Apple responds to aftermarket iPhone replacement battery health warning

Posted:
in iPhone edited August 14
Apple's 'Service' battery message in the iPhone XR, iPhone XS, and iPhone XS Max Battery Health bar following a battery replacement outside of Apple's authorized repair network is doing its job, Apple has confirmed, with the warning a safety measure for users that doesn't affect how the installed battery functions at all.

Apple's new
Apple's new "Service" battery message. | Source: iFixit


Reports in early August revealed the existence of a "Service" message in the iPhone's Battery Health section of the iOS Settings app. The notification appears in instances when the battery has been replaced by an alternate component, and will display if the replacement was installed by a third-party firm not authorized by Apple to perform repairs, even if it is a genuine component.

The battery notification only applies to Battery Health for the iPhone XR, iPhone XS, and iPhone XS Max, when the handset is put through a battery repair via an unauthorized repair shop.

In a statement provided to AppleInsider, Apple insisted "We take the safety of our customers very seriously, and want to make sure any battery replacement is done properly." Apple points out it has over 1,800 Apple authorized service providers across the United States, so there is ample opportunity for customers to go through an official repair process with genuine parts.

"Last year we introduced a new feature to notify customers if we were unable to verify that the battery was genuine and installed by a certified technician following Apple repair processes," referencing the Service message. The notification is there to help protect customers from "damaged, poor quality, or used batteries which can lead to safety or performance issues," which could be the case for components from third-party battery firms outside the Apple supply chain.

Apple also advises the message's appearance does not affect the ability to use the iPhone at all, even after an unauthorized repair.

Testing by iFixit found the message appeared even if the component installed into the iPhone was a genuine Apple battery, indicating it requires an Apple Genius or Apple Authorized Service Provider for the message to work on the iPhone to remove the message.

Unverified batteries are not able to be monitored by the Battery Health function, with maximum capacity and peak performance capacity metrics also not registering on the device.

Battery Health was introduced following the discovery Apple artificially throttled the CPU performance of iPhones with degraded batteries, in an attempt to prevent them from unexpectedly shutting down. Battery Health gave consumers a way to see if their battery was running poorly, and if it was in need of replacement.

For a period of time, Apple also started a battery replacement program that reduced the cost of out-of-warranty battery replacements from $79 to $29. The program was popular, with 11 million batteries replaced in 2018, nine times the usual number.

The full statement reads:
"We take the safety of our customers very seriously and want to make sure any battery replacement is done properly. There are now over 1,800 Apple authorized service providers across the US so our customers have even more convenient access to quality repairs.
Last year we introduced a new feature to notify customers if we were unable to verify that the battery was genuine and installed by a certified technician following Apple repair processes. This information is there to help protect our customers from damaged, poor quality, or used batteries which can lead to safety or performance issues.
This notification does not impact the customer's ability to use the phone after an unauthorized repair."
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 44
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 987member
    So it does affect the use of the phone, as you can no longer see the battery health, despite the phone knowing that data, and it seemingly will not go into "peak performance protection" mode. Ok then.
    zroger73muthuk_vanalingamchemengin1entropysFileMakerFellergatorguy
  • Reply 2 of 44
    bsimpsenbsimpsen Posts: 295member
    I think Apple's approach is reasonable. Thirty years ago, I designed battery powered medical instrumentation (including defibrillators) containing rudimentary "gas gauge" hardware/firmware in the battery packs that allowed cell life and capacity to be monitored far more accurately than in previous systems. A couple years after introduction, we started getting field failure reports of batteries going dead unexpectedly while the gas gauge was indicating half a tank, or of warnings from our software that recently refurbished battery packs were worn out.

