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."
Well, we live in a world where collapsible child strollers need a message stating that the child should be removed before the device is compacted (https://people.howstuffworks.com/11-stupid-legal-warnings10.htm), so, yes, I think such a message is warranted.
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.
I understand the sentiment, and I agree about up-front warnings, but I'm really struggling to envision who exactly these "legislative powers" might even be. Are these the same powers who can't handle food inspections, bridge inspections, transportation safety, environmental contamination, lead poisoning of water supplies, professional certifications, privacy protection, election tampering, etc? Hoping that a government entity is going to step in and actually do anything other than make a little noise is wishful thinking. Perhaps competition would help if non-Apple manufacturers actually set out to differentiate themselves from Apple instead of copying Apple.
The only group that has a chance to change manufacturer's behaviors are consumers, but they seldom if ever act as a single bargaining collective and too many people really don't care about the lifetime costs of products, maintainability, sustainability, repairability, component substation, etc. It breaks and it's trashed. Remember when all (sealed beam) auto headlights had to be one of a very few standard sizes and configurations? I really don't know why they moved away from the standardization model for headlight assemblies but I do know that the cost of headlight assemblies have easily risen by at least 100X since every model of automobile changed to being a unique design.
Consumer product manufacturers who are thriving and growing must be giving consumers what consumers want. Otherwise we wouldn't be buying all the shiny new models and sending truckloads and cargo ships filled to the brim with the discarded and worn-out carcasses of the older models to far reaches of the country and the world to make room for the shiny new ones.
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.
In no way am I trying to diminish your experience. It is impressive. But your experience doesn't justify the narrative you're trying to build with nothing more than your anecdote. Respectfully, your experience means you have expertise, but it doesn't mean you're an expert on Apple's situation. And yes, your anecdote is a single data point... from a single individual.
The CPU throttling was an issue of poor communication. That's exactly what I said in my comment. How can you not be aware of any evidence of substandard batteries? iPhone batteries unexpectedly shutting down was pretty big news Apple issued a battery replacement program for them. The throttling was a mitigation against the unexpected shutdown. Those batteries were substandard. It wasn't just aged batteries having the issue.
This threw me a little: The batteries in current iPhones are no better than before (excepting general improvement in the technology over time)... Is that some type of Yogism? This is essentially what you said: The batteries are no better than before except they're better because they've been generally improved over time. Okay.
You say to judge 3rd party batteries would require objective comparative performance analysis, yet you, without any objective analysis, laid out a scenario where 3rd party batteries were being compared to batteries that delivered half the energy.
If the iPhones still work regardless of the software notification, then this issue is more an annoyance than a real issue. There are apps that can monitor a 3rd party battery. I do think this is going to be more of an issue for Apple than customers because I think it's going to be used as another bullet in the Right to Repair gun.
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.
None of what you said refuted his information as a SME on this very topic. That it was 30 years ago is less of an issue that you purport, because the ideas and mechanisms behind batteries and monitoring software hasn’t changed that much. If the device doesn’t know it’s a legit battery, by means of setting of that switch (whatever it may be), the correct response is to say so. Even if it’s an Apple battery, if the switch isn’t set the device doesn’t know it.
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.
Remember this is a recently introduced thing. These devices were able to tell battery health before the update, now they can't. Every third party cell has the same TI gas-gauge chip as genuine Apple batteries that reports to the phone the battery capacity remaining. So yes, as I said, the phone does know the battery health. Without knowing the battery health, the battery indicator would be completely wrong. So third parties can't leave out the chip.
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.
With health equipment there is a different standard to consumer equipment. I agree third parties shouldn't replace parts of a medical instrumentation device, only the first party. Though that said, if the first party replacement parts are too expensive, people will just buy new equipment from someone else. But in any case, if your design couldn't handle batteries (of the same voltage) but less capacity, your design was flawed. The (original) battery could have been cold, and thus have less capacity, or someone might have put an old battery in from a different device for some reason; and your firmware wouldn't be able to cope. That's bad design. The system should measure the total capacity used from full to empty, i.e. when the voltage hits either the battery's minimum, or the minimum workable voltage. And from then on, that voltage should be used for the gas gauge. In addition, there should be a low pass filter on the voltage such that high internal resistance in old cells doesn't cause a shut off when voltage sags.
