Other Apple is slowing down older iPhones based on battery wear level [MERGED]

[eyoungren]

I think the right thing for Apple to do would be have a simple popup to tell the user that cpu performance is being reduced due to an issue with the battery and to have it checked. They seem to love popups for everything else, this type of popup would actually be useful and appreciated

Since when does Apple do anything for the customer unless a financial loss or a large hit on public reputation is involved?
[doublepost=1512932858][/doublepost]

If this actually can be proven it should be a big lawsuit.
Cause people with devices that the battery degrades over a few years do experience slow downs and bad performance intentionally done by the manufacturer.
Having no idea that if they replace their battery their device will run much better. But if Apple does that and doesn't tell anyone about it in order for people to get frustrated with bad performance and slowdowns to force their hand to buy new iphones.
Then that is very bad IMO.

If true, it just tells me that Apple is more and more moving towards Microsoft's business model.

 

[Radon87000]

Yup. Yet more proof,of planned obsolescence as if there wasn't enough available already. Basically, Apple's going to take more money from you whichever option you choose. You can only buy a new device or a newer battery if you want some of your performande back.

 

[BigMcGuire]

Edit: The more I read the massive Reddit thread - looks like there are quite a few people with "proof" - interesting.
----------------------------------

More solid data on this would be nice. You just have a ton of people running geekbench, even they admit that the results aren't consistent (they aren't). And what is considered an overused battery? My wife and I had our 6+ and 6s+ phones for almost 2 years each, and I had about 240 cycles, my wife had 360+ but both were 93%-97%+ in design capacity. Most people I know keep their phones for just a few years then upgrade with a trade/in or what not so I really don't have anyone to talk to about this

My wife did have the 6s+ battery problem where her phone would turn off at around 40% and when we booted it back up, it would show 8%. Apple denied there was any problems with the battery so we just paid to replace the battery - sadly, when they did, they destroyed the phone so my wife just got a brand new 6s+ for free - but didn't notice any "speed" improvements - just better battery life.

My 6s+ was probably the smoothest and fastest phone I've ever used (had it for 1.7 years). My 8+ continues this tradition.


My ASSUMPTION is that the 6s and 6s+ had some serious battery issues that Apple hid by slowing down the CPU, something few users noticed because the 6s+ and 6s were fairly fast phones anyway. My wife's old 6s+ always shut off during high cpu activities (running Ingress, etc...). Rather than face the bad press and pay tons of $$$ for battery replacements, they just throttled the CPU a bit. People like me without the battery shut down problem didn't notice anything. This is of course unproven and a big "maybe" - but tha'd be my guess if I had to make one.

Our 8+ phones are operating perfectly atm.

-------------------------------

Edit2: Yeah I think a lot of 6s models (6s+ too) had faulty batteries that dropped voltage a ton - causing the phones to shut off (my wife had this) -- and Apple probably lowers CPU frequency to cope with these low voltage batteries --- because in the thread there are some 6s users with super old batteries but normal CPU benchmarks/frequencies. I bet my wife's 6s+ would have showed a 600mhz or 900mhz cpu.

"I suspect this problem is unique to battery bugs on the 6S." - agreed.

 

[JM]

Yup. Yet more proof,of planned obsolescence as if there wasn't enough available already. Basically, Apple's going to take more money from you whichever option you choose. You can only buy a new device or a newer battery if you want some of your performande back.

"performande" Is that like super-fancy performance?

 

[Chazzle]

https://9to5mac.com/2017/12/10/iphone-6s-slow-down-battery-fix/

So, hopefully this won't turn into a bloodbath....

How does this not prove that Apple has no problem slowing older devices for personal gain?

Objectively: yes, Apple wants to manage the power when the battery gets old.

But does this not give evidence towards the claim that Apple would slow older devices to encourage purchasing of a new one? (Which could be in a way called... GASP!... Planned Obsolescence?)

I'm not saying it's proof that Apple subscribes to Planned Obsolescence; I'm saying that this is pretty good evidence that they are capable of it, and have behaved in a way that would help one believe that they do.

*and please read the whole article. I'm not a wacko tin foil man, so don't treat me like one.

I came across that article this morning. Not seeing how this provides evidence of planned obsolescence. Sounds more like the 6s had quite a few batteries and/or power management controllers which were defective and instead of owning up to it and replacing said components, Apple throttled performance of the phone. This in my opinion is worse than planned obsolescence but certainly not evidence of it.

 

[JM]

I came across that article this morning. Not seeing how this provides evidence of planned obsolescence. Sounds more like the 6s had quite a few batteries and/or power management controllers which were defective and instead of owning up to it and replacing said components, Apple throttled performance of the phone. This in my opinion is worse than planned obsolescence but certainly not evidence of it.

Yeah, but.... (all great sentences start with "yeah, but". ha)... Apple has shown willingness to slow devices down, so why wouldn't they slow older devices down to encourage purchasing of the newest devices?

