Law firm that extracted $450M settlement in Apple e-books case is going after company for ...

1235789

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 178
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,688member

    ivanh said:
    b. "Your iPhone lets you know when your battery level goes down to 20% ... and lets you turn on Low Power Mode... " And when you turn on Battery Saving Mode, the performance throttled showed on Geekbench 4's Single-Core from about 1500 to below 999, and frequency throttled showed on CPU DasherX from 1400 MHz to 839 MHz on an iPhone 6 Plus.  So, it's conservative to say that 30% battery remains to an iOS device, the Battery Savings Mode is not necessary and the device can still run at full speed.
    Battery saving mode is to try and eek out more runtime for a given amount of energy left in the battery. It is totally unrelated to the problem of unexpected shutdown due to too-high internal resistance of the battery.
  • Reply 82 of 178
    ivanhivanh Posts: 129member
    Around mid-2017 one of my iPhone 6 Plus-es was randomly throttled to Geekbench 4 Single-Core 914 for a few days while battery capacity at 92% between fully charged to 30% remaining, even after restart and no app was running. Apple Store replaced it and the AppleCare+ restarted for 2 years till 2019.  The replaced iPhone 6 Plus was randomly throttled again on December 2017, for about a week.  It returns to normal now, i.e. Single-Core >1500, frequency > 1300 MHz.
  • Reply 83 of 178
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,688member
    mr. h said:
    Your battery may be good and there may be myriad of reasons that slow down your device: defective logic board, water, drop, defective battery are to name a few. Slowness is always a support issue. If you have a slowness problem Apple support is there. As when you're sick you don't heal yourself reading Wikipedia but you go to a physician right? Did Apple refuse to cure the slowness of your device? No because you didn't request that.
    Agreed with all of this.
    tried to force Apple to comply with your "solution".
    You don't think it's totally unreasonable of Apple to refuse to replace the battery? It's not that they were refusing to replace it for free, they were refusing to replace it, even for the $79 fee (which clearly has a VERY healthy profit margin)! Personally, I think that is unacceptable and indefensible.
    Then you would sue Apple again claiming "they unnecessarily replaced my good battery and they charged $79 for that."
    This does not logically follow. If a customer wants to pay Apple to put a brand new battery into said customer's phone, I really don't see why the state of the battery currently in the phone is at all relevant. It is reasonable for the customer to expect that Apple will put in a new battery for the agreed fee, regardless of the reason that the customer wants a new battery.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 84 of 178
    ivanhivanh Posts: 129member
    Kuyangkoh said:
    WoW, so LI batteries now have thier own Processor inside??? Whatah @@@
    Now you've learned something new.
  • Reply 85 of 178
    ivanhivanh Posts: 129member

    saltyzip said:
    I can't understand how people can defend apple in this situation, if they had been transparent about the problem then there wouldn't have been an investigation into this and outrage post factual results. 

    There Are None So Blind

    As Those Who Will Not See

    Transparency / honesty is suitable only for those innocent people.  Denial is for those who say "catch me if you can"!
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 86 of 178
    ivanhivanh Posts: 129member

    mr. h said:
    ivanh said:
    It should not be the iOS business to throttle it.
    Not correct. There is nothing that the on-battery circuitry can do with regards the internal resistance of the cells. It is inevitable that if the iPhone circuitry draws too large a peak current on an old battery with high internal impedance, its output voltage will drop excessively and cause a shutdown. The throttling is used to prevent such peak current draw.

    From your perspective, I know and accept what you said.  My perspective saying that "not the iOS business to throttle it" is on a different context.
  • Reply 87 of 178
    SoliSoli Posts: 7,089member
    ivanh said:
    mr. h said:
    ivanh said:
    It should not be the iOS business to throttle it.
    Not correct. There is nothing that the on-battery circuitry can do with regards the internal resistance of the cells. It is inevitable that if the iPhone circuitry draws too large a peak current on an old battery with high internal impedance, its output voltage will drop excessively and cause a shutdown. The throttling is used to prevent such peak current draw.
    From your perspective, I know and accept what you said.  My perspective saying that "not the iOS business to throttle it" is on a different context.
    I don't even know how many decades its been since CPUs were intelligently throttling performance in order to make power use as efficient as possible. Even know we have multiple cores that work in tandem to supply a variety of performance thresholds to maximize battery life. The A11 Bionic even takes that to a whole new level.