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.
Except when a battery catches fire, most reputable news outlets report if it was a genuine or third party battery. People replace batteries often enough now that the majority know there are third party and genuine batteries, so the automatic assumption that an failure is Apple's fault isn't really that common anymore. Unless it's an Android fanboy trying to make up stores.
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.
I wouldn't mind paying more for a genuine Apple battery, except they only have a 90 day guarantee and after less than a year, mine was down to 65% of its original capacity with just 400 cycles. I have a 2200mAh replacement from Amazon for £17, and it's done 150 cycles and is still on 2100mAh capacity, way more than Apple's official batteries which were about 1700mAh.
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.
None of what you said refuted his information as a SME on this very topic. That it was 30 years ago is less of an issue that you purport, because the ideas and mechanisms behind batteries and monitoring software hasn’t changed that much. If the device doesn’t know it’s a legit battery, by means of setting of that switch (whatever it may be), the correct response is to say so. Even if it’s an Apple battery, if the switch isn’t set the device doesn’t know it.
You're 100% right. I haven't questioned his knowledge as a subject matter expert. I have questioned his conclusions regarding Apple's particular issue. He is not an SME on that subject. To suggest substandard 3rd party batteries are a reason for Apple's stance does not stand scrutiny. As I said, his anecdote is interesting. It isn't applicable though. If 3rd party batteries were proven to be substandard, a point might be made. Essentially what we have right now from that anecdote is this: I know a lot about battery tech (I believe he does) and went through X situation regarding batteries (I believe he did), therefore Apple must be going through a similar situation. That's a conclusion drawn solely on past experience with a different issue. It's not a conclusion drawn on anything regarding this current issue. Sorry, that's not how it works.
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.
Exactly, and that is why people do it. A third party battery might be say £17 vs Apple's £45. That battery only has to last 37% of the time of the Apple battery and the user has already made their money back. So people are satisfied with third party batteries even if they aren't that great. As I said above, my genuine replacement battery was crap.
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.
Huh? They can monitor perfectly well all those things. They just choose not to. Condition at installation is easy as the phone knows when it's lost power entirely, as the time resets back to some year in the past. The expected life of an Apple battery is supposed to be 80% capacity after 500 cycles, easy to track. Initial capacity can be measured during the first full charge and discharge after using the previous method to detect a new battery. Also, the TI gas gauge chips on the battery have EEPROM which can be set such that the iPhone knows the battery has been previously used or not.
Of course what would sort almost all these battery woes is making the device slightly thicker. If the whole phone was the same thickness as the camera bump, the battery life would be at least 30% more, probably 50%. Pretty much doubling the life of the battery.
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.
None of what you said refuted his information as a SME on this very topic. That it was 30 years ago is less of an issue that you purport, because the ideas and mechanisms behind batteries and monitoring software hasn’t changed that much. If the device doesn’t know it’s a legit battery, by means of setting of that switch (whatever it may be), the correct response is to say so. Even if it’s an Apple battery, if the switch isn’t set the device doesn’t know it.
You're 100% right. I haven't questioned his knowledge as a subject matter expert. I have questioned his conclusions regarding Apple's particular issue. He is not an SME on that subject. To suggest substandard 3rd party batteries are a reason for Apple's stance does not stand scrutiny. As I said, his anecdote is interesting. It isn't applicable though. If 3rd party batteries were proven to be substandard, a point might be made. Essentially what we have right now from that anecdote is this: I know a lot about battery tech (I believe he does) and went through X situation regarding batteries (I believe he did), therefore Apple must be going through a similar situation. That's a conclusion drawn solely on past experience with a different issue. It's not a conclusion drawn on anything regarding this current issue. Sorry, that's not how it works.
Well his situation is irrelevant anyway because Apple's battery tech is apparently superior to his, in that it is able to handle a large change in battery capacity in one go.