This is no smoking gun, but it's definitely a gun. (Not that any of this matters, because I probably will never buy another phone anyway. It's just sad that businesses do this instead of truly making devices that last for many years. Recycling is a joke... How about create devices that don't NEED to be recycled? Consumerism. Profit. That's why. Hypocrites at Apple, there are. It doesn't seem like they truly care about saving the environment if they continue to make products that are designed to be tossed into a landfill, ne: recycling bin. Make me a device that can be kept for five years, that isn't crippled by software upgrades.)

 

[gladoscc]

Can confirm this on my old iPhone 7 with 79% capacity; 232 cycles. Half the Geekbench of what iPhone 7 should have.

I’m not using that anymore and was planning on selling it; so tough to cough up a battery replacement.

So not unique to the 6 or the 6S.

 

[mollyc]

How do you determine the battery capacity and number of cycles?

 

[Chazzle]

Yeah, but.... (all great sentences start with "yeah, but". ha)... Apple has shown willingness to slow devices down, so why wouldn't they slow older devices down to encourage purchasing of the newest devices?

This is no smoking gun, but it's definitely a gun. (Not that any of this matters, because I probably will never buy another phone anyway. It's just sad that businesses do this instead of truly making devices that last for many years. Recycling is a joke... How about create devices that don't NEED to be recycled? Consumerism. Profit. That's why. Hypocrites at Apple, there are. It doesn't seem like they truly care about saving the environment if they continue to make products that are designed to be tossed into a landfill, ne: recycling bin. Make me a device that can be kept for five years, that isn't crippled by software upgrades.)

The difference in regards to the article is that Apple’s reason for slowing down those devices is to prevent random shutdowns and allow you to keep using your device without getting a new battery or new phone.
Still not seeing the correlation you are claiming.

 

[tonybarnaby]

Can confirm this on my old iPhone 7 with 79% capacity; 232 cycles. Half the Geekbench of what iPhone 7 should have.

I’m not using that anymore and was planning on selling it; so tough to cough up a battery replacement.

So not unique to the 6 or the 6S.

That’s horrible how badly it’s degraded in such a short amount of time. Does Apple use really low quality batteries or something?? For reference, Samsung claims the battery on an s8 or note 8 should only lose 5% capacity in the first year.

 

[JM]

The difference in regards to the article is that Apple’s reason for slowing down those devices is to prevent random shutdowns and allow you to keep using your device without getting a new battery or new phone.
Still not seeing the correlation you are claiming.

The correlation is that they're capable of slowing down devices... and chose to do so.

It's not a one to one relationship, no. It just shows that they're capable, that's all. And it makes me wonder if they are also slowing devices to sell new ones. And no one would ever know for sure.
[doublepost=1512937962][/doublepost]

Yup. Yet more proof,of planned obsolescence as if there wasn't enough available already. Basically, Apple's going to take more money from you whichever option you choose. You can only buy a new device or a newer battery if you want some of your performande back.

Because of course no one really is going to get mad about it and go buy Android. Apple knows this.

 

[ipooed]

https://9to5mac.com/2017/12/10/iphone-6s-slow-down-battery-fix/

So, hopefully this won't turn into a bloodbath....

How does this not prove that Apple has no problem slowing older devices for personal gain?

Objectively: yes, Apple wants to manage the power when the battery gets old.

But does this not give evidence towards the claim that Apple would slow older devices to encourage purchasing of a new one? (Which could be in a way called... GASP!... Planned Obsolescence?)

I'm not saying it's proof that Apple subscribes to Planned Obsolescence; I'm saying that this is pretty good evidence that they are capable of it, and have behaved in a way that would help one believe that they do.

*and please read the whole article. I'm not a wacko tin foil man, so don't treat me like one.

Interesting! Thanks for sharing. I have a 6s 32GB a year old today so according to that article Apple says my battery should last another year, I want to jump on the iOS 11 wagon but as the old saying goes if it ain't broke don't fix it, also I wasn't a user affected by the "recall" so in that sense I shouldn't have an issue with 11. Decisions decisions

 

[IsaacM]

How do you determine the battery capacity and number of cycles?

To check your battery capacity you can use the Battery Life app:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/battery-life-check-runtimes/id1080930585?mt=8

To check your CPU clock use Geekbench:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/geekbench-4/id1130770356?mt=8
[doublepost=1512938298][/doublepost]

Can confirm this on my old iPhone 7 with 79% capacity; 232 cycles. Half the Geekbench of what iPhone 7 should have.

I’m not using that anymore and was planning on selling it; so tough to cough up a battery replacement.

So not unique to the 6 or the 6S.

That's really a dramatic underclock and a terrible idea knowing that with every day of iPhone usage, your device is gradually becoming slower and slower.

 

[JM]

Interesting! Thanks for sharing. I have a 6s 32GB a year old today so according to that article Apple says my battery should last another year, I want to jump on the iOS 11 wagon but as the old saying goes if it ain't broke don't fix it, also I wasn't a user affected by the "recall" so in that sense I shouldn't have an issue with 11. Decisions decisions

I'm with you. I don't think the iOS 11 is as bad as some say, but I also don't discount their poor experiences.

