Other iPhone battery life scandal. Would you ever buy another iPhone again?

[MacDevil7334]

It's a battery folks! Do you yell and scream when your Maglite batteries go down? Do you throw it away and buy another one? No, you replace the BATTERY! Batteries, in every case I am aware of, degrade over time/usage.
What  should do is have a pop up when the battery is starting to degrade to the point that iOS throttles it. Then you go to your local battery replacement store and get a new battery. Or give iFixit $30 and they mail you the tools and battery to replace it, (just like your flashlight).
SMH

Yes, but that right there is the problem. Nobody is saying battery physics don't apply to Apple devices or that Apple should have come up with some sort of magical battery that never degrades. Apple's decision to throttle the processor is probably justified in that it's the "least bad" solution to the problem of what to do when a battery is getting old. It can definitely be argued that slower performance overall is preferable to random sudden shutdowns.

The problem is that Apple implemented this change in software without telling anyone AND deliberately made it difficult for users to access official battery replacements from Apple. The option of a battery replacement isn't widely publicized to begin with and Apple won't even do it if their tests show the battery hasn't degraded to 80% capacity yet. But, the software starts slowing down the phone well before the battery has degraded that far. So, the user is left with a slow phone and may not know that a battery replacement is an option (and even then Apple might refuse). Given that information, the user decides it's time for a new phone, which is more money in Apple's coffers. Apple has an incentive to push people to buy a new phone rather than replace the battery, which is why they didn't mention throttling in the software release notes. If Apple was really acting in the customer's best interest, they would have alerted the user to the change when iOS 10.2.1 was released, offered a choice between throttling and random shutdowns in Settings, and made it much easier for customers to access a battery replacement (the fee is fine, but it's hard to get). Instead, they kept it quiet and hoped nobody would notice. That's incredibly shady and only serves Apple's bottom line.

It's important to remember that, while tech companies often market themselves as being our "friends", they're definitely not. They're still corporations who mainly care about their bottom line and keeping their shareholders happy. Apple still makes great stuff and offer an experience that is better than the competition. However, that gap has rapidly narrowed as Apple has become complacent and jacked up prices under Tim Cook. I'm not saying I'm jumping ship on Apple. But, I will definitely be taking a closer look at other options the next time I decide to get a new phone.

 

[Raist3001]

I guess it comes down to one question. Do we trust apple?
In my opinion, from all I have read, it looks to me as though apple developed a plan to fix the battery issue with a band aid. After all, they released a software update in which they claimed fixed the battery issue. However, sadly, they did not explain how this was to be done. Although I can understand why the battery fix was implemented, it was the non disclosure as to how this was being accomplished that in my opinion is the real foul. Couple this with the fact that many folks are not being allowed to update their battery for 79 dollars because apples equipment does not show your battery degraded enough, and you have the making for a disgruntled customer.

So, do I trust apple? Yes I do, but that does not mean I am not disappointed in how they handled this situation.

 

[MachCrit]

Yes, but that right there is the problem. Nobody is saying battery physics don't apply to Apple devices or that Apple should have come up with some sort of magical battery that never degrades. Apple's decision to throttle the processor is probably justified in that it's the "least bad" solution to the problem of what to do when a battery is getting old. It can definitely be argued that slower performance overall is preferable to random sudden shutdowns.

The problem is that Apple implemented this change in software without telling anyone AND deliberately made it difficult for users to access official battery replacements from Apple. The option of a battery replacement isn't widely publicized to begin with and Apple won't even do it if their tests show the battery hasn't degraded to 80% capacity yet. But, the software starts slowing down the phone well before the battery has degraded that far. So, the user is left with a slow phone and may not know that a battery replacement is an option (and even then Apple might refuse). Given that information, the user decides it's time for a new phone, which is more money in Apple's coffers. Apple has an incentive to push people to buy a new phone rather than replace the battery, which is why they didn't mention throttling in the software release notes. If Apple was really acting in the customer's best interest, they would have alerted the user to the change when iOS 10.2.1 was released, offered a choice between throttling and random shutdowns in Settings, and made it much easier for customers to access a battery replacement (the fee is fine, but it's hard to get). Instead, they kept it quiet and hoped nobody would notice. That's incredibly shady and only serves Apple's bottom line.