Case in point, my (replacement) genuine Apple battery would die due to low voltage if it was cold at about 60%. The phone (or TI gas gauge chip) then updated its estimation of the of the total capacity (in milliamp hours) available - by simply calculating the energy used since last full charge until the voltage was too low for the phone to work. After warming and charging the phone, the gauge would get to 100% and then count down to 1% as the phone used energy, 1% being the capacity it previously stored at which it thought the battery would die. The gauge would drop to 1% but really, there would still be ~60% left. So the phone would continue to work for several hours at 1%, until the voltage dropped to about 2.9v, and the phone would die, and update its new capacity value to whatever amount the phone had used since the last full charge. It's simple and any Li-Ion device worth its salt does it. Apple's just being obstructive and trying to get people to use their own batteries.
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.
@bsimpsen ; Hadn't heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect before. It was very interesting to read up on. Thanks.
Edit: Also, thanks for sharing your knowledge on battery tech. It's handy to hear from people who actually know what they are talking about. Shame it tends to lure the trolls out...
This threw me a little: The batteries in current iPhones are no better than before (excepting general improvement in the technology over time)... Is that some type of Yogism? This is essentially what you said: The batteries are no better than before except they're better because they've been generally improved over time. Okay.
Yes, you'd expect incremental improvement in all battery technology over time. The implication here and elsewhere has been that Apple shipped substandard batteries, got caught at it, then switched to a better vendor and implemented their battery recall program. As far as I've read, the primary (only?) issue was that apple changed how they handled low battery situations to prolong battery life at the expense of CPU throughput. People noticed the throttling, and that raised concern that Apple was hiding something. I've seen no reports that Apple changed battery vendors or technology.
By placing the throttle/shutdown decision in the hands of the user, and providing health tracking for the battery, Apple hopefully assuaged fears of nefarious intent without requiring any "improvement" in the battery. My son used to swear that his iPhone batteries were crap, because he had to replace them after 12-18 months of use. My wife and I have always been happy with the battery life in ours. We still get two days of typical usage from a charge on our nearly two year old iPhones. What's the difference? He uses his phone as a hotspot and had was running a few power hungry apps with background processing enabled, when he didn't need it . Since the arrival of the battery health monitor, he's made more efficient use of his phone and knows he's working the thing pretty hard each day.
I recently read that Apple will implement smart charge scheduling with the intent of reducing the amount of time an iPhone spends floating at full charge, as that degrades battery life. The phone will attempt to learn the user's charging routine and then schedule delivering the last 20% of charge just in time for it to be needed. I imagine there will be someone out there who will complain that, on the mornings they get up early, their iPhone doesn't last as long. That'll be true, but it won't be because of some nefarious intent on Apple's part. If Apple learned anything from the "battery gate", it'll be to fully explain, or even advertise as an advantage, this smart charging technique and perhaps offer the user the ability to disable it.
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.
So how many years did iOS not have this battery health? BFD it wont work. I've looked at it many twice. BooHoo I'm so pissed I cant see it any longer. LMFAO... This is like a auto mfg telling you, you can never change your own oil again. In order to change the filter you have to use ours that have a built in chip. If we don't detect such chip you will never see when it needs to be replaced again. Cool, change it every xyz amount of miles like it used to be before the service light was installed.
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.
If you have nothing constructive or concrete to add to the Commenters section get the hell out! This topic is about a specific tech issue; not world peace, Brexit, or the cure for cancer. I hate when commentators contribute to a tech issue then get lambasted by people like you for being complainers and whiners or in this case, ridiculing Apple users for daring to criticize legitimate constructive comments.
WOW! So if I have my mechanic replace my o2 sensor on my car, should the check engine light stay on if that was the only cause in the first place? Even if he used original new parts? THIS IS BS
This threw me a little: The batteries in current iPhones are no better than before (excepting general improvement in the technology over time)... Is that some type of Yogism? This is essentially what you said: The batteries are no better than before except they're better because they've been generally improved over time. Okay.
Yes, you'd expect incremental improvement in all battery technology over time. The implication here and elsewhere has been that Apple shipped substandard batteries, got caught at it, then switched to a better vendor and implemented their battery recall program. As far as I've read, the primary (only?) issue was that apple changed how they handled low battery situations to prolong battery life at the expense of CPU throughput. People noticed the throttling, and that raised concern that Apple was hiding something. I've seen no reports that Apple changed battery vendors or technology.
