in iOS 10.2.1 and the introduction of this throttling."

Interesting fact, since the Apple Apologists still deny what Apple already
admitted. Another fact that the Apple Apologists will hate is that this is
an Apple-only problem.

"Apple tries to dodge responsibility for its own smartphone designs"
"This is an Apple-only issue."

Everyone (but the Apple Apologists) already knew that this problem is an
Apple-created Apple-design problem, where *all* the major Android
manufacturers have gone on record publicy asserting

"Android phones do not perform this kind of throttling".

What's more interesting than that is where this article goes into decent
detail on the one thing that's different about Apple design:

"Single-threaded performance is the one area where Apple clearly
stands alone."

Interesting. The article posits that the Apple single-threaded design might
be the main reason why Apple batteries can't handle their phones:

"there's a strong relationship between power consumption and
architecture"

In summary, it's purely wishful thinking that Apple won't throttle *all*
their latest iPhones after one year because:
1. Apple themselves clearly said they'd throttle all their newest iPhones.
2. Apple didn't change their power-hungry single-threaded architecture.

Remember, this is an Apple-caused Apple-designed Apple-only problem,
despite nospam's clever hands-caught-in-the-cookie jar Apple Apologists'
attempt at saying Android manufacturers also *secretly*, *permanently*, and
*drastically* throttle CPU speeds of their phones after only one year of
ownership.

Everthing I state is a fact.

harry newton wrote:

HTC, Motorola, LG and Samsung are
among the major brands quick to stress they see no reason to throttle
the performance of their smartphones."

False. Android phones absolutely do throttle the CPU secretly with no
warning:

https://stackoverflow.com/q/11883404/6540130

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

You will learn two things about little Jimmy Newton very quickly:

1. It changes its name more often than a few here change their socks (those that wear socks).

2. It is looking for validation, not discussion.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

HTC, Motorola, LG and Samsung are
among the major brands quick to stress they see no reason to throttle
the performance of their smartphones."

False. Android phones absolutely do throttle the CPU secretly with no
warning:

https://stackoverflow.com/q/11883404/6540130

from the same stackoverflow thread Samsung Galaxy S3 (9300)
"It turns out to be a thermal problem. As the app is running the
android battery temperature is rising. At 48 degrees android os has
throttled down the cpu from 1.4 Ghz to 0.8 Ghz."

The difference is that the throttling isn't permanent. Unclear if the
same behavior exists for all Androids.

On 2018-01-02, M.L wrote:


HTC, Motorola, LG and Samsung are
among the major brands quick to stress they see no reason to throttle
the performance of their smartphones."

False. Android phones absolutely do throttle the CPU secretly with no
warning:

https://stackoverflow.com/q/11883404/6540130

The difference is that the throttling isn't permanenti

Nope; the Apple feature only activates when the OS detects the battery
is unable to provide needed voltage, which fluctuates and is not
permanent or even constant. You've been fed a lie.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

In article , M.L.
wrote:

HTC, Motorola, LG and Samsung are
among the major brands quick to stress they see no reason to throttle
the performance of their smartphones."

False. Android phones absolutely do throttle the CPU secretly with no
warning:

https://stackoverflow.com/q/11883404/6540130

from the same stackoverflow thread Samsung Galaxy S3 (9300)
"It turns out to be a thermal problem. As the app is running the
android battery temperature is rising. At 48 degrees android os has
throttled down the cpu from 1.4 Ghz to 0.8 Ghz."

The difference is that the throttling isn't permanent.

it's not permanent on iphones either.

only *peak* loads are limited, where the battery can't source the
necessary current. had that not been done, the phone would likely
suddenly shut down.

the rest of the time, when the battery is not being pushed hard,
there's no throttling because the battery is capable of providing the
needed power.

Unclear if the
same behavior exists for all Androids.

all mobile devices vary cpu speed and other subsystems based on load.

to not do so is stupid.

He who is nospam said on Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:38:29 -0500:

it's not permanent on iphones either.

Apple Apologists seem to believe in the battery fairy.

harry newton wrote:
He who is nospam said on Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:38:29 -0500:

it's not permanent on iphones either.