    So complaining that the system is keeping a high voltage event from shutting down the system with an aged battery is just part of this evolution of more intelligent systems that will work to maximize battery life for the very mobile devices that we've come to rely on.

    Are you really saying it's not Apple's business to have the system choose whether the two high-performance and/or the four-high efficiency cores in the A11 Bionic are ideal for a given moment? How about the fact that it comes from the factory underclocked for ideal performance per watt and to keep it within a certain heat threshold? What about when the system throttles down as thermometers detect that the heat it getting too high? Do you think you deserve a toggle switches in iOS so you can choose all varying CPU options that Apple has decided to choose for you? How about a slider for the maximum clock rate as you see fit… battery life and dangerous heat levels be damned?  If it's not Apple to make all these decisions then who's is it? Yours? All these seem like ridiculous expectations, to me, but if you're arguing for the device shutting down without warning do to a voltage spike that can be avoided, then these are in the same ballpark of giving the user stupid settings choices.
    edited January 6 ihatescreennamesStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 88 of 178
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,214member
    feudalist said:
    Ignorant nonsense full of half truths and outright lies. Congratulations on your first post. 

    One year of casual use will not cause your battery to fail the impedance checks as you claim. Nor will above casual use as most of us can attest to. You’d have to run 2-3 full charge cycles a day to wear down your battery that far. 
    Set aside 6/6s. I have iphone 7, so far so good. But, can you explain something. When apple pushed iOS 11.2, almost all 7’s was covered with warranty. Users on reddit reported cases when they had batteries with 90-ish remaing capacity, allready throtled, got to apple only to hear that they batteries fine, that there is no any problem, they even refused to change battteries at owners cost. Suddenly, after reddit story go wild, apple is in sorry folks, we apologize. 
    I don’t have any problem with battery age, they are consumables. But in first year of use and without clear customer support policy regarding issue? For some eastern brands for half or quarter price of iphone - its acceptable, but not for APPLE and 800 USD. I’m from EU, we have consumer protection law, two year warranty is mandatory minimum. How low cost chinese brands can do bussines here but apple can’t?  Why secrecy? I’ll tell you - because this is design flaw and number of affected units is in tens of millions so there is considerable buttom line hit. 

    I’m very happy iphone user, I simply love them, but this is not acceptable behavior. No need for insults, don’t worry about me, think what you want. 

    Time will tell...
    Totally agree.  Wonder if it has something to do with TMSC chips instead of using Samsung.
    feudalistmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 89 of 178

    feudalist said:
    Ignorant nonsense full of half truths and outright lies. Congratulations on your first post. 

    One year of casual use will not cause your battery to fail the impedance checks as you claim. Nor will above casual use as most of us can attest to. You’d have to run 2-3 full charge cycles a day to wear down your battery that far. 
    Set aside 6/6s. I have iphone 7, so far so good. But, can you explain something. When apple pushed iOS 11.2, almost all 7’s was covered with warranty. Users on reddit reported cases when they had batteries with 90-ish remaing capacity, allready throtled, got to apple only to hear that they batteries fine, that there is no any problem, they even refused to change battteries at owners cost. Suddenly, after reddit story go wild, apple is in sorry folks, we apologize. 
    I don’t have any problem with battery age, they are consumables. But in first year of use and without clear customer support policy regarding issue? For some eastern brands for half or quarter price of iphone - its acceptable, but not for APPLE and 800 USD. I’m from EU, we have consumer protection law, two year warranty is mandatory minimum. How low cost chinese brands can do bussines here but apple can’t?  Why secrecy? I’ll tell you - because this is design flaw and number of affected units is in tens of millions so there is considerable buttom line hit. 

    I’m very happy iphone user, I simply love them, but this is not acceptable behavior. No need for insults, don’t worry about me, think what you want. 

    Time will tell...
    Look at your warranty documents again. Batteries are consumables in the US, and EU, like you said. As such, they are not covered under consumer protection laws.

    That said, with the iPhone 7, there is a chance that a battery can hit under voltage at a year, or just over. It depends on the use pattern of the owner, and the care and handling of the device. Temperature extremes like being left in a hot car, or frozen very nearly always inflict some form of permanent damage on the battery.