By placing the throttle/shutdown decision in the hands of the user, and providing health tracking for the battery, Apple hopefully assuaged fears of nefarious intent without requiring any "improvement" in the battery. My son used to swear that his iPhone batteries were crap, because he had to replace them after 12-18 months of use. My wife and I have always been happy with the battery life in ours. We still get two days of typical usage from a charge on our nearly two year old iPhones. What's the difference? He uses his phone as a hotspot and had was running a few power hungry apps with background processing enabled, when he didn't need it . Since the arrival of the battery health monitor, he's made more efficient use of his phone and knows he's working the thing pretty hard each day.
I recently read that Apple will implement smart charge scheduling with the intent of reducing the amount of time an iPhone spends floating at full charge, as that degrades battery life. The phone will attempt to learn the user's charging routine and then schedule delivering the last 20% of charge just in time for it to be needed. I imagine there will be someone out there who will complain that, on the mornings they get up early, their iPhone doesn't last as long. That'll be true, but it won't be because of some nefarious intent on Apple's part. If Apple learned anything from the "battery gate", it'll be to fully explain, or even advertise as an advantage, this smart charging technique and perhaps offer the user the ability to disable it.
@vmarks you should get @bsimpsen on the AI podcast next time you are discussing the topic of batteries.
I can be critical of Apple - but this is one area where I agree. Years back, I used an aftermarket charger and started getting odd things happening to my phone - flickering screen, overheating while charging. They disappeared when I went back to Apple’s cube. There is a lot of poorly/wrongly made batteries and chargers on the market. If you want to save some money at the risk of ruining your expensive iPhone then go for it - just don’t blame Apple if you ruin your device with some Chinese made garbage. And good luck getting the Chinese company to reimburse you for damages.
My iPhone XS is at 89% capacity after 6 months of usage. The worst battery so far. My old iPhone 8 was at 100% after the same period, and iPhone 7 before it was at 96% during intial 6 months.
My iPhone XS is at 89% capacity after 6 months of usage. The worst battery so far. My old iPhone 8 was at 100% after the same period, and iPhone 7 before it was at 96% during intial 6 months.
My nearly two year old iPhoneX is at 97%. My wife's is at 98%. My son, who complained like hell about poor battery life in his iPhoneX (he used it as a perpetual hotspot, had lots of background stuff enabled and had to charge it mid-day most days... until the health monitor shoved his usage patterns in his face) is at 90%. He replaced the battery in his iPhone6 twice, probably because he imagined it was in far worse shape than it really was. His battery complaints have diminished since the arrival of the battery health monitor and he's still on his original iPhoneX battery. Perception is reality.
Comments
The only group that has a chance to change manufacturer's behaviors are consumers, but they seldom if ever act as a single bargaining collective and too many people really don't care about the lifetime costs of products, maintainability, sustainability, repairability, component substation, etc. It breaks and it's trashed. Remember when all (sealed beam) auto headlights had to be one of a very few standard sizes and configurations? I really don't know why they moved away from the standardization model for headlight assemblies but I do know that the cost of headlight assemblies have easily risen by at least 100X since every model of automobile changed to being a unique design.
Consumer product manufacturers who are thriving and growing must be giving consumers what consumers want. Otherwise we wouldn't be buying all the shiny new models and sending truckloads and cargo ships filled to the brim with the discarded and worn-out carcasses of the older models to far reaches of the country and the world to make room for the shiny new ones.
The CPU throttling was an issue of poor communication. That's exactly what I said in my comment. How can you not be aware of any evidence of substandard batteries? iPhone batteries unexpectedly shutting down was pretty big news Apple issued a battery replacement program for them. The throttling was a mitigation against the unexpected shutdown. Those batteries were substandard. It wasn't just aged batteries having the issue.
This threw me a little: The batteries in current iPhones are no better than before (excepting general improvement in the technology over time)... Is that some type of Yogism? This is essentially what you said: The batteries are no better than before except they're better because they've been generally improved over time. Okay.
You say to judge 3rd party batteries would require objective comparative performance analysis, yet you, without any objective analysis, laid out a scenario where 3rd party batteries were being compared to batteries that delivered half the energy.
If the iPhones still work regardless of the software notification, then this issue is more an annoyance than a real issue. There are apps that can monitor a 3rd party battery. I do think this is going to be more of an issue for Apple than customers because I think it's going to be used as another bullet in the Right to Repair gun.
