This reads like a case study in confirmation bias...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Resolved Are Intel Apple computers being deliberately slowed?
- Thread starter Agincourt
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Those later model years of Intel MBPs had trouble with thermals and the CPUs would frequently throttle. Perhaps that is happening. Do you notice a different when you first startup vs after it has been running a while?
I have a 2020 i5 MBP with two thunderbolt ports. It’s my understanding that these 8th gen chips were either the same as the ones found 2019 MBPs or slower. (Someone correct me if I’m wrong, though.)
I have no slowdowns like that whatsoever in the slowest chip that you could get in those MBPs, with the latest macOS version.
The computer is really slow waking up from sleep, though - but the same happens on my 12th gen Intel Windows laptop and I may absolutely have spoiled myself with the M1.
I have no slowdowns like that whatsoever in the slowest chip that you could get in those MBPs, with the latest macOS version.
The computer is really slow waking up from sleep, though - but the same happens on my 12th gen Intel Windows laptop and I may absolutely have spoiled myself with the M1.
They did it to prevent iPhones with worn out batteries of shutting down under load. That was a good move (in fact designed to prolong the life of an iPhone) but they explained it poorly and payed the price for that.
Anyway, no, they are not intentionally slowing down your Mac.
Apple Will Finally Pay for Throttling iPhones With ‘Batterygate’ Settlement
Plus: Amazon Music gets pricier, a bunch of people still want to ban TikTok in the US, and it’s only getting hotter on planet Earth.
You don't have to pay settlements for something that's objectively untrue. The fact malicious intent was proven kinda shows this was a thing on iPhones. So when I admit to being a conspirator, that's because there HAS been an instance similar to the one in my opening post.
^^
This wasn't 'poor communication' otherwise Apple could have defended themselves in court. It was done in secret and without consent of their customers. Whatever their reasons it probably did compel owners to replace their device earlier than they would have.
My particular issues were with Safari and Windows, both of which coincided at same time for unrelated reasons. Obviously I had a question for others and they haven't had such issues, thus my question is answered. Safari appears to be the problem and Windows running simultaneously with Apple OS is going to make the machine hot and is naturally slower.
Last edited:
First thing I note is that this discussion seems to be going a bit nonspecific and vague so I'll try and bring it on topic.
You're not specific about which 2019 MacBook Pro you have - I was wondering if you have a 15" which would therefore have an AMD GPU on the motherboard or if it's a 13" which would mean you're on Intel graphics throughout. Could be a hardware issue (graphics switching on the 15") or might be a bad install - would you be up for a full reinstall as an option?
I believe recent versions of MacOS try and fill all available RAM which things you run to make stuff open that bit faster. I'd be relaxed about RAM filling up as the OS is capable of switching when operating normally.
I scoured this thread and notice that you appear to imply you have macOS 13.2 - which suggests that you are using Ventura. But the latest version of Ventura is 13.6.3.
Seems to me that you could at least update to the latest version of Ventura if you are reluctant to update to Sonoma which is at 14.2 (unless it's a typo and you really are bang up to date).
In addition, there was a mention of Ad blockers being an issue to explore - it rings a bell as Youtube appears to be making threats to block access if users have Ghostery or similar ad blockers installed as extensions. As mentioned elsewhere you could try checking what extensions you have installed in Safari (under Settings/Extensions) and disable them all to see if one of those is causing issues - it might be if you have extensions you have forgotten about that they either need updating or disabling/uninstalling.
seems to me that apple has gone overboard with security and non-tracking on Sonoma
which some websites dont like that which slows or has an effects the elements of the site Are blocked
such as playing videos etc. i realised this yesterday.
Okay I was under the impression my Apple was up to date with the OS because I was never prompted about it. I had to specifically search for it to know there was a 13.6.3 update. Now that I have it's highlighted on my 'system report' menu bar. I checked my settings and apparently my computer WAS supposed to automatically check for updates, but didn't.
I suppose with a glaring problem such as this, I'm going to update to the latest version of 13.
I mean, to be fair, my MacBook Pro mid 2010 was A LOT faster on 10.6 and 10.7 than on 10.12. Even freshly installed by a lot faster I mean A LOT FASTER. Unity exported projects etc faster too.
Same with my MacBook Early 2008. It was a lot faster on Leopard than on Lion. The operating systems do get heavier within time.
My MSI PC was a lot faster on Windows 10 too, by the way. Whether it's just the technology moving forward or on purpose.