    Customers were replacing the cells in our packs with generic cells of about half the capacity,  because they were far less expensive. On the first charge cycle, those new cells were delivering half the energy expected by our battery monitoring system and our firmware wasn't able to cope with such a large (and out of spec) change in component behavior. A large system customer asked us to disable or modify our firmware to allow use of those lower capacity aftermarket replacement cells. We refused. It was our contention that the end customer for our products was the patient who's care was affected by our product's performance. Were we not about to let unskilled health care providers dictate to us the parameters for safe and effective operation of our products.
    planetary paulzroger73charlesgresdewmevirtualshiftradarthekatmacseekerFileMakerFellerStrangeDaysrepressthis
  • Reply 3 of 44
    bsimpsenbsimpsen Posts: 295member
    elijahg said:
    So it does affect the use of the phone, as you can no longer see the battery health, despite the phone knowing that data, and it seemingly will not go into "peak performance protection" mode. Ok then.
    If the specifications of a replacement battery are not known to the battery management system, the phone does NOT know the battery health. There are variations in cell capacity and cycle life between manufacturers of physically compatible batteries and iPhone cannot know what those are.
    FileMakerFellerStrangeDaysrepressthislolliverbshankwatto_cobraargonaut
  • Reply 4 of 44
    There might be umteen hundred Apple authorised service centers around the US, sure. But the world is bigger than the US, and Apple products are used arond the globe. Some countries, like the one where I service Apple products, have no official Apple presence at all. Battery replacement is dead simple to do really, any tech savvy person can do it. If Apple wanted to make sure replaced batteries are working the way they should, the better road to take would be to institute an MFI program for 3rd party batteries. I would be happy to get mine from a MFI certified manufacturer, the market for 3rd party batteries are for the most part completely opaque and it's really difficult to know anything much about the quality of the batteries you do take in. Which is a bummer for me and my business and a bummer for my customers.
    muthuk_vanalingamchemengin1entropysFileMakerFellerelijahg80s_Apple_Guygatorguybb-15toysandmewatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 44
    bsimpsenbsimpsen Posts: 295member
    Zamgeek said:
    There might be umteen hundred Apple authorised service centers around the US, sure. But the world is bigger than the US, and Apple products are used arond the globe. Some countries, like the one where I service Apple products, have no official Apple presence at all. Battery replacement is dead simple to do really, any tech savvy person can do it. If Apple wanted to make sure replaced batteries are working the way they should, the better road to take would be to institute an MFI program for 3rd party batteries. I would be happy to get mine from a MFI certified manufacturer, the market for 3rd party batteries are for the most part completely opaque and it's really difficult to know anything much about the quality of the batteries you do take in. Which is a bummer for me and my business and a bummer for my customers.
    We tried this route for third world countries where our products were sold, and where our distribution network was too thin to easily supply fast turnaround support. We quickly dropped the effort because it was too difficult to certify and police third party battery suppliers. We had particular difficulty in India, where the service bureau recommended by our customers, and who we'd connected with our own battery cell supplier, chose to use the worst quality NiMh batteries we'd ever seen in their refurb work, while tarnishing our reputation by claiming (correctly) that we'd certified them. That's the kind of brand damage that Apple understandably wishes to avoid. They're in a better position to hold third party service providers to account, but it's still a risky move.
    planetary paulracerhomie3jdb8167FileMakerFellerStrangeDaysrepressthislolliverbb-15watto_cobralarryjw
  • Reply 6 of 44
    Did anyone else initially interpret the headline as a "health warning" about batteries... as in human health?  Not the health of the battery?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 44
    irelandireland Posts: 17,645member
    Now that Apple’s battery replacement fees are a bit more reasonable, I’m fine with this trade off. Also, it’s nice to know when you purchase a used phone is the battery is guaranteed legit.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 44
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,147member
    elijahg said:
    So it does affect the use of the phone, as you can no longer see the battery health, despite the phone knowing that data, and it seemingly will not go into "peak performance protection" mode. Ok then.
    And some how we all survived and used our smartphones just fine before this battery health stuff existed. IMO this is one of those things that just gets people all riled up yet it probably impacts a small percentage of users. But we live in the age of everyone being constantly outraged over something.
    AppleExposedchemengin1FileMakerFellerrepressthiselijahgbb-15toysandmewatto_cobraargonaut
  • Reply 9 of 44
    If I buy a refurb IPhone, I’d like to know it an unauthorized party did the refurbishment.

    Really, this applies to any electronic device...

    As long as Apple doesn’t throttle performance I don’t care.  I would like to know though if Apple detects a problem regardless of the source of parts or service.  I realize it might not be as accurate, but some information is better than no information.
    dewmezinkdifferent
  • Reply 10 of 44
    zroger73zroger73 Posts: 718member
    elijahg said:
    So it does affect the use of the phone, as you can no longer see the battery health, despite the phone knowing that data, and it seemingly will not go into "peak performance protection" mode. Ok then.
    And some how we all survived and used our smartphones just fine before this battery health stuff existed. IMO this is one of those things that just gets people all riled up yet it probably impacts a small percentage of users. But we live in the age of everyone being constantly outraged over something.
    Yep. I've used Coconut Battery to see the health of my iDevice's batteries for years.