    The cost of the device that the battery services is irrelevant. And, they last longer than a year anyway, so I'm not sure where you're coming up with that little tidbit in your argument. The reddit threat that you're speaking of is iPhone 6-family heavy.

    These batteries are very small. Volume-wise, there's about the same amount of reactants in one as there is in a C-cell alkaline battery. Expecting them to be eternal or comparing them to the life of a car battery isn't reasonable, and expecting them to have the same voltage for years isn't either. Like I've said -- there is a sin to be accounted for, here, and it's a lack of disclosure beyond "oh, hey, we fixed the shutdown problem." But, it isn't a defect.
    You are right, batteries are consumables, there is no protection for usual wear & tear. But, there is protection for manuf. defect, in some places upto 6 years. This is exactly the same as with firestone tyres. No guarantee for wear but there is protection for sudden puncture unrelated to use. Batteries degrade with use, you get shorter and shorter usable time betwean charges and when the battery is depleted and because there is no foolproof metods to accuratly mesure remaining charge, you can expect shuttdowns in 20-0 region. Not in seamingly healty batteries, not in first year. That’s defect, thats’s recall. Oh, we shared that story with allmost every apple product. No problem for me, my iphone 5 had defective battery in first 8 monts (simptoms exactly the same - unpredictable shuttdowns), covered in warranty, got another iphone and 4 years later stil usable. With another, had one stuck pixel, covered, me happy, love them even more. Fast forward, some 6’s got faulty batteries, apple recalled them. Fine. Forward more, there is more faulty 6’s. Ouch ouch. And thats the time when apple started this story. 

    Because of apple’s good track record, there must be bigger problem than some bad batch. According to anandtech, iphone is designed to draw upto 10w in very short time. They have very tight tolerances for every component whitch is good, but batteries are on razor blade thin. It’s possible that with smallest variations in manufacturing and user care too large numbers of units can fail. Plus models are almost unafected. This is not setled, just arguing my opinion. 

    Iphone price is technicaly unrelated to batteries and capacity but is related with quallity. It’s expected here, in US? you tell me. 
    edited January 6 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 90 of 178
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,214member
    petri said:
    bluefire1 said:
    Apple should have known better.
    100% this.  The lawsuits are deserved.
    They should also sue Apple for using the intel Modems in some of the 8plus and X phones - I have crap calll quality now and miss to many calls. Tim “bean counter” cook screws his customers with shady business.  Apple is lucky that Androids still suck.  If one of their OEMs figured out design, build, and security people would have a real alternative. For now I will have to switch from ATT to Verizon.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 91 of 178
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 1,659member
    p-dog said:
    Well, it’s a good thing somebody didn’t spill hot coffee onto their lap as well.
    You should learn the facts of that case before making another ignorant comment. The case against McDonald's was a solid case of corporate malfeasance. Sadly, their media campaign to slander the victim of their unsafe coffee temperature was very successful because people like you reference it as a frivolous lawsuit. An utterly inappropriate association. The woman got third degree burns, was not driving, the vehicle was not in motion, and accidents happen to anyone. People shouldn't have to suffer life-changing injuries from an accident with a cup of coffee.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 92 of 178
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 1,659member

    alandail said:
    bluefire1 said:
    Apple should have known better.
    All they did was fix a problem.  Now they are being sued for fixing it.
    They didn't fix a problem for customers. They hid a problem for the Wall Street types. They throttled phones with defective batteries to hide the defect and not replace as many batteries as they should have. This was absolutely corporate malfeasance. Their free battery replacement program was not in any way advertised and was limited to too few phones. This CPU throttling is equivalent to drugging over the symptoms, creating new symptoms, and ignoring the cause of the underlying problem.
    muthuk_vanalingamfeudalist
  • Reply 93 of 178
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 1,659member
    And yes, they should be sued for this. It's a shame so few people care enough about civilization that they're willing to be lapdogs to corporatocracy, defending every selfish act by corporations as if capitalism is some kind of god they're praying to ("please let it be my turn to be the 1%!"). We need more regulation, not less, and definitely not none! There is no self-regulation! Especially in a market where so many vocal consumers are indoctrinated tech geeks who think that bloated and broken software is some kind of natural law.
    muthuk_vanalingamfeudalist
  • Reply 94 of 178
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 2,556administrator
    dysamoria said:

