Do auto, boat, tractor, etc makers deal with this when they put electronic governors on their products? I know they don't for manual governors that have been in place since darn near the beginning of internal combustion engines. The point is to put safeguards in place to prevent something from destroying itself.
Nothing more.
I get the anger over this being added AFTER a phone was purchased and people being upset. But the battery program was instituted to fix the issue for anyone that wanted. What more should Apple do? Handle it better? Yes. Won't happen again I'm pretty sure. But beyond that, let it go people!!!
Tech blog denizens never let anything go when it comes to Apple. They still trot out antenna-gate and bend-gate when it suits them. If you are a negative personality you hold grudges and never let them go. You keep pounding away years after the fact in some sort of blood vendetta. In this case it’s really about the theory that Apple intentionally throttled iPhones for no reason other than to force/entice users to buy new phones. That kind of conspiracy theory cannot be proved or disproved so it took on a life of its own. Lawyers will try to convince sympathetic juries that Apple is evil to the core and cynically throttled iPhones for their evil intentions. And there are more than a few AI posters who believe it.
Forgotten by most people is that Apple actually announced the throttling in the release note for one of the iOS point releases way back when. Nobody paid attention, but this feature was not sneakily put in without notice.
Americans are really strange at times. Why would one prefer to have their iPhones crashing instead of having it run stably but at slightly reduced speed, esp when most times that performance degradation isn’t noticeable.
I was among those who had random crashing and auto-shutdown (think was iPhone 6s) which was getting very irritating. It was only much later that it was announced as a battery quality issue and a recall program initiated.
The missing piece here is that for a time, the public was not made aware of what was happening to their phones. I'm fairly tech-savvy, and even I simply speculated that the slowdown in my phone's performance was just the result of normal software bloat and iOS software progression. At the time, my 1 year old iPhone SE felt strangely sluggish, and scrolling within some apps would noticeably lag and stutter. After some investigating, I realized that my CPU was downclocked to a near constant 50%.... and they weren't just "momentary" dips like some are made to believe.
Then of course there was the fiasco where Apple techs refused to let me BUY a replacement battery for it, claiming that their tests showed that it was still a healthy battery and that they were not allowed to perform the service unless the test indicated otherwise. Talk about infuriating. For the record, this is BEFORE Apple came out with the revised battery replacement program, after which I was "allowed" to make the replacement and my phone's performance returned to 100%.
At the end of the day, Apple bowed to the public pressure and made good on their mistakes (and offered transparency to what was going on)... but it took a bit of haggling to get there. These lawsuits are a bit overdone at this point, but I think it's fitting that Apple has to deal with a bit of baggage for some misguided decision making. If the consumers were legitimately burdened by this ordeal, then the company should share in that frustration.
I want to see how the plaintives express harm. Because without proof of harm, there’s no damages to be had.
All you have to do is find a sympathetic jury that thinks all companies are evil. These would usually be blue collar individuals, union members, the underemployed.
This sentiment reeks of so much bullshit it’s difficult to breathe. The working class and those looking to bargain collectively with the executive class doesn’t mean they think “corporation are evil!” It means there’s a desire to organize to help level the playing field against the inherent advantage large employers have over workers. The removal of unions and collective bargaining bears such a striking correlation with the decrease of the middle class that I believe no rational person can deny causation.
...but nice nice job perpetuating the class warfare infighting that the mega-wealthy oligarchy who give no shits about working class or middle class depend on. Down with blue collar workers, rar! Good thing the executive class has educated fellows like you watching their backs!
Then why do you think most of the lawsuits against Apple are filed in specific locations, like East Texas? It ain’t because the juries there are objective. Lawsuits are filed in those locations precisely because the people there are more likely to award large sums of money. The lawyers know it and so should you. I was a member of a union for 34 years at AT&T (TCEU, CWA, IBEW) not because I wanted to but because Illinois is a union shop state. That means you must pay union dues whether you join or not, a nice little gotcha. Then there’s something called COPE, the union equivalent of a PAC. For most of my time at AT&T the union used dues to fund COPE, no opting out. Now only voluntary contributions are allowed. Take it from me that the union leaders I dealt with were as radical anti-corporation as it gets, fanatical Democrats, and hard left in their political and social ideology. Funny thing was when one of them got promoted to management they immediately did a complete 180 and became dutiful company men.
I've always wondered about Union Dues. how much are they? is it basically a percentage of your paycheck that goes into your Union Leaders bank account?
I want to see how the plaintives express harm. Because without proof of harm, there’s no damages to be had.