    Also, a noticeable decrease in usage time between charges is a pretty obvious sign your battery capacity is decreasing. Do we REALLY need a message telling us, "Hello! Your phone is only holding a charge for 3 hours and it used to hold a charge for 12 hours. Please replace your battery to restore peak performance."
    zinkdifferent
  • Reply 11 of 44
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,376unconfirmed, member
    bsimpsen said:
    I think Apple's approach is reasonable. Thirty years ago, I designed battery powered medical instrumentation (including defibrillators) containing rudimentary "gas gauge" hardware/firmware in the battery packs that allowed cell life and capacity to be monitored far more accurately than in previous systems. A couple years after introduction, we started getting field failure reports of batteries going dead unexpectedly while the gas gauge was indicating half a tank, or of warnings from our software that recently refurbished battery packs were worn out.

    Customers were replacing the cells in our packs with generic cells of about half the capacity,  because they were far less expensive. On the first charge cycle, those new cells were delivering half the energy expected by our battery monitoring system and our firmware wasn't able to cope with such a large (and out of spec) change in component behavior. A large system customer asked us to disable or modify our firmware to allow use of those lower capacity aftermarket replacement cells. We refused. It was our contention that the end customer for our products was the patient who's care was affected by our product's performance. Were we not about to let unskilled health care providers dictate to us the parameters for safe and effective operation of our products.

    I'm sure the complainers in the comments know more than you. Apple is just being mean.

    /s
    lolliver
  • Reply 12 of 44
    bsimpsenbsimpsen Posts: 295member
    some information is better than no information.
    Really? And if that information is wrong? That's the potential Apple is trying to avoid.

    As long as Apple doesn’t throttle performance I don’t care.
    You'd prefer a sudden shut-down?

    If the new battery can't provide the energy expected by the battery management system, you're going to get bad information and will have to endure whatever protective measures the system takes to maximize utility. A slow phone is better than a dead phone.
    edited August 14 dewmeFileMakerFellerStrangeDayslollivergenovellepscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 44
    bsimpsenbsimpsen Posts: 295member
    AppleExposed said:

    I'm sure the complainers in the comments know more than you. Apple is just being mean.

    /s
    The Dunning-Kruger effect explains your suspicion.
    StrangeDayslolliver
  • Reply 14 of 44
    dewmedewme Posts: 2,121member
    Nothing Apple does with respect to battery replacement is going to satisfy 100% of those affected for every possible scenario. It's not like they are negatively impacting the function of the device in any way. Yes, seeing the service flag will likely detract from the resale value of devices that are flagged. However, if you in need of a battery replacement you will now have to consider that getting it replaced locally by a third party shop rather than shipping it off to Apple Is possibly going to reduce your device's resale value. It's your choice and Apple should probably make this very clear in the Battery Health app and the user documentation. 

    The point about Apple implementing a battery certification program that third parties can follow sounds good on paper but it would likely be very expensive to manage to the quality level and schedule that Apple requires. The time frames required to get such a program in place and monitored for a single component in a single product would likely be near the lifetime of the product itself. These are not standard off-the-shelf components, every one is made specifically for a specific product that's only on the market for a few years. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 44
    bsimpsen said:
    I think Apple's approach is reasonable. Thirty years ago, I designed battery powered medical instrumentation (including defibrillators) containing rudimentary "gas gauge" hardware/firmware in the battery packs that allowed cell life and capacity to be monitored far more accurately than in previous systems. A couple years after introduction, we started getting field failure reports of batteries going dead unexpectedly while the gas gauge was indicating half a tank, or of warnings from our software that recently refurbished battery packs were worn out.

    Customers were replacing the cells in our packs with generic cells of about half the capacity,  because they were far less expensive. On the first charge cycle, those new cells were delivering half the energy expected by our battery monitoring system and our firmware wasn't able to cope with such a large (and out of spec) change in component behavior. A large system customer asked us to disable or modify our firmware to allow use of those lower capacity aftermarket replacement cells. We refused. It was our contention that the end customer for our products was the patient who's care was affected by our product's performance. Were we not about to let unskilled health care providers dictate to us the parameters for safe and effective operation of our products.
    Your anecdote, although interesting, is only a single data point.  The viewpoint it represents is not indicative of the current state of battery tech in iPhones.  You haven't presented any evidence that current 3rd party batteries for iPhone are any more likely to be substandard to OEM or Authorized batteries. You've provided info about an issue 30 years ago.  Again, it's interesting, but doesn't seem really relevant here.  Afaik, there haven't been wide scale complaints about 3rd party iPhone batteries.  No shortened life span, nothing about lesser capacity.  Those details, relative to your devices' issues, serve to highlight troubles you experienced 30 years ago.  Those details, relative to this iPhone issue, paint an inaccurate picture unsupported by any evidence.  If 3rd party batteries were that much of a menace, Apple wouldn't be willing to service iPhones with them inside.  Yet they do. 