Apple Apologists

So few facts, so much time. Life's hard for an old troll!

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2018-01-02, harry newton wrote:
He who is nospam said on Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:38:29 -0500:

it's not permanent on iphones either.

Apple Apologists blah blah blah blah blah.

The old man-child troll is a broken record.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

He who is Jolly Roger said on 2 Jan 2018 22:00:24 GMT:

So few facts, so much time. Life's hard for an old troll!

Since you're an Apple Apologists, facts are invisible to you.
You do believe in the battery fairy.

Meanwhile, the rest of us can see the fact that are *invisible* to Apple
Apologists.

To wit...
Apple Won't Stop Throttling iPhone Performance

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/261243-apple-cuts-battery-replacement-costs-wont-stop-throttling-iphone-performance

That article clearly says Apple "won't stop" throttling of *all* newer
iPhones after about one year to about half their original CPU speeds.

"The effective cost of buying an Apple device is significantly higher
than it used to be, at least for people who keep their hardware more
than a year"

"Apple acknowledges that it failed to properly inform users about the
changes made in iOS 10.2.1 and the introduction of this throttling."

Another fact that the Apple Apologists will hate is that this is
an Apple-only problem.

"Apple tries to dodge responsibility for its own smartphone designs"
"This is an Apple-only issue."

Everyone (but the Apple Apologists) already knew that this problem is an
Apple-created Apple-design problem, where *all* the major Android
manufacturers have gone on record publicy asserting

"Android phones do not perform this kind of throttling".

Remember, this is an Apple-caused Apple-designed Apple-only problem,
despite nospam's clever hands-caught-in-the-cookie jar Apple Apologists'
attempt at saying Android manufacturers also *secretly*, *permanently*, and
*drastically* throttle CPU speeds of their phones after only one year of
ownership.

Everything I state is a fact; but facts are invisible to Apple Apologists.

He who is JF Mezei said on Tue, 2 Jan 2018 16:44:02 -0500:

I think that's wishful thinking (sans facts) for two big reasons:
1. What you hope goes diametrically against what Apple actually said.
2. Apple didn't change their power-hungry single-threaded architecture.

Apple made big changes starting with the 7 with low power and high power
CPU cores, and with the 8/X, The CPU has more dynamic management of
which core is used.

JF Mezei,
You're one of the rare people on this newsgroup who can converse like an
adult, so I appreciate that you bring up this great point.

There's *something* different about the iPhone 6's and 7's that Apple felt
the need to secretly permanently reduce the CPU speeds to less than half
the original in just a year - so - we would *hope* that Apple figured out
what it is that only the Apple CPUs exhibit that kills the batteries in a
year.

Let's *hope* they made those changes - but - if they did make those
changes, then why do they definitely throttle the iPhone 7?

And why did they *say* they would throttle *all* their phones in the
future?

Both those are facts.

So if Apple did "improve" the power - why are they still throttling and
planning to throttle the exact phones you say have power improvements?

Those two facts don't mix well.

So with the 8/X, there is a possibility that the "power management" will
just limit processes to the low power cores instead of throttling the
CPUs.

This would be *great* if it is true.
I *hope* it is true.

But then we have to wonder why Apple clearly said they would throttle *all*
their phones going forward.

Maybe ... and this is just conjecture ... Apple wants to settle the court
cases out of court so they don't want to give the court cases ammo by
admitting wrongdoing ... so maybe that's why Apple *said* they would
throttle moving forward (as if that's "normal" for phones).

Dunno. All I can say is that if they did "fix" the power management, then
they wouldn't need to throttle the newer phones - but they clearly said
they would throttle them. So the facts don't line up.

Apple knows how many amps are needed to run the phone, and how many amps
older batteries of certain size can supply. If the needed amps with low
power cores is less than what battery can supply, then no need for
further throttling.

I think Apple learned a lesson here which is they should test their phones
in the real world - and where the real world happens to include weather
colder than it gets in Cupertino and where the real world happens to be
"aged" batteries of at least the warranty period of 1 or 2 years.

I'm with you that Apple will likely *fix* this problem because they know
that people have to be thinking that they pay $1000 for an iPhone X and in
just one year, it's an iPhone 1/2X in terms of CPU speeds. That's horrid.