It's important to remember that, while tech companies often market themselves as being our "friends", they're definitely not. They're still corporations who mainly care about their bottom line and keeping their shareholders happy. Apple still makes great stuff and offer an experience that is better than the competition. However, that gap has rapidly narrowed as Apple has become complacent and jacked up prices under Tim Cook. I'm not saying I'm jumping ship on Apple. But, I will definitely be taking a closer look at other options the next time I decide to get a new phone.

The court is likely to rule that the buyer has some responsibility to understand the product and policies pertinent to their purchase. Especially since the product give access to massive amounts of information literally at the fingertips of the user.

You'd have a case if Apple prevented battery replacement, but since they have a process to purchase new batteries before the throttling is apparent, then this isn't a valid tort.

 

[Extoll]

My S8 came out of the box throttled by lowering the Screen res and cpu/gpu throttled to get the best battery life it could. I really don't see much difference here to what apple is doing

 

[Raist3001]

The court is likely to rule that the buyer has some responsibility to understand the product and policies pertinent to their purchase.

Isn't that the real issue? How would a customer understand that apple fixed the battery issues with throttling? Where can I find this info on their website? Why would I need to be responsible to research and understand every fix apple makes to their product?

 

[Martyimac]

Isn't that the real issue? How would a customer understand that apple fixed the battery issues with throttling? Where can I find this info on their website? Why would I need to be responsible to research and understand every fix apple makes to their product?

Every time apple has you agree to a change, you have "read and understood" what they put in it. You mean you didn't read the whole thing? LOL (psst, neither did I )

 

[rawCpoppa]

Easiest fix would be to allow customers to pay for the battery to be changed. All this nonsense about not qualifying for a battery change needs to stop.

 

[Raist3001]

You mean you didn't read the whole thing? LOL (psst, neither did I )

LOL...I don't read the fine print

 

[Martyimac]

Easiest fix would be to allow customers to pay for the battery to be changed. All this nonsense about not qualifying for a battery change needs to stop.

You can have the battery changed whenever you want. Apple may not do it but there are plenty of non  options available and they are probably cheaper.

 

[rawCpoppa]

You can have the battery changed whenever you want. Apple may not do it but there are plenty of non  options available and they are probably cheaper.

Problem with this is Apple flags many of these 3rd party batteries as degraded as well.

 

[Martyimac]

Problem with this is Apple flags many of these 3rd party batteries as degraded as well.

Sounds like a great topic for a different/new thread!

 

[MachCrit]

Easiest fix would be to allow customers to pay for the battery to be changed. All this nonsense about not qualifying for a battery change needs to stop.

I thought that a customer could buy a battery at will, but having it paid for by Apple under AppleCare warranty required less than the 80% charge capacity standard to be met?

 

[bevsb2]

First of all, doing a peak load more slowly is unquestionably better than completely turning off due to insufficient current, which would be a performance level of exactly 0. So yes, that does seem like a wise choice.

Secondly, we DO have the option of replacing the battery. We've had this option for many years. Any third party phone repair shop can do this and also Apple will do it too.
https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/battery-power

Except when the performance of your phone deteriorates immediately after an iOS update, the first thing you think is not I must need a new battery.

 

[I7guy]

This was talked about on all the TV news show that I caught today. Just now on CBS NY. The news anchor actually complained on air as part of this story of his very slow iPhone lol.

This has to be one of Apple's bigger PR nightmare, if not the biggest.

“Antenna-gate” was worse. There was no fix for that, other than “you’re holding it wrong.”

 

[rawCpoppa]

I thought that a customer could buy a battery at will, but having it paid for by Apple under AppleCare warranty required less than the 80% charge capacity standard to be met?

You can or cannot have AppleCare. Apple won't change it if it hasn't dropped below 80%.

 

[ActionableMango]

Apple should've offered an option for, along with offering to replace worn battery at the $79 fee, regardless of what their *battery test software* indicates

Fair enough, I agree Apple should let you pay for it whether they think the phone needs it or not. That would lead to greater customer satisfaction. However, it's not like this is some sort of insurmountable problem considering that third party repair shops do it too and for about $50, which saves you $30 over Apple.

Also, individual experiences are anecdotal. I personally walked into Apple Store to complain about my battery and I got a new battery installed for free. The repair tech noticed the screen had a little chip in the corner. I don't have AppleCare+ so damage is not covered. But since he couldn't call me to authorize an optional repair for a replacement screen (he couldn't call me because he had my phone), he decided to do just do it anyway and discounted the part 99%.