    Also, the software flakes when confronted with an OEM battery that wasn't installed by Apple or an Authorized repair shop.  So it's not just a 3rd party issue.  Essentially, Apple is saying you can use batteries that weren't installed by us or our partners.  We know they work just like ours, but we won't monitor them with our software.  Which is fine, since they weren't monitoring the batteries via that software before last year anyway... and people were none the worse for wear.  Remember, this software only exists because Apple mishandled informing users of the software throttling they instituted to deal with their own substandard batteries.  Users that concerned can probably get an app like Coconut Battery to monitor their non-OEM/authorized battery if it's a real concern.
    edited August 14 elijahgmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 16 of 44
    realisticrealistic Posts: 1,143member
    bsimpsen said:
    I think Apple's approach is reasonable. Thirty years ago, I designed battery powered medical instrumentation (including defibrillators) containing rudimentary "gas gauge" hardware/firmware in the battery packs that allowed cell life and capacity to be monitored far more accurately than in previous systems. A couple years after introduction, we started getting field failure reports of batteries going dead unexpectedly while the gas gauge was indicating half a tank, or of warnings from our software that recently refurbished battery packs were worn out.

    Customers were replacing the cells in our packs with generic cells of about half the capacity,  because they were far less expensive. On the first charge cycle, those new cells were delivering half the energy expected by our battery monitoring system and our firmware wasn't able to cope with such a large (and out of spec) change in component behavior. A large system customer asked us to disable or modify our firmware to allow use of those lower capacity aftermarket replacement cells. We refused. It was our contention that the end customer for our products was the patient who's care was affected by our product's performance. Were we not about to let unskilled health care providers dictate to us the parameters for safe and effective operation of our products.
    Your anecdote, although interesting, is only a single data point.  The viewpoint it represents is not indicative of the current state of battery tech in iPhones.  You haven't presented any evidence that current 3rd party batteries for iPhone are any more likely to be substandard to OEM or Authorized batteries. You've provided info about an issue 30 years ago.  Again, it's interesting, but doesn't seem really relevant here.  Afaik, there haven't been wide scale complaints about 3rd party iPhone batteries.  No shortened life span, nothing about lesser capacity.  Those details, relative to your devices' issues, serve to highlight troubles you experienced 30 years ago.  Those details, relative to this iPhone issue, paint an inaccurate picture unsupported by any evidence.  If 3rd party batteries were that much of a menace, Apple wouldn't be willing to service iPhones with them inside.  Yet they do. 

    Also, the software flakes when confronted with an OEM battery that wasn't installed by Apple or an Authorized repair shop.  So it's not just a 3rd party issue.  Essentially, Apple is saying you can use batteries that weren't installed by us or our partners.  We know they work just like ours, but we won't monitor them with our software.  Which is fine, since they weren't monitoring the batteries via that software before last year anyway... and people were none the worse for wear.  Remember, this software only exists because Apple mishandled informing users of the software throttling they instituted to deal with their own substandard batteries.  Users that concerned can probably get an app like Coconut Battery to monitor their non-OEM/authorized battery if it's a real concern.
    bsimpson, like apple needn't waste time, effort and expense proving 3rd party batteries aren't as good as Apple's. It's the 3rd parties mission and job to prove there claim of being as good or better then Apple's.
    Rayz2016StrangeDayslolliver
  • Reply 17 of 44
    crossladcrosslad Posts: 497member
    My son-in-law got a third party battery fitted to the iPhone 6 he had at the time. After about a month he was getting about half the screen on time he was getting when he had it fitted. You’re much better if spending about £20 more and getting the official battery from Apple. 
    Rayz2016lolliverpscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 44
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,056member
    I think we're at a point where someone with legislative power needs to step in and take a deep dive into current practices and state of play of batteries and changing them in CE products that aren't designed with battery substitution as a user friendly option.

    The consumer looks to be losing out on both clarity and competition. If manufacturers want to push users through to official support channels, there needs to be competition in those channels. 

    If we are to have messages appearing after non-certified battery changes, then a message also needs to be in plain sight on the box, advising potential purchasers what the results of a non-authorised battery swap will be.

