Apple facing yet another multi-state probe related to iPhone throttling

AppleInsider

Apple is once again targeted in a multi-state consumer protection investigation over the highly publicized "batterygate" controversy.

Arizona is leading a multi-state probe to find out if Apple's intentional slowing down of older iPhones violated trade practice laws, according to documents seen by Reuters.

Last week, technology watchdog Tech Transparency Project discovered that the Texas attorney general may file a lawsuit against Apple for violating the state's deceptive trade practices law.

Two months ago, Apple's $500 million deal to settle a series of class-action lawsuits involving the so-called iPhone slowdown controversy was approved by the U.S. District Court.

Users affected by Apple's throttling of older iPhones can now submit a claim to potentially receive around $25 per phone, following a court's decision to accept Apple's settlement.

geekmee

Can you say? Pile on
Because that is where the money is.

hodar

So, in an effort to keep your phone from crashing, due to normal battery degradation; Apple freely admits they ran battery testing and reduced the performance on older iPhones to prevent them from randomly rebooting, due to worn batteries.

This was done, with the intent to make perfectly serviceable phones, continue to be usable.  If anything, it allowed their customers to use older iPhones for more than they would have, and likely delayed some customers from upgrading immediately - as their phone "still worked'.

No good deed goes unpunished.  All Apple had to do was push a note during boot-up that said "Your iPhone battery is weak and needs to be replaced, in an effort to prolong the life of the battery, your iPhone's performance will be reduced.  To restore full performance, please have your battery replaced".

That mistake was expensive.

george kaplan

hodar said:

So, in an effort to keep your phone from crashing, due to normal battery degradation; Apple freely admits they ran battery testing and reduced the performance on older iPhones to prevent them from randomly rebooting, due to worn batteries.

This was done, with the intent to make perfectly serviceable phones, continue to be usable.  If anything, it allowed their customers to use older iPhones for more than they would have, and likely delayed some customers from upgrading immediately - as their phone "still worked'.

No good deed goes unpunished.  All Apple had to do was push a note during boot-up that said "Your iPhone battery is weak and needs to be replaced, in an effort to prolong the life of the battery, your iPhone's performance will be reduced.  To restore full performance, please have your battery replaced".

That mistake was expensive.

Yes. Apple’s fatal flaw was that it was not forthcoming about the reason for the throttling, and even denied it was happening following the update. Their famous reputation for secrecy caused them to not do a full disclosure—had it been phrased as you suggested, this would have been over in a week or two. Instead, the denial gave legs to a stupid conspiracy theory that this was all a plot to make people unsatisfied with their phones and cause an upgrade.

I think many with Android phones don’t keep their phones as long as Apple customers keep their iPhones, so there really is no analog experience with Android, even though the same problem would exist. Therefore, this is seen as something unique to Apple, making the  “problem” even worse for the company.

My 6S got a new battery for $29, which was a great deal for me, and I kept my phone another year-plus afterwards. I still replaced it with an 11 when the time was right, but I used my phone for 4 years otherwise. Nobody with an Android phone as a daily driver keeps it for 4 years (unless they’re 70 and using Consumer Cellular to have handy for emergencies). Hell, many Android phones can’t get software updates for 4 years. The news media has to start regarding Apple iPhones are something substantially different from their Android competitors in some key points of evaluation, if they’re going to roast them on the battery debacle.

Beats

hodar said:

So, in an effort to keep your phone from crashing, due to normal battery degradation; Apple freely admits they ran battery testing and reduced the performance on older iPhones to prevent them from randomly rebooting, due to worn batteries.

This was done, with the intent to make perfectly serviceable phones, continue to be usable.  If anything, it allowed their customers to use older iPhones for more than they would have, and likely delayed some customers from upgrading immediately - as their phone "still worked'.

No good deed goes unpunished.  All Apple had to do was push a note during boot-up that said "Your iPhone battery is weak and needs to be replaced, in an effort to prolong the life of the battery, your iPhone's performance will be reduced.  To restore full performance, please have your battery replaced".

That mistake was expensive.

Youtubers and the anti-Apple army jumped on this as some conspiracy theory. Remember "planned obsolescence"? Idiots. 

mcdave

hodar said:

So, in an effort to keep your phone from crashing, due to normal battery degradation; Apple freely admits they ran battery testing and reduced the performance on older iPhones to prevent them from randomly rebooting, due to worn batteries.

This was done, with the intent to make perfectly serviceable phones, continue to be usable.  If anything, it allowed their customers to use older iPhones for more than they would have, and likely delayed some customers from upgrading immediately - as their phone "still worked'.

No good deed goes unpunished.  All Apple had to do was push a note during boot-up that said "Your iPhone battery is weak and needs to be replaced, in an effort to prolong the life of the battery, your iPhone's performance will be reduced.  To restore full performance, please have your battery replaced".

That mistake was expensive.

And the dumb thing is, that warning wouldn’t have changed the phone’s behaviour one bit. If the customer thought it was too slow they were always going to change it. Actually, I’m pretty sure more would have changed them.
Nobody said the law had to make sense.

macxpress

Well in Apple's situation they were damned if they do and damned if they don't. It was really a shitty situation for them with no good solutions in the end.

TomE

So, it appears Apple & others should not make software upgrades because a group of stupid class action vampires will sue them if they do and sue them if they don't. Kiss off vampires.  I have even offered to pay for my battery for my 6S+, but the non-Apple store says it has not degraded enough to be worried.  Generally there is a charging source located somewhere close by.  I cannot use it all day because I have to do other things !