All you have to do is find a sympathetic jury that thinks all companies are evil. These would usually be blue collar individuals, union members, the underemployed.
This sentiment reeks of so much bullshit it’s difficult to breathe. The working class and those looking to bargain collectively with the executive class doesn’t mean they think “corporation are evil!” It means there’s a desire to organize to help level the playing field against the inherent advantage large employers have over workers. The removal of unions and collective bargaining bears such a striking correlation with the decrease of the middle class that I believe no rational person can deny causation.
...but nice nice job perpetuating the class warfare infighting that the mega-wealthy oligarchy who give no shits about working class or middle class depend on. Down with blue collar workers, rar! Good thing the executive class has educated fellows like you watching their backs!
Then why do you think most of the lawsuits against Apple are filed in specific locations, like East Texas? It ain’t because the juries there are objective. Lawsuits are filed in those locations precisely because the people there are more likely to award large sums of money. The lawyers know it and so should you. I was a member of a union for 34 years at AT&T (TCEU, CWA, IBEW) not because I wanted to but because Illinois is a union shop state. That means you must pay union dues whether you join or not, a nice little gotcha. Then there’s something called COPE, the union equivalent of a PAC. For most of my time at AT&T the union used dues to fund COPE, no opting out. Now only voluntary contributions are allowed. Take it from me that the union leaders I dealt with were as radical anti-corporation as it gets, fanatical Democrats, and hard left in their political and social ideology. Funny thing was when one of them got promoted to management they immediately did a complete 180 and became dutiful company men.
I've always wondered about Union Dues. how much are they? is it basically a percentage of your paycheck that goes into your Union Leaders bank account?
Yes, dues are levied as a percentage of your paycheck, usually on a monthly basis. Dues increases are voted on by the membership. Like any organization unions have corruption issues. When I was member of IBEW Local 21 in Illinois the entire state leadership was ousted by the international organization for corruption. Union dues are supposed to be used to pay the salaries of elected union employees and to represent union members in disputes or disciplinary action taken by the company against a member. Collective bargaining expenses are also paid for out of dues as well as when something is taken to binding arbitration. No one has a problem with that but for a long time a portion of union dues were also used for political contributions to candidates and groups who supported the union, almost always Democrats. Many union members objected to that because they didn’t agree with the politics the union leaders espoused. Some years ago a law was passed that stopped union dues from being used to support political activities. Union members can still voluntarily contribute as much money as they want to COPE (Committee on Political Education) but they cannot be forced to by use of their dues for that purpose. Union members are not some monolithic group that always support whatever political action the leadership takes. I was among those who had no problem with collective bargaining, supporting and defending members who had employer related issues. I did have issues with the leadership’s political, often far left ideology.
Take it from me that seemingly random unannounced shutdowns are far worse than throttling from a user experience perspective. I've run into them on computers where they had thermal management problems and on laptops where the battery was wonky. Having it run slower because it detected a CPU fan failure is far preferable to the thing shutting down every few minutes. Even the near constant 50% clock rate that @Atomic101 experienced is worlds better than having the phone die when you desperately need it.
From what I'm reading Apple did make this information public within their documentation, albeit buried in a lot of text somewhere. It sounds like Apple had everything covered and this lawsuit is nearly baseless.
I want to see how the plaintives express harm. Because without proof of harm, there’s no damages to be had.
Apple could turn and say that not doing this could harm the plaintiffs. The iPhone is first and foremost, a phone, and for the same reason they gave way back when they introduced the App Store, they want to make sure that the phone part works when needed. The last thing someone wants is to try to dial 911 and the phone crashes.
Comments
Then of course there was the fiasco where Apple techs refused to let me BUY a replacement battery for it, claiming that their tests showed that it was still a healthy battery and that they were not allowed to perform the service unless the test indicated otherwise. Talk about infuriating. For the record, this is BEFORE Apple came out with the revised battery replacement program, after which I was "allowed" to make the replacement and my phone's performance returned to 100%.
At the end of the day, Apple bowed to the public pressure and made good on their mistakes (and offered transparency to what was going on)... but it took a bit of haggling to get there. These lawsuits are a bit overdone at this point, but I think it's fitting that Apple has to deal with a bit of baggage for some misguided decision making. If the consumers were legitimately burdened by this ordeal, then the company should share in that frustration.
I've always wondered about Union Dues. how much are they? is it basically a percentage of your paycheck that goes into your Union Leaders bank account?
From what I'm reading Apple did make this information public within their documentation, albeit buried in a lot of text somewhere. It sounds like Apple had everything covered and this lawsuit is nearly baseless.