    If Apple (or any other manufacturer) is setting strict control of pricing through authorised service providers (I have no idea if they are free to set their own pricing on out of warranty battery changes or not), that would mean competition is taking a hit.

    Batteries should meet or exceed the specification set by the manufacturer of the handset and battery manufacturers should be able to offer brand certified products with full traceability.

    Third party repair shops be able to opt in for certification of repairs too, leaving the 'service' message to everyone else who decides to do their own thing.

    The problem is that when I had the iPhone 6 battery swapped by Apple, things were far less simple than many people seem to realise.

    First, I was told that simply opening the phone (even with the correct tools and qualified technician) could break it. This is made clear verbally and in writing. To the point that even before the phone reached a technician I was informed of how much a replacement iPhone 6 would cost. The only way to get through that stage was to sign acceptance.

    This is because the phone had not been designed with battery substitution as a characteristic. It is more of a 'there is a way to do it but the risks are high enough to require a disclaimer and signing of a formal document'.

    This is the kind of situation that legislation would make crystal clear to everyone as to where liabilities lie.

    The devil is in the details and often it is the consumer that is left in the dark when it comes to things like this.

    Good legislation would be part of the solution independently of your stance on right to repair.


    elijahgmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 19 of 44
    bsimpsenbsimpsen Posts: 295member
    bsimpsen said:
    I think Apple's approach is reasonable. Thirty years ago, I designed battery powered medical instrumentation (including defibrillators) containing rudimentary "gas gauge" hardware/firmware in the battery packs that allowed cell life and capacity to be monitored far more accurately than in previous systems. A couple years after introduction, we started getting field failure reports of batteries going dead unexpectedly while the gas gauge was indicating half a tank, or of warnings from our software that recently refurbished battery packs were worn out.

    Customers were replacing the cells in our packs with generic cells of about half the capacity,  because they were far less expensive. On the first charge cycle, those new cells were delivering half the energy expected by our battery monitoring system and our firmware wasn't able to cope with such a large (and out of spec) change in component behavior. A large system customer asked us to disable or modify our firmware to allow use of those lower capacity aftermarket replacement cells. We refused. It was our contention that the end customer for our products was the patient who's care was affected by our product's performance. Were we not about to let unskilled health care providers dictate to us the parameters for safe and effective operation of our products.
    Your anecdote, although interesting, is only a single data point.  The viewpoint it represents is not indicative of the current state of battery tech in iPhones.  You haven't presented any evidence that current 3rd party batteries for iPhone are any more likely to be substandard to OEM or Authorized batteries. You've provided info about an issue 30 years ago.  Again, it's interesting, but doesn't seem really relevant here.  Afaik, there haven't been wide scale complaints about 3rd party iPhone batteries.  No shortened life span, nothing about lesser capacity.  Those details, relative to your devices' issues, serve to highlight troubles you experienced 30 years ago.  Those details, relative to this iPhone issue, paint an inaccurate picture unsupported by any evidence.  If 3rd party batteries were that much of a menace, Apple wouldn't be willing to service iPhones with them inside.  Yet they do. 

    Also, the software flakes when confronted with an OEM battery that wasn't installed by Apple or an Authorized repair shop.  So it's not just a 3rd party issue.  Essentially, Apple is saying you can use batteries that weren't installed by us or our partners.  We know they work just like ours, but we won't monitor them with our software.  Which is fine, since they weren't monitoring the batteries via that software before last year anyway... and people were none the worse for wear.  Remember, this software only exists because Apple mishandled informing users of the software throttling they instituted to deal with their own substandard batteries.  Users that concerned can probably get an app like Coconut Battery to monitor their non-OEM/authorized battery if it's a real concern.
    I've been designing battery operated instrumentation for the entire thirty years since that first experience with battery management. The story has not changed, the behavior of third party service bureaus has not changed, the variance in quality and specification for batteries (of any chemistry) has not changed. The issue of Apple software not operating properly upon installation of an Apple battery has been explained as the result of the service person not using Apple's tools to recalibrate the monitoring system to the new battery.

    My "anecdote" is not a single data point. My experience, which makes me appreciate what Apple is dealing with, spans thirty years of battery system design and tens of thousands of devices in the field.

    As for Apple throttling the CPU to extend operating time, the issue was primarily poor communications. I've seen no evidence to suggest that Apple was using substandard batteries, but rather that it deployed a mechanism for extending the operating time of their phones without explaining it properly. The batteries in current iPhones are no better than before (excepting general improvement in the technology over time), but owners now have a better view into their health. Customer satisfaction with iPhones remains the best in the industry, and that's Apple's goal.