With health equipment there is a different standard to consumer equipment. I agree third parties shouldn't replace parts of a medical instrumentation device, only the first party. Though that said, if the first party replacement parts are too expensive, people will just buy new equipment from someone else. But in any case, if your design couldn't handle batteries (of the same voltage) but less capacity, your design was flawed. The (original) battery could have been cold, and thus have less capacity, or someone might have put an old battery in from a different device for some reason; and your firmware wouldn't be able to cope. That's bad design. The system should measure the total capacity used from full to empty, i.e. when the voltage hits either the battery's minimum, or the minimum workable voltage. And from then on, that voltage should be used for the gas gauge. In addition, there should be a low pass filter on the voltage such that high internal resistance in old cells doesn't cause a shut off when voltage sags.
Except when a battery catches fire, most reputable news outlets report if it was a genuine or third party battery. People replace batteries often enough now that the majority know there are third party and genuine batteries, so the automatic assumption that an failure is Apple's fault isn't really that common anymore. Unless it's an Android fanboy trying to make up stores.
I wouldn't mind paying more for a genuine Apple battery, except they only have a 90 day guarantee and after less than a year, mine was down to 65% of its original capacity with just 400 cycles. I have a 2200mAh replacement from Amazon for £17, and it's done 150 cycles and is still on 2100mAh capacity, way more than Apple's official batteries which were about 1700mAh.
Huh? They can monitor perfectly well all those things. They just choose not to. Condition at installation is easy as the phone knows when it's lost power entirely, as the time resets back to some year in the past. The expected life of an Apple battery is supposed to be 80% capacity after 500 cycles, easy to track. Initial capacity can be measured during the first full charge and discharge after using the previous method to detect a new battery. Also, the TI gas gauge chips on the battery have EEPROM which can be set such that the iPhone knows the battery has been previously used or not.
Of course what would sort almost all these battery woes is making the device slightly thicker. If the whole phone was the same thickness as the camera bump, the battery life would be at least 30% more, probably 50%. Pretty much doubling the life of the battery.
Case in point, my (replacement) genuine Apple battery would die due to low voltage if it was cold at about 60%. The phone (or TI gas gauge chip) then updated its estimation of the of the total capacity (in milliamp hours) available - by simply calculating the energy used since last full charge until the voltage was too low for the phone to work. After warming and charging the phone, the gauge would get to 100% and then count down to 1% as the phone used energy, 1% being the capacity it previously stored at which it thought the battery would die. The gauge would drop to 1% but really, there would still be ~60% left. So the phone would continue to work for several hours at 1%, until the voltage dropped to about 2.9v, and the phone would die, and update its new capacity value to whatever amount the phone had used since the last full charge. It's simple and any Li-Ion device worth its salt does it. Apple's just being obstructive and trying to get people to use their own batteries.
Edit: Also, thanks for sharing your knowledge on battery tech. It's handy to hear from people who actually know what they are talking about. Shame it tends to lure the trolls out...
By placing the throttle/shutdown decision in the hands of the user, and providing health tracking for the battery, Apple hopefully assuaged fears of nefarious intent without requiring any "improvement" in the battery. My son used to swear that his iPhone batteries were crap, because he had to replace them after 12-18 months of use. My wife and I have always been happy with the battery life in ours. We still get two days of typical usage from a charge on our nearly two year old iPhones. What's the difference? He uses his phone as a hotspot and had was running a few power hungry apps with background processing enabled, when he didn't need it . Since the arrival of the battery health monitor, he's made more efficient use of his phone and knows he's working the thing pretty hard each day.
I recently read that Apple will implement smart charge scheduling with the intent of reducing the amount of time an iPhone spends floating at full charge, as that degrades battery life. The phone will attempt to learn the user's charging routine and then schedule delivering the last 20% of charge just in time for it to be needed. I imagine there will be someone out there who will complain that, on the mornings they get up early, their iPhone doesn't last as long. That'll be true, but it won't be because of some nefarious intent on Apple's part. If Apple learned anything from the "battery gate", it'll be to fully explain, or even advertise as an advantage, this smart charging technique and perhaps offer the user the ability to disable it.