Nobody wants half an iPhone X in just one year!

So Apple *has* to fix this problem. Remember, despite the FUD that the
Apple Apologists (e.g., nospam & Jolly Roger) try to spew, this is an
Apple-only problem.

So Apple needs to understand what they did wrong, and how to fix it.

To me, the Occam's Razor answer is they need more realistic battery sizing
or actual "dynamic" (and not just "legally semantically dynamic that is
actually permanent" speed optimization), but, we have to let Apple figure
that one out for themselves.

That article clearly says Apple "won't stop" throttling of *all* newer
iPhones after about one year to about half their original CPU speeds.

Articles are speculation. And limiting access to high power cores is a
form of throttling anyways (except it doesn't actually slow down the CPU).

Actually, that's *not* speculation. Apple said it themselves. So it's just
the article saying a fact which is what Apple said it would do.

I suspect that Apple is playing a clever game (as always), which is that
they will vehemently deny wrongdoing all the while trying to combine the
court cases into a single case that they can settle out of court.

I posit that once they settle out of court, they're free to actually
finally admit the truth and fix the problem - but until then - they can't
be open (because anything they admit will be used in court against them).

In the end, I think Apple has an *easy* problem to solve which is so easy
to solve that it's not funny. But this is a long post so we can leave the
solution to later.

He who is harry newton said on Wed, 3 Jan 2018 05:15:18 +0000 (UTC):

In the end, I think Apple has an *easy* problem to solve which is so easy
to solve that it's not funny. But this is a long post so we can leave the
solution to later.

Here's what I posit is the easy solution to this Apple-only problem.

1. They will never come clean until they settle the court cases - it's just
not realistic to expect them to tell the truth - so we can expect all sorts
of cleverly crafted statements like that so-called apology until and unless
the combine the court cases and settle them out of court.

2. Once Apple clears that legal hurdle (which will cost them something like
five or ten million dollars and some nearly worthless incentive to
consumers, like free batteries or reduced-price batteries in the future or
discounts on new phones or whatever) ... then Apple can work on a truthful
"fix".

3. The most truthful fix is to eliminate the mandatory throttling - which
is to allow the user to decide if they want half an iPhone X in one year or
not. But of course, that will kill the batteries if the consumer doesn't
opt for half an iPhone X.

4. Hence, the next-most truthful fix is to fix the batteries or to fix the
Apple-only Apple-created problem with power management of those batteries.

Notice if Apple opts for the power management fix, then it's likely going
to be implemented in the next revision *after* the iPhone X because it
might involve changing how they streamline the CPU loads.

If Apple opts to fix the batteries, that has its own problems such as the
back of the phone might need to be enlarged to fit the bigger batteries. If
they can squeeze a better battery out of the current size, then that's fine
- but it's likely not gonna happen - so they have to increase the size of
the phone which will invite all sorts of lawsuits in and of itself.

In the end, Apple *knows* all this - which is why they secretly,
drastically, and permanently chopped CPU speeds in half after just one year
of use in those phones. It was the easy way out of the Apple-created
Apple-only design problem.

The good news is that Apple can make a trade-in of the old phone with the
newer (perhaps slightly bigger) phone as part of their settlement of the
lawsuits. Apple has plenty of money so that is the option that is probably
the best for all concerned.

But if Apple continues to attempt to weasle their way out of this
Apple-only Apple-design problem with lies, subterfuge, and secrecy, then
they will lose a *lot* of customer goodwill (which should be important to
them).

Most of the above is conjecture - so please consider it part of an adult
perspective on the facts in your adult response.

harry newton wrote:
He who is Jolly Roger said on 2 Jan 2018 22:00:24 GMT:

So few facts, so much time. Life's hard for an old troll!

Blah blah blah Apple Apologists, blah blah blah blah

Get some new material, old foolish troll.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

He who is JF Mezei said on Wed, 3 Jan 2018 01:59:01 -0500:

We'll just have to see what apple does for iPhone 2018 models. (Whether
it grows battery capacity such that after 2 years, the battery is still
good enough to power the phone in cold weather) or whether this is still
done through software throttling.