I got a brand new battery, brand new screen, and brand new home button for $1.29. I have to say, that incident put my customer satisfaction through the roof. We all have different anecdotal experiences at the Apple Store and mine was enormously positive.

 

[iosuser]

“Antenna-gate” was worse. There was no fix for that, other than “you’re holding it wrong.”

I’m not so sure. That was a design flaw. The throttling is deliberate and implemented long after the phone was originally released.

 

[I7guy]

I’m not so sure. That was a design flaw. The throttling is deliberate and implemented long after the phone was originally released.

The power management is also designed with an altruistic goal...keeping your iPhone alive. With the iPhone 4 There was no work around other than a different grip.

But okay, I can see how differing opinions of these events are possible.

 

[AndrewR23]

Lol, you are asking this on a Apple forum. Most here would buy an iPhone even if Apple required them to give up a finger or toe. Literally.

 

[DNichter]

Of course. I still don't buy at all that Apple did this to make people upgrade. Apple prolonged the life of devices that had defective/old batteries. I don't see the issue with what they did, more so that they should have been transparent about it. iOS is still the best platform by far as they will always lead when it comes to performance, security, privacy, ecosystem, apps, and support. I upgrade yearly so this does not affect me in any way, either.

 

[MachCrit]

You can or cannot have AppleCare. Apple won't change it if it hasn't dropped below 80%.

When does throttling kick in? Is it simply activated by the age of the phone, or the status of the battery?

The way I read it, any consumer could purchase a battery as long as they understood that they had to fork over the $79.
[doublepost=1513972520][/doublepost]

I’m throwing away all of my Apple products!!

Throw them at me!

This, like most techie things, is overblown and assumes that all consumers are helpless victims. Tiresome really.

I suppose the answer would be for the government, not the market, to require removable batteries.

Also, the way people manage power varies widely. Knowing the Li-ion battery charging phenomenon, I am always on external power if available. Never had an issue with poor battery life.

 

[BittenApple]

When does throttling kick in? Is it simply activated by the age of the phone, or the status of the battery?

The way I read it, any consumer could purchase a battery as long as they understood that they had to fork over the $79.
[doublepost=1513972520][/doublepost]

Throw them at me!

This, like most techie things, is overblown and assumes that all consumers are helpless victims. Tiresome really.

I suppose the answer would be for the government, not the market, to require removable batteries.

Also, the way people manage power varies widely. Knowing the Li-ion battery charging phenomenon, I am always on external power if available. Never had an issue with poor battery life.

Some people are complaining that they went into an Apple Store with their slower throttled iPhone, and apple would reject them saying their batteries were fine. which was not true.

 

[Martyimac]

Some people are complaining that they went into an Apple Store with their slower throttled iPhone, and apple would reject them saying their batteries were fine. which was not true.

Bur were they expecting Applecare to fix them? If so, I'm sure there is a test involved to determine if it really is an Applecare qualified replacement. Hard to believe otherwise.

 

[MachCrit]

You can or cannot have AppleCare. Apple won't change it if it hasn't dropped below 80%.

Battery service
The Apple Limited Warranty covers a defective battery, but it doesn’t cover wear from normal use. We might need to test your iPhone to find the cause of your battery issue.

If your battery has a manufacturing defect and it's covered by our warranty, AppleCare+, or consumer law, we'll service it at no additional cost. If your iPhone battery service isn't covered, we can replace your battery for a fee.

If you’re covered by AppleCare+ and your iPhone battery can hold only 80 percent or less of its original capacity, we'll service your product at no charge.

Learn how to preserve battery life
See Apple out-of-warranty battery pricing
Learn more about AppleCare+ for iPhone
[doublepost=1513973338][/doublepost]

Some people are complaining that they went into an Apple Store with their slower throttled iPhone, and apple would reject them saying their batteries were fine. which was not true.

The salient aspect here is whether the complainants had AppleCare. Makes sense that they would want their batteries replaced under extended warranty that they purchased. If not, and the phone is over one year old, then they could simply buy another battery.

Apple needed to lay out the options for AppleCare customers clearly.

 

[bbrks]

Just to answer OPs question.....I will stick with Apple...always....IOS does the work for me, Android doesn't. Period.