    alandail said:
    bluefire1 said:
    Apple should have known better.
    All they did was fix a problem.  Now they are being sued for fixing it.
    They didn't fix a problem for customers. They hid a problem for the Wall Street types. They throttled phones with defective batteries to hide the defect and not replace as many batteries as they should have. This was absolutely corporate malfeasance. Their free battery replacement program was not in any way advertised and was limited to too few phones. This CPU throttling is equivalent to drugging over the symptoms, creating new symptoms, and ignoring the cause of the underlying problem.
    You're conflating two different issues.

    The battery recall that's still going on for the short run of serial numbers is for an actual manufacturing defect in the battery. I'm not sure how much advertising needed to be done on it, considering it was covered on major media sources outside tech. 

    The throttling on low voltage is not.
    SoliStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 95 of 178
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,819member
    Lawyers in America are like parasites...seriously!
    watto_cobramagman1979
  • Reply 96 of 178
    For F*** sake.. They’re all a pack of whingers... if you don’t like Apple and how they make their phones and IOS.. F*** off and buy an Android. You people are pathetic and think the world owes you everything. Batteries wear out and apple does it’s best to make sure you get the best out of it with a degraded battery. Just STFU AND REPLACE THE BATTERY like normal people do when it’s worn out . With all you litigious A Holes their won’t be an Apple in Years to come
    StrangeDayswatto_cobramagman1979
  • Reply 97 of 178
    Soli said:
    ivanh said:
    mr. h said:
    ivanh said:
    It should not be the iOS business to throttle it.
    Not correct. There is nothing that the on-battery circuitry can do with regards the internal resistance of the cells. It is inevitable that if the iPhone circuitry draws too large a peak current on an old battery with high internal impedance, its output voltage will drop excessively and cause a shutdown. The throttling is used to prevent such peak current draw.
    From your perspective, I know and accept what you said.  My perspective saying that "not the iOS business to throttle it" is on a different context.
    I don't even know how many decades its been since CPUs were intelligently throttling performance in order to make power use as efficient as possible. Even know we have multiple cores that work in tandem to supply a variety of performance thresholds to maximize battery life. The A11 Bionic even takes that to a whole new level.

    So complaining that the system is keeping a high voltage event from shutting down the system with an aged battery is just part of this evolution of more intelligent systems that will work to maximize battery life for the very mobile devices that we've come to rely on.

    Are you really saying it's not Apple's business to have the system choose whether the two high-performance and/or the four-high efficiency cores in the A11 Bionic are ideal for a given moment? How about the fact that it comes from the factory underclocked for ideal performance per watt and to keep it within a certain heat threshold? What about when the system throttles down as thermometers detect that the heat it getting too high? Do you think you deserve a toggle switches in iOS so you can choose all varying CPU options that Apple has decided to choose for you? How about a slider for the maximum clock rate as you see fit… battery life and dangerous heat levels be damned?  If it's not Apple to make all these decisions then who's is it? Yours? All these seem like ridiculous expectations, to me, but if you're arguing for the device shutting down without warning do to a voltage spike that can be avoided, then these are in the same ballpark of giving the user stupid settings choices.
    Thermal menagement is unrelated with this issue. Yes, they have thermal menagement because there is room for something about 4-5 W of power for SoC in a sustained manner. Anandtech was famous for their in-detph testing and they proved that iphone can sustain high load, benchmark load witch is something we never do in everyday use, even for 30 minutes before trothling kick in. There is no shutdowns, even then, after 30 minutes of benchmark torture, iphone retained two times higher framerate than nearest android competitor. Regarding battery issue, users experienced immediate shutdowns, so this is something diferent, unrelated to generated heat but related with batteries and pmic ability to quickly generate req. ammount of current and voltage witch is ussualy order of magnitude higher than typical load. 
    maxit
  • Reply 98 of 178
    For F*** sake.. They’re all a pack of whingers... if you don’t like Apple and how they make their phones and IOS.. F*** off and buy an Android. You people are pathetic and think the world owes you everything. Batteries wear out and apple does it’s best to make sure you get the best out of it with a degraded battery. Just STFU AND REPLACE THE BATTERY like normal people do when it’s worn out . With all you litigious A Holes their won’t be an Apple in Years to come
    This is contract issue, they advertise, we buy. Throtling to oblivion, secretly, after the terms are consumed, is breach of contract. Yes, they are obliged to restore device to agreed perfomance minus expected wear&tear. 
  • Reply 99 of 178
    dewmedewme Posts: 1,281member
    feudalist said:
    For F*** sake.. They’re all a pack of whingers... if you don’t like Apple and how they make their phones and IOS.. F*** off and buy an Android. You people are pathetic and think the world owes you everything. Batteries wear out and apple does it’s best to make sure you get the best out of it with a degraded battery. Just STFU AND REPLACE THE BATTERY like normal people do when it’s worn out . With all you litigious A Holes their won’t be an Apple in Years to come
    This is contract issue, they advertise, we buy. Throtling to oblivion, secretly, after the terms are consumed, is breach of contract. Yes, they are obliged to restore device to agreed perfomance minus expected wear&tear. 
    The last statement regarding "contract" brings up a very important point that the courts are going to have to decide on. This applies to this collection of class actions but also the now growing number of class actions against Intel regarding the Meltdown/Spectre issues. Both sets of class actions allege that the members of the class have been damaged due to mitigation steps and workarounds taken to avoid failures (crashes, unintended shutdowns, data loss) or breaches (private information leaks, revelation of secrets). Both sets of class actions specifically identify performance degradation and slowdowns as a damage that's been inflicted upon the members of the class. 