Yup. Apple has to do *something* because nobody wants their $1000 iPhone X
to turn into an iPhone 1/2X in just one year.

Apple *knows* what the problem is, and they *knew* the problem when they
decided to secretly slip in the CPU halving in the first place.

That they resorted to a drastic move that nobody else has ever done for a
smartphone is a very strong indicator that a "real" solution is a new
design.

So I agree with you on your logic that Apple must do something so that this
Apple-only design problem doesn't happen with the 2018 iPhone models.

I think Apple learned a lesson here which is they should test their phones
in the real world - and where the real world happens to include weather
colder than it gets in Cupertino

The specs mention low operating temperature of 0+ALA-, so from a legal point
of view, they may be in the clear. (although for the first battery,
within a year, I saw it shutdown at +-12+ALA- once).

It's been proven already that Apple wasn't aware of the low-temperature
issues so it's just yet another piece of the puzzle that clearly indicates
Apple doesn't test their devices thoroughly enough.

What Samsung implemented for batteries is sort of what Apple needs to
implement for their phones - which is a rigorous testing system that
simulates what would happen in a year.

Remember, Apple said they were totally blindsided by the iPhone 6 problems,
which simply means they didn't test it because they were common.


So Apple needs to understand what they did wrong, and how to fix it.

I am pretty sure Apple has known for quite some time. They will just
have to break the news to Jony Ive who won't be able to make his baby
thinner in 2018.

That's a pretty accurate assessment that I agree with. If anything, they
need thicker phones, where their "legal remedy" from lawsuits might be a
trade-in program for a phone that works for more than a year but that has
to have a thicker case.

I agree with you that Apple *knows* all the possible solutions which is why
they came up with the genius idea that they implemented, got caught, and
apologized for (although their so-called apology was a soothing farce).

On the plus side, bigger batteries will give more autonomy as well as
proviode enough amps when cold.

Yup. My battery is 7,000 mAh. It lasts as long as I need it to last.
And when it's dead, I just pop in another.

I agree with you that better batteries is what they need, and they know
this, which is why they decided not to and to just do their secret trick.

They can't do the secret trick anymore, so, they'll have to fix the design
problem moving forward. Let's hope they fix it for 2018 models and that
they offer a new-design trade-in program for the previous iPhones.

I suspect that's what their out-of-court settlement will end up being:
a. A penalty
b. A trade-in for the customers to a design that actually works

In the end, I think Apple has an *easy* problem to solve which is so easy
to solve that it's not funny.

It's not that easy. If only they could shrink that huge taptic engine to
what it used to be like before (a small vibrator). Marketing might not
like that.

Well, it's not that easy if they want to keep the phones thin, but remember
this is an Apple-only problem so they can do whatever it is that the
Android manufacturers do and they won't have this problem.

So they can fix the design if they want to.

For the existing phones, it's pretty easy for them to just design a thicker
back and thicker battery, and that might solve their legal issues if they
offer a trade in. People might accept a bigger phone if it's the same
phone, essentially, but with the battery that works with it for more than
just one year.

I pity all those $1000 iPhone X owners who will have an iPhone 1/2 X in
just one year. Apple can't afford to alienate those customers who pay the
most. It might be why shipment forecasts are down 20 million from 50
million to 30 million. Dunno.

But if I was in the market for a $1000 iPhone X, and I knew it would be an
iPhone 1/2 X in just a year, I wouldn't plunk down $1000 for a phone with
that time-lapse halving "feature".

Apple could grow the smaller phones a bit to allow bigger battery. I
have to wonder at what stage the iPhone 9 is at right now and wether it
is too late or not to make such a change.

I'm going to agree with you and posit that the simplest solution is a
bigger battery. Of course, Apple already knew this, which is why they came
up with their simplest solution (which was to secretly halve the cpu).

Since they can't secretly halve the CPU anymore (they'll lose customers if
they continue that shady practice) - they have to do *something*, and that
something might be a bigger battery.

What I think is *easy* for Apple, given they have more money than God, is
just to make a trade-in for existing owners of a phone with a bigger
battery, and that will go a long way toward solving their self-created
legal troubles.