I do believe that Apple has dropped features on older Macs on purpose though, but they've always done that. Also, the fact that Mountain Lion (hacked one) worked better on my MacBook Early 2008 than Lion is suspicious. I asked about it on Apple Discussion forums once but it was deleted for whatever reason. It's not a conspiracy theory in my opinion.
Mountain Lion was just a smoother system than Lion in general. I had a similar experience updating my 2012 Mac mini from Catalina (supported) to Big Sur (unsupported). The latter is just a smoother system on any machine that I've experienced.
Any new OS has to strike a balance between adding new features and optimizing old ones. Given that hardware performance is constantly improving, there's less incentive to focus on the latter. But the result is older hardware struggling to keep up with everything that's going on. Some things are a necessity though, like supporting all of the latest web features that really use a lot of resources. That's unfortunately the main thing holding older OS versions back today.
Snow leopard is very responsive, maybe the "mostest" in the osx family!
someone explained that in 2009 these Macs did not need the computing demands as
say 2011as computer use expanded.
there was simpler tasks and less searching because the os was less than Mountain lion who had a large spectrum of data including iCloud etc,
I realized this several month ago while reinstalling Snow Leopard on the MBA 2010.
sure everything was fast, but there were less things to do compared to mountain lion.
'hope this explanation was clear....
From my experience, they just lag with time and updates. I have a 2015 MBP and it was getting really sluggish on Catalina. It would take it about 80 seconds to cold boot. I then had to swap its battery, so everything was erased with a fresh installation of Monterey. The cold boot time after that was about 20 seconds, magic! A few years down the line it starts slowing down again. I guess this is inevitable, as software grows in its complexity, while hardware stays the same. This was a permanent pattern ever since the computers came by, this is why IT people in big companies would routinely flash all the workstations every six months or so to give them some extra zestiness, LOL.
So if your current setup is too sluggish for your needs I would attempt a fresh installation of everything first. If this does not help, then yes, you would probably need to upgrade your hardware.
So if your current setup is too sluggish for your needs I would attempt a fresh installation of everything first. If this does not help, then yes, you would probably need to upgrade your hardware.
One thing that I find ironic is that I own a pre retina iMac that could be upgraded to 32 GB RAM and yet it's unsupported by anything beyond 10.15. It boots up slow (despite an SSD) and all but is snappy with basic tasks. One would think that 'heavier' operating systems rely more on memory than processor speed, but now it's more about how old the computer is. If it predates x year, Apple won't support it.
The fact that experts can make a newer OS run on such a machine shows how everlasting Apple products can be. It's one of the reasons I keep buying them despite having the life of three of them cut short due to hardware faults. In reality Apple has little reason to keep supporting Intel machines beyond what's legally required. They don't want consumer-level users to buy a secondhand iMac for $200 from someone on eBay, they want the customers to keep coming back to them and buying their newest models.
However there is another angle to this in the form of website creators. They absolutely cannot afford to make all their content available on high-end computers, otherwise they have no market. It's for that reason we can reasonably expect even a decade-old computer to have much useful life left. While you may not be able to play high-end online games anymore you absolutely CAN expect such machines to hold up for consumer level tasks.
The fact that experts can make a newer OS run on such a machine shows how everlasting Apple products can be. It's one of the reasons I keep buying them despite having the life of three of them cut short due to hardware faults. In reality Apple has little reason to keep supporting Intel machines beyond what's legally required. They don't want consumer-level users to buy a secondhand iMac for $200 from someone on eBay, they want the customers to keep coming back to them and buying their newest models.
However there is another angle to this in the form of website creators. They absolutely cannot afford to make all their content available on high-end computers, otherwise they have no market. It's for that reason we can reasonably expect even a decade-old computer to have much useful life left. While you may not be able to play high-end online games anymore you absolutely CAN expect such machines to hold up for consumer level tasks.
Well, Leopard and Snow Leopard had MobileMe instead of iCloud.
Mountain Lion was faster on my unsupported early 2008 Mac than Lion, which was officially supported. So yes, I do believe that Apple might drop the support on purpose in order to sell new hardware.
Also, the fact that MacBook (2009) supported Sierra and MacBook Pro and Air from 2009 didn't support Sierra is suspicious to me.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacOS_Sierra. One beef that I've always had with Apple was the lack of security updates and dropping support too fast, but there's no point to argue about that anymore. In the past some computers became obsolete within 4 years, while Windows PCs were supported much longer.
If you bought a Dell in 2007 it was able to run from Windows XP to Windows 10 with no issues, if you bought a MacBook in 2007 Lion was the last officially supported Mac OS X release and Lion received it's last security update back in 2014, while Windows 10 is still being updated and patched and you can surf the web with it freely till 2025.