    So the real question that's raised in terms of a "contract" becomes, is there an agreed upon quality of service (QoS) contract between the sellers and buyers of these products when it comes to performance, either qualitatively (what it does) of quantitatively (how fast and how many things it can do at the same time)?  When I look at the end user license agreements (EULA), which I must agree to in order to use these products, in all cases that I can recall they make no QoS promises whatsoever. In fact, most of them pretty much say that everything is sold "as-is" and the seller is not making any promises whatsoever. If you don't like these terms, don't agree to the EULA and return the product. You do read the EULA prior to checking the "I agree" box, don't you?

    Outside of our tech gadget world there are many examples where mitigations or workarounds put in place to protect people or systems from known or anticipated threats have imposed serious QoS degradations on a product or service. None is more obvious than the airline travel service. There was a time when air travel was fun and exciting and only mildly disruptive to your normal routine, schedule, and privacy. With TSA security procedures in place the performance has degraded significantly, privacy is totally absent, and the whole process is onerous and degrading at times. Should we initiate a class action suit against the TSA for breaching an implied contract that airline travel shouldn't totally suck? Maybe this isn't the best example, but it is an example of an instance where things were done to mitigate a threat and the mitigation resulted in a reduced QoS to the consumers of the service.

    I hope that these class actions result in some clarification around what should be considered reasonable (I know, very subjective) ramifications of mitigations performed by the makers/owners of products in cases where a threat must be dealt with. I know everyone will want to spin it in their personal favor. There are as many arguments for a company performing preemptive protection measures in a product as there are against it. Those who say "run my smartphone at full speed and if it crashes - I'm willing to live with it" would be no less likely to try to sue the pants off of the manufacturer if the crash prevented a family member from contacting 911 in-time and someone died.  Perhaps the QoS terms and conditions need to be very explicit, like they are with many critical business systems. Either way, the courts are going to have to deal with this issue because the universal assumption of infinite entitlement that exists in many of today's consumers is not going away any time soon and there are armies of lawyers eager to take up their cases through the risk-free class action suit mechanism.  
    edited January 7 mr. hflashfan207feudalistpscooter63
  • Reply 100 of 178
    For F*** sake.. They’re all a pack of whingers... if you don’t like Apple and how they make their phones and IOS.. F*** off and buy an Android. You people are pathetic and think the world owes you everything. Batteries wear out and apple does it’s best to make sure you get the best out of it with a degraded battery. Just STFU AND REPLACE THE BATTERY like normal people do when it’s worn out . With all you litigious A Holes their won’t be an Apple in Years to come
    Even though I agree with you, rest assured that Apple will be fine. They still make amazing products that millions of people love and trust, and like me, will continue to buy. 
    watto_cobramagman1979
Sign In or Register to comment.