Once they get that backlog of legal troubles resolved, moving forward, all
they havfe rto do is implement what the Android people do, since this
problem is an Apple-only problem.

That's why the solution should be easy for them - since it's already solved
on the Android side. It's a self-created Apple-only problem that Apple can
easily solve if they want to solve it.

As you said ... we'll know in the future... so this is just conjecture.
I do appreciate that you speak as an adult would, and not as an Apple
Apologist would. That's refreshing for this newsgroup.

In article , harry newton
wrote:

but remember
this is an Apple-only problem

nope. it's a battery chemistry issue which affects android and any
other device that uses a battery.

there is *no* avoiding it. *every* battery ages.

https://us.community.samsung.com/t5/...e-4-shuts-off-
at-40-battery/td-p/54776
The *note *4 shut down with 40% left I thought mine *was the only one
but I've heard others complaining about this *how fustrating is that
what's up that samsung ?
....
My phone shuts down at 50% I don't know what to do ??
....
New or old, internal battery makes no difference. * I've had
shutdowns at levels as high as 80%. Most notably during camera usage,
especially if flash is used. *I've resorted to always being connected
to a fast charge external battery. Sigh.*
....
A buddy of mine recently took note of something similar, especially
when using his camera as well. He ended up disabling Instagram and
the boomerang feature, and that did the trick for him on the random
restarts or shutting down. Not sure how that was even related, just
what he told me.

it's related because those apps were causing the battery to be pushed
beyond its limits, exactly the same as with iphones, at which point, it
shut down.


https://forums.androidcentral.com/sp...-4g-touch/2246
28-strange-battery-problem-need-help.html
In each case, I was using it in some kind of high battery drain
function... either watching a movie or running GPS software.
In two of the three cases, this was started right after unplugging
the phone from the charger for the night, so I had a full charge,
but suddenly, without warning the phone just shuts off dead. No power
down animation, no nothing... just goes cold black dead.
In each case, I know I've had about 60-75% battery left just before
it died.

When I power up the phone, it beeps low battery, and say I have
between 1-3% power left and eventually powers down from low battery.
....
I had this issue as well. New battery fixed it, hadn't happened since.
....
Had this exact problem. Never had any battery issues until the JB
upgrade. Tried Factory Reset and that didnt help.
....
my S2 just shuts off without any notification and doesn't start until
i plug it to the charger and switch it on. This mostly happens after
2 minutes of playing games,listening songs or downloadin an app. What
should I do? Please help me
....
My phone is a HTC Desire S, which I upgraded to Android 4.0.4 a few
months ago (official update). The shutdowns and extreme power
drainage startet about a week ago. With a full battery my phone
reliably shuts down less than 5 minutes into a game. Then upon reboot
it reports ~6% battery life and often shuts down again.
....
My Galaxy J7 suddenly shut down, and could not restart by pushing the
power button.
....
My mobile switches off even at 70-80% of charging.and it doesn't
switch on even when I switch it on.


https://forums.androidcentral.com/sa...10523-note-4-s
udden-battery-drain.html
My Sprint Note 4 (running 5.1.1) has been working without issue for
the past year, but a strange power/battery/something issue happened
yesterday and today.

Both days, around the same time (between 5:00-6:00pm) my phone has
decided that it no longer has a charge and shuts off. Yesterday, the
phone went from roughly 35% 10%, which alerted me of low charge
0% and shutting off within around 30 seconds.
....
That's funny. My AT&T Note 4 does the exact same thing.
....
My note 4 does similar. I get maybe 1.5 hours of use out of it, then
at 30% boom it shuts down. Plug it in and it shows zero percent.

30% after 1.5 hours of use (ignoring the shutdown problem)? hah.
iphones can easily get 1.5 *days* of use.

What this all comes down to is a chemistry/battery aging issue that Apple did a ****-poor job of explaining to its customers. Not some grand conspiracy, not some plot to force Apple users to purchase a new phone - I would posit that 90% of their customers did not notice one whit of inconvenience or trouble.