    Widespread complaints about third party batteries would require widespread use of third party batteries, and some method of objectively comparing performance of those batteries to Apple's OEM parts. Were I to put a cheap third party battery in a two year old iPhone, I don't think I'd be inclined to complain much if it didn't last as long as the original.

    Also, understand that Apple can't monitor things that can't be measured in the phone, like battery condition at installation, expected cycle life, initial capacity, etc.
    edited August 14 Rayz2016dewmeFileMakerFellermacseekerStrangeDays2old4funlollivermacguipscooter6313485
  • Reply 20 of 44
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,716member
    bsimpsen said:
    bsimpsen said:
    I think Apple's approach is reasonable. Thirty years ago, I designed battery powered medical instrumentation (including defibrillators) containing rudimentary "gas gauge" hardware/firmware in the battery packs that allowed cell life and capacity to be monitored far more accurately than in previous systems. A couple years after introduction, we started getting field failure reports of batteries going dead unexpectedly while the gas gauge was indicating half a tank, or of warnings from our software that recently refurbished battery packs were worn out.

    Customers were replacing the cells in our packs with generic cells of about half the capacity,  because they were far less expensive. On the first charge cycle, those new cells were delivering half the energy expected by our battery monitoring system and our firmware wasn't able to cope with such a large (and out of spec) change in component behavior. A large system customer asked us to disable or modify our firmware to allow use of those lower capacity aftermarket replacement cells. We refused. It was our contention that the end customer for our products was the patient who's care was affected by our product's performance. Were we not about to let unskilled health care providers dictate to us the parameters for safe and effective operation of our products.
    Your anecdote, although interesting, is only a single data point.  The viewpoint it represents is not indicative of the current state of battery tech in iPhones.  You haven't presented any evidence that current 3rd party batteries for iPhone are any more likely to be substandard to OEM or Authorized batteries. You've provided info about an issue 30 years ago.  Again, it's interesting, but doesn't seem really relevant here.  Afaik, there haven't been wide scale complaints about 3rd party iPhone batteries.  No shortened life span, nothing about lesser capacity.  Those details, relative to your devices' issues, serve to highlight troubles you experienced 30 years ago.  Those details, relative to this iPhone issue, paint an inaccurate picture unsupported by any evidence.  If 3rd party batteries were that much of a menace, Apple wouldn't be willing to service iPhones with them inside.  Yet they do. 

    Also, the software flakes when confronted with an OEM battery that wasn't installed by Apple or an Authorized repair shop.  So it's not just a 3rd party issue.  Essentially, Apple is saying you can use batteries that weren't installed by us or our partners.  We know they work just like ours, but we won't monitor them with our software.  Which is fine, since they weren't monitoring the batteries via that software before last year anyway... and people were none the worse for wear.  Remember, this software only exists because Apple mishandled informing users of the software throttling they instituted to deal with their own substandard batteries.  Users that concerned can probably get an app like Coconut Battery to monitor their non-OEM/authorized battery if it's a real concern.
    I've been designing battery operated instrumentation for the entire thirty years since that first experience with battery management. The story has not changed, the behavior of third party service bureaus has not changed, the variance in quality and specification for batteries (of any chemistry) has not changed. The issue of Apple software not operating properly upon installation of an Apple battery has been explained as the result of the service person not using Apple's tools to recalibrate the monitoring system to the new battery.

    My "anecdote" is not a single data point. My experience, which makes me appreciate what Apple is dealing with, spans thirty years of battery system design and tens of thousands of devices in the field.

    As for Apple throttling the CPU to extend operating time, the issue was primarily poor communications. I've seen no evidence to suggest that Apple was using substandard batteries, but rather that it deployed a mechanism for extending the operating time of their phones without explaining it properly. The batteries in current iPhones are no better than before (excepting general improvement in the technology over time), but owners now have a better view into their health. Customer satisfaction with iPhones remains the best in the industry, and that's Apple's goal.

    Widespread complaints about third party batteries would require widespread use of third party batteries, and some method of objectively comparing performance of those batteries to Apple's OEM parts. Were I to put a cheap third party battery in a two year old iPhone, I don't think I'd be inclined to complain much if it didn't last as long as the original.

    Also, understand that Apple can't monitor things that can't be measured in the phone, like battery condition at installation, expected cycle life, initial capacity, etc.
    Stick around. We need some real world knowledge round here. 
    FileMakerFellermacseeker2old4funlollivermacguipscooter63fastasleepwatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.