That's 18 years of use. I have a Dell from 2007 too and it still works. The same with an old desktop PC my family has from 2003. It's still supported by the security updates and it has an up to date web browser. Macs are great, but Apple should support old Macs more.
the Dell XPS 9380 13' I purchased in 2019 deceased in 2022
mostly because they would not replace the battery at the asking price.
they would bump th price $20 then say were out of stock!
which was good because the usbC connecting board started to fail intermittently.
meanwhile the MacBook Air (High Sierra) form 2010 runs great!
not as great as the MBA or iPad tho!
I challenge your assumption that “many” users got a new phone over this. If I remember correctly, the random shutdown/throttling issue was implemented when the iPhone 6s was about a year old….I mean how many people are buying a new phone because their 1-year old phone suddenly feels slow? Just thinking about it, the super majority of buyers are getting their phone on a 2-3 year device payment loan. They are not going to go out and get a new phone after 1 year and be paying their loan on two phones.
I can see the argument if Apple did this on a 4-year old device, but the whole 6s battery thing had a toggle switch for peak performance and everything before the device was even two years old.
That I all said - I absolutely agree it was a problem that Apple didn’t explain to customers what kind of “fix” they were putting on place. I just don’t think this had the kind of impact people like to pretend it had (and yes, people like the Brizilian government like to pretend all sorts of stuff in their lawsuits over this).
That's an issue with all the new computers. My Dell from 2007 doesn't even have a battery. I dont even use it tbh. It's in a closet, but it works and in 2017 it was my backup computer for awhile.
My main point was the software though. Apple has dropped High Sierra too and you need to use 3rd party browsers etc.
Is Apple intentionally slowing Intel Macs? No.
Is Apple investing less time optimizing for Intel-Macs? Very likely.
Everything is being designed a optimized as ARM first and foremost.
Jumping to a pretty major conclusion here. Done any troubleshooting of any sort on your machine? I have a 2013 MBP that still functions extremely well. I still use it, never had an issue where clicking in the browser takes several seconds to initiate an action. Sounds more like an actual browser problem, less than a computer problem.
Not being an Apple fanboy, but you should try providing some actual steps you've take to try and resolve the issue before jumping to " Apple is screwing us over again" People are going to switch to these new Macs, they can be expensive, but people are going to make the switch to M Macs when they can. Apple doesn't need to slow down older machines, and only based on my personal experience and knowledge, I don't think they are.
If what you claim were true it could not realistically be proven in a court of law. The fact Apple had been proven to have done it in secret and generated financial damage negates your claim. Remember that it's extremely difficult to prove malicious intent, because you must generate evidence relating to exactly that. Even if there were some fine print that most people don't read, that would have negated the case entirely.
And while we cannot define exactly how much was gained/lost due to this, logic would indicate AT LEAST that customers were compelled to replace their iPhones earlier due to slow performance. This all wasn't a miscommunication it was really Apple doing it all in secret. Whether it was to extend the battery life or not doesn't matter in that slower performance was the result and no notification or consent was presented of this to users.
The fact this was proven in a court means there had to have been enough evidence to convince a jury or judge of malicious intent, not some conspiracy nut weaving a tall tale based on anecdotal evidence. Your denial of such evidence and assumption that no one replaced their phones as a result is the exact same behavior you condemn but from the other side.
Do you have a reference for this court case? I tried searching, but am not seeing any US court case where a judge or jury found Apple guilty of malicious intent on this issue….
As I have said before, you are not understanding how this happened. I had the 6s in my family and lived through this in real time.
The iPhone 6s would randomly shut down. You could not turn it on again without plugging it in, leaving you stranded with a dead phone. Basically the phone was unusable. Before Apple diagnosed the problem, they were just replacing peoples whole phone. At least they did for us.
Then Apple provided a software update that “fixed” the issue. It did this by limiting the peak current the phone could draw when the battery was old. The phone only slowed down when the batter was old. There was no “permanent throttling” as you suggest. It was not done to “preserve the battery” as you suggest. It was done to keep the phone from crashing, and it only applied when your phone had an okd battery. If you replaced the battery, the phone worked without any throttling.
The whole problem is that Apple did it in secret, and didn’t inform the users what the fix was. The fix itself was reasonable, as evidenced by the fact that all iPhones now throttle with old batteries by default.
I went through 7 Plus, best thing that came out of this was $29 battery replacement. I replaced my battery twice and was in pretty good condition till I upgraded to 13 PM. Battery replacement can do wonders to prolonging the life of the phone.