But, that did not stop our schizophrenic OP from attempting to start his personal tempest in a virtual teapot. And with a little "poor me" thrown in.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

In article , JF Mezei
wrote:


nope. it's a battery chemistry issue which affects android and any
other device that uses a battery.

Funny how the 6s PLUS doesn't have that.

it absolutely does

He who is JF Mezei said on Wed, 3 Jan 2018 12:56:27 -0500:

Funny how the 6s PLUS doesn't have that. Same battery chemistry. Same
CPU and components. Oh, but while same chemistry, it has BIGGER Battery
which means that it is able to supply my amps than the small battery
when cold/old.

All phone may have smame/similar battery chemistry, but how the battery
is sized relative to power consumption needs of the phone makes a huge
difference.

The bigger Android phone have mega battteries like 5000-7000mAh compared
to the ~1750 on the 6s.

Everything you say is apropos, where nospam, as a classic Apple Apologist,
tries to intimate because all phones have batteries, that this
Apple-created Apple-only problem is inside of all phones.

That's like saying because all houses have paint, that lead paint is in all
houses if it's in just one house.

I don't know why facts are invisible to the Apple Apologists, but nospam
knows very well this is a specific problem for specific phones, just like
the Samsung exploding battery problem was a specific problem for a specific
phone.

As you aptly noted, Apple *knows* exactly what the problem is, and since
the solution is to fix the design, they decided to secretly take the
simpler way out ...

And for that, I predict they'll need to settle those lawsuits out of court
and then, when they have that behind them, they can come clean and just
make the customer harm good.

Hence I predict the following along that strategy:
1. Apple won't admit fault until they settle the lawsuits in court
2. Once they settle, the settlement will dictate the redress

I postulate that a perfectly acceptable redress for the owners harmed is
for Apple to provide a trade-in program of old phone to slightly larger
equivalent phone that doesn't have the same Apple battery problems.

Apple has enough money and customer loyalty to pull this off with aplomb.
Let's see if they take the true "courageous" decision.

I suspect they will because they will have to.

He who is Jolly Roger said on 3 Jan 2018 06:25:53 GMT:

Get some new material, old foolish troll.

Think about this question before you childishly retort.

Q: How much added *value* have you added to this adult conversation?

He who is JF Mezei said on Wed, 3 Jan 2018 12:54:04 -0500:

It's been proven already that Apple wasn't aware of the low-temperature
issues so it's just yet another piece of the puzzle that clearly indicates
Apple doesn't test their devices thoroughly enough.

I know Apple became aware of battery problem for 6s by March/April 2016,
so barely 6 months after product launch. Staff were instructed to tell
customers that it was normal for thw 6a to shutdown in cold.

Except that it's not normal for a phone to shutdown in the cold.

I applaud you for being able to see facts.

You're not an Apple Apologist because your observations and opinions are
sane. Certainly no Apple Apologist could say what you just said.

IMHO, Apple spent more energy on how to hide the battery issues after they
were found, than on testing for them prior to launch.

By October, Apple Support was instructed to get customers to run the
remote diagnostics suite (with results sent back to Apple). And by end
of November, the battery recall was launched. (2016).

The Apple battery recall was the right thing to do, just as any other
manufacturer would recall a defective device.

That recall was premised on a bad batch of batteries, so the customers
were given expectation that new battery would permanently fix problem.
It didn't.

Again, you have the ability to see facts which appear to be invisible to
the Apple Apologists.

Apple was "incredibly specific" about the first recall issue but incredibly
vague about the 10.2.1 "fix". There's a reason for that since nothing
happens at Apple by accident.

Apple made a conscious decision to hide the facts, which will be proven in
court if the cases aren't settled out of court sooner.

Note that the "bad batch" did age much faster and exhibited the problem
within 5-6 months of product launch.

This is an interesting fact, where even Apple said there were multiple
problems that the customers found for them since Apple doesn't test their
devices long enough in the real world to find them on their own.

What Samsung implemented for batteries is sort of what Apple needs to
implement for their phones - which is a rigorous testing system that
simulates what would happen in a year.

I am pretty sure that engineering within Apple would have been aware
that the battery was undersized for the type of power loads of the 6s
once you factopr in reduced battery amperage capacity as it ages.