Annnnd it's just not a gamble I'm willing to take because there's no WOW feature I want, and I really don't want shorter battery life. It's kind of nice having two days of battery life for the length of life with less charge cycles)

 

[BigMcGuire]

https://9to5mac.com/2017/12/10/iphone-6s-slow-down-battery-fix/amp/

 

[147798]

I ran my ip6 on GB4, and got 1050 single core, vs a supposed 1400 expected score.

After reading this, I ran CPU DasherX to find my CPU clocked at 600Mhz instead of the expected 1400 MHZ. Checked my wife's iP6 still running iOS9 (on CPU Dasher 64) and her's clocked at 1400 MHz.

Not at all happy with Apple right now. Almost ponied up $700+ for a new phone, when it wasn't needed.

They have enough cash to do a battery recall.

Tim Freakin Cook -- you owe me a battery.

btw -- I'm more prone to think this whole deal is Apple dodging a complete battery recall across the 6 and 6s line, and sloppy thinking, than pro-active planned obsolesce, but either way, it's not very comforting.

I'm going tonight for a new battery -- if they do a recall, I would hope they make good on mine. If they don't, well, I'm not in the mood for a full iPhone upgrade right now, or perhaps anytime in the future. This might be my last iPhone, depending on how they respond -- both what they say and what they do. If I can get another 6-12 months on this phone, that gives me time for a trial of Android. I've been avoiding moving to Android, but this kind of the last straw. Just so steamed right now.

 

[CTHarrryH]

Gee the 487 thread this month on this topic. I'm sure it will be full of new information rather than the same old rants.

 

[Chazzle]

Gee the 487 thread this month on this topic. I'm sure it will be full of new information rather than the same old rants.

Read the article though. That's where the new info resides. The OP thinks that the article is evidence of planned obsolescence, which I disagree with. Good article regardless.

 

[IsaacM]

I ran my ip6 on GB4, and got 1050 single core, vs a supposed 1400 expected score.

After reading this, I ran CPU DasherX to find my CPU clocked at 600Mhz instead of the expected 1400 MHZ. Checked my wife's iP6 still running iOS9 (on CPU Dasher 64) and her's clocked at 1400 MHz.

Not at all happy with Apple right now. Almost ponied up $700+ for a new phone, when it wasn't needed.

They have enough cash to do a battery recall.

Tim Freakin Cook -- you owe me a battery.

btw -- I'm more prone to think this whole deal is Apple dodging a complete battery recall across the 6 and 6s line, and sloppy thinking, than pro-active planned obsolesce, but either way, it's not very comforting.

I'm going tonight for a new battery -- if they do a recall, I would hope they make good on mine. If they don't, well, I'm not in the mood for a full iPhone upgrade right now, or perhaps anytime in the future. This might be my last iPhone, depending on how they respond -- both what they say and what they do. If I can get another 6-12 months on this phone, that gives me time for a trial of Android. I've been avoiding moving to Android, but this kind of the last straw. Just so steamed right now.

600Mhz vs 1400Mhz is crazy difference

 

[eyoungren]

But I'm on 9.0.2…

 

[tonybarnaby]

Does Apple use low quality batteries in the 7/8/x, or does this only affect the 6?

 

[Septembersrain]

But I'm on 9.0.2…

View attachment 741358 View attachment 741357

So you think this was introduced in a later iOS iteration? If so, that's even bigger of a quandary.

Are they doing this to keep the battery working longer knowing it will ruin performance?

Why are they not telling us?

Will each new iteration affect the device increasingly? Until inevitably a person would just feel compelled to buy a new device rather than a new battery?

That sounds like planned obsolescence but also like they may be hiding something about their batteries?

 

[eyoungren]

So you think this was introduced in a later iOS iteration? If so, that's even bigger of a quandary.

Are they doing this to keep the battery working longer knowing it will ruin performance?

Why are they not telling us?

OP said it occured with the 10.2.1 update.

So, yeah. It's sure not happening with me. And the only device I have running anything higher than that is an iPhone 5 that was brand new (refurb) in May 2017. My son has an SE on 11 something but it's less than two months old. And my daughter has a 5 on 10.3.x (forget which version), but it's also brand new (May 2017).

All the other phones in my house are iOS 9. My wife is on 9.0.1 and doesn't have any battery issues, or at least none she tells me about.

 

[IsaacM]

So you think this was introduced in a later iOS iteration? If so, that's even bigger of a quandary.

Are they doing this to keep the battery working longer knowing it will ruin performance?

Why are they not telling us?

Will each new iteration affect the device increasingly? Until inevitably a person would just feel compelled to buy a new device rather than a new battery?

That sounds like planned obsolescence but also like they may be hiding something about their batteries?

I feel like it's a mixture of them fixing the problem with iPhone 6 batteries and random shutdowns that they had and planned obsolesce.

This is now also happening on iPhone 7 series models and it is remained to be seen wether 8 and X Series are affected because they have just been released and their batteries are still in pristine condition.

 

[147798]

600Mhz vs 1400Mhz is crazy difference

Weird. I was charging my battery (while backing up, before taking it for the battery replacement) and now it's reading 1127MHz, which is still down from 1400MHz. Not sure what is going on, unless the app is not accurate??