This is a good point, in that there isn't any engineering mystery here like
there was, initially, in the Samsung exploding battery recall ... so, it's
odd then that if Apple engineers knew what they were doing, then why did
Apple feel the need to *secretly* halve the performance of the CPU.

Do you think the engineers planned this all along?

And it
is likely that marketing overruled this for the sake of keeping the 6s
as thin as the 6, making it sturdier (back pocket bending gate) and
adding a bigger taptic engine.

Ummm....mmm... this makes sense. Nothing happens at Apple without MARKETING
knowing about it - as it's one of the most successfully marketed companies
on the planet.

It could very well be that, just like in the Volkswagen situation,
MARKETING decided the final specs, and engineering couldn't do it - so they
had to shoehorn in the secret halving of the CPU just to meet the spec.

I know that the handful of (155.7 x 80 x 7.4 mm) $130 LG Stylo 3 Plus
phones I bought for Christmas as gifts has a 3200 mAh battery, as does the
(159.7 x 78.1 x 7.6 mm) LG V20, while the (158.2 x 77.9 x 7.3 mm) iPhone 7
Plus has only a 2900 mAh battery (about 10% less capacity).

Maybe that tenth of a millimeter in thickness is what cost Apple customers
that 10% loss, out of the box, of their battery capacity?

https://www.phonearena.com/phones/compare/LG-Stylo-3,Apple-iPhone-7-Plus,LG%20V20/phones/10337,9816,10202

Remember, Apple said they were totally blindsided by the iPhone 6 problems,
which simply means they didn't test it because they were common.

They were not blindsighted. The bad batch simply made a problem they
would have been aware of surface well before they had predicted.

I agree that it's a technical problem to test for "battery aging", and I
note that Apple went to extreme lengths to try to imply that all batteries
aged as fast as the iPhone batteries aged.... but it's a fact that this
problem that they felt the need to secretly throttle cpu speeds to less
than half within a year of use happens only on Apple devices, and only on
some of them.

So, no matter when Apple figured it out, the fact remains that they decided
to "solve" their problem by secretly halving CPU speeds, which is what
they're being sued for (rightfully so).

What I expect them to do is:
1. Not come clean until they can settle the lawsuits out of court
2. Then the lawsuits will dictate a proper remedy to the customer

Hint: Charging the customer to replace a defective battery is a lousy
remedy by all accounts.

With the then expected replacement cycle of 2 years, they likely figured
that the average onwer might expect a couple of cold shutdowns during
the winter of year 1, and as phone would be replaced in fall of year 2,
wouldn't get the bad shutdowns on year 2.

I have to disagree with your replacement lifecycle of 2 years, as I get far
more than that out of my phones. So do plenty of other people.

It's only Apple customers who have been trained to think a battery lasts
only two years. Did you see the Samsung statement I published for example?
It's a completely different expectation of battery life cycles.

In practice, the Android phones that have non-removable batteries (Nexus 5
was given away and is still working fine and the Google Moto G is also
working just fine) I gave as gifts years ago are still going strong.

My observation is that it seems only Apple customers feel that a battery
needs to be replaced after only two years of use. It's like saying a car
needs to be replaced after only two years of use. The perception works to
the manufacturer's advantage only.

Suspect they underestimated how soon the problem would surface.

Like Volkswagon, they hit upon the "elegant" solution, but it was so
elegant, and cheap, that they had to do it secretly.

BTW, one possible solution is similar to electric cars:
Put a heater in/under the battery.

I think Apple knows all the solutions where they took the "elegant"
(secret) way out.

Now that the cat is out of the bag, I hope they just design the phones for
the batteries and vice versa. It's ridiculous that only Apple phones are
2-year replacement items. It's like having cars being replaced every two
years. It's wasteful.

On 2018-01-03, harry newton wrote:

Blah blah blah blah blah Apple Apologist, blah blah blah blah

Get some new material, old fool.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2018-01-03, harry newton wrote:
He who is Jolly Roger said on 3 Jan 2018 06:25:53 GMT:

Get some new material, old foolish troll.

Think about

Troll, troll, troll your boat...

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR