Completely agree being an iPad 4 owner. It worked absolutely fine on iOS 9, only with the latest update I can see some delays and that would be expected after so many years.
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.
Should we sue Apple for not allowing downgrading iOS devices?
- Thread starter olduser007
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Completely agree being an iPad 4 owner. It worked absolutely fine on iOS 9, only with the latest update I can see some delays and that would be expected after so many years.
I am a forced march person.
I dislike using old software.
Whenever there is a new version, I gotta have it now.
I believe sincerely that you should upgrade or buy a new device that runs the software properly.
However, you do make a good point. What's so wrong with a prompt with the word "Go Away, I am not Upgrading, Thank you." If people have an older device that may not run the software properly or are just stubborn troglodytes who still think Windows XP and Mac OS X Tiger are the "greatest OS ever", they should be allowed to stay behind.
Majority of us will move forward.
But I agree on giving the user the option to hold back.
It may be a stupid reason in some cases, but I remember trying to run Leopard on an iBook G4 and I couldn't downgrade any faster than I did!
God, that computer was slow as molasses on Leopard!
I dislike using old software.
Whenever there is a new version, I gotta have it now.
I believe sincerely that you should upgrade or buy a new device that runs the software properly.
However, you do make a good point. What's so wrong with a prompt with the word "Go Away, I am not Upgrading, Thank you." If people have an older device that may not run the software properly or are just stubborn troglodytes who still think Windows XP and Mac OS X Tiger are the "greatest OS ever", they should be allowed to stay behind.
Majority of us will move forward.
But I agree on giving the user the option to hold back.
It may be a stupid reason in some cases, but I remember trying to run Leopard on an iBook G4 and I couldn't downgrade any faster than I did!
God, that computer was slow as molasses on Leopard!
I'm going to sue you for that!
[doublepost=1501104215][/doublepost]
Each version of iOS is optimized for a given platform (and not always well optimized.) Optimizing for one chip mean losing optimization for the earlier one(s). There are also more features added, and new services added (not always visible.)
I also have an iPad 2 and iPad 3 and understand his pain. For me, they became unstable on 9.3.5 with involuntary reboots often. I am happily chugging along on my new iPad 2017.
That said, I did not feel the urge to sue or complain as I knew what to expect and decided the tradeoff of compatibility was worth the lost speed. YMMV...
You could probably "try and sue" but that's all that'll happen..
Apple decision is theirs. just only because a few users here and there don't like it wouldn't account for anything.
I never upgrade iOS anymore. And unless Apple forces larger updates over Cellular, I'll stay that way.
Its come to say Apple users understand iOS is restrictive this way.... so we accept it. If u can find more than a billion users that feel the same way i'll be on this as well
Apple decision is theirs. just only because a few users here and there don't like it wouldn't account for anything.
I never upgrade iOS anymore. And unless Apple forces larger updates over Cellular, I'll stay that way.
Its come to say Apple users understand iOS is restrictive this way.... so we accept it. If u can find more than a billion users that feel the same way i'll be on this as well
I am a forced march person.
I dislike using old software.
Whenever there is a new version, I gotta have it now.
I believe sincerely that you should upgrade or buy a new device that runs the software properly.
However, you do make a good point. What's so wrong with a prompt with the word "Go Away, I am not Upgrading, Thank you." If people have an older device that may not run the software properly or are just stubborn troglodytes who still think Windows XP and Mac OS X Tiger are the "greatest OS ever", they should be allowed to stay behind.
Majority of us will move forward.
But I agree on giving the user the option to hold back.
It may be a stupid reason in some cases, but I remember trying to run Leopard on an iBook G4 and I couldn't downgrade any faster than I did!
I agree with you. I believe that people should keep their software up to date, but it should indeed be their choice. People should have full control over what OS is installed on this device, but as I said before, it's Apple idealology of protecting people from themselves. Theoretically, the latest OS should be the most stable and secure, and have the best features, so Apple wants everyone to be using it, for their own good.
If the question is, "Why not sue?" the question I'd ask is, "Based on what points of law?"
If you're going to claim harm, "My iPhone ran better under iOS x.x," Apple will show up with anonymized log files from millions of identical iPhones that they'll say contradicts your claim. They'll describe all the efforts they've gone to during development and testing to prove their dilligence and good intentions. Even if you can prove your iPhone suffered (how many people take and store the results of benchmark tests after each os upgrade), you'd also have to successfully challenge the validity of Apple's testing methods and results - if you can't undermine them, the court has to accept them as fact. Apple would probably say that, "Some very small percentage of users exhibited negative impact, sorry that the plaintiffs were among them. We're happy to work with them to improve the performance of their units."
A claim that Apple is doing this to intentionally cripple older units in order to encourage sales of new hardware has to be backed by evidence. Good luck finding hard evidence to that effect (policy memos, recordings of secret meetings...). That kind of "discovery" is very expensive. I doubt there's a law firm out there that would find this particular fight sufficiently profitable to spend that kind of money. This is hardly the equivalent of the tobacco industry knowingly pushing a deadly product. Consider how many decades it took to finally hold that industry responsible.
"I'd like the freedom to roll back" is not written in the constitution. Apple grants you a license to use it, and they can also withdraw it from circulation. You'd be demanding the right to use someone else's property against their wishes. Courts, especially in the U.S.'s current political and judiciary climate, aren't likely to overturn a property owner's rights for a cause of this sort.
So, as they used to say on TV, "Good luck, Mr. Phelps!"
If you're going to claim harm, "My iPhone ran better under iOS x.x," Apple will show up with anonymized log files from millions of identical iPhones that they'll say contradicts your claim. They'll describe all the efforts they've gone to during development and testing to prove their dilligence and good intentions. Even if you can prove your iPhone suffered (how many people take and store the results of benchmark tests after each os upgrade), you'd also have to successfully challenge the validity of Apple's testing methods and results - if you can't undermine them, the court has to accept them as fact. Apple would probably say that, "Some very small percentage of users exhibited negative impact, sorry that the plaintiffs were among them. We're happy to work with them to improve the performance of their units."
A claim that Apple is doing this to intentionally cripple older units in order to encourage sales of new hardware has to be backed by evidence. Good luck finding hard evidence to that effect (policy memos, recordings of secret meetings...). That kind of "discovery" is very expensive. I doubt there's a law firm out there that would find this particular fight sufficiently profitable to spend that kind of money. This is hardly the equivalent of the tobacco industry knowingly pushing a deadly product. Consider how many decades it took to finally hold that industry responsible.
"I'd like the freedom to roll back" is not written in the constitution. Apple grants you a license to use it, and they can also withdraw it from circulation. You'd be demanding the right to use someone else's property against their wishes. Courts, especially in the U.S.'s current political and judiciary climate, aren't likely to overturn a property owner's rights for a cause of this sort.
So, as they used to say on TV, "Good luck, Mr. Phelps!"
Agreed, the knee jerk reaction of just sue them, is baseless if Apple is not breaking any law. Just because someone wants something, doesn't mean suing the maker is an option. While I understand and to a degree agree with the OP, hiring a lawyer and then filing a lawsuit that could take years and cost a lot a fortune is silly. No lawyer will take this on for free, they'll expect a retainer and charge you for their work.
I cannot speak for Netflix, but many internet sites are definitely much different from when an iPad2 was new. All of the graphics, animations, adverts will have a performance impact for rendering and the amount of graphics, etc. use up the memory.
It's not just the graphics within the apps either. It's the operating system itself. With each version the OS gets more and more complicated and as object oriented programming goes. Things can't be coded for specific models. That's way too much waste of very expensive and valuable resource.
As iOS gets more and more complicated there are things that go on in the background. More threads running at the same time, more functions and objects being called, more memory locations being addressed. Allocation and deallocation of memory and a lot more.
You see that's the nature of software development. Most of these complaints are from non techie users who don't know / care about the way the devices work. But that doesn't change the reality. Older devices will eventually get slowed down. That's how it goes.
The only thing the OP can do is to not update the device, which will mean apple can't be held responsible for any future issues he / she comes across. It's as simple as that.
I also agree with sracer. I also know that upgrades to the iPad2 can bog it down. I own one and have experienced this. After the first time I applied an upgrade and experienced issues, I started to just install the latest ios by backing up and restoring. this installs the newest version cleanly and the iPad2 is as snappy as it was when I got it. That is not to say it can keep up with my iPhone's performance. If you try to measure iPad2 performance to a newer device you will be disappointed. The older hardware will never be any faster with an upgrade.
I dont agree with the lets "sue" culture, but... I own the device, i should be able to do as i pls with it.
civil suits alot of times have nothing to do with breaking a law. I can see the OP point about not allowing downgrades if one was to try out a new version and they dont like the experience/performance. They bought the device, the owner of the device should have right to have performance on it the same as day they bought it. I could see a lawyer that also happens to be an iOS user take this on, especially if it affects them. Then again, most lawyers can always afford the latest and greatest devices so probably a non issue for them.
[doublepost=1501174721][/doublepost]
Seems unreal to me then that people pay that kind of money for iPads/iPhones if it isn't their property. We all know those devices are useless without "apple's property" as described above. There are consumer rights as well, if one pays $649 for a new iPad, they don't expect to be "forced" into an update that makes their experience worse than day the device was bought.
Last edited:
The reason you would lose the lawsuit is because Apple isn't forcing you to upgrade your device. If you're happy with your iPad 2 on iOS 6, you can continue to use it happily.
You make that choice yourself. Now if you're clueless about technology, I could understand your gripe but it is quickly learned. Most of the people in this thread seem to have knowledge of technology that software updates slow down older devices. It begs the question, knowing this - why would you upgrade if speed is so important? Seems more like a mistake that you want to hold someone else accountable for.
You make that choice yourself. Now if you're clueless about technology, I could understand your gripe but it is quickly learned. Most of the people in this thread seem to have knowledge of technology that software updates slow down older devices. It begs the question, knowing this - why would you upgrade if speed is so important? Seems more like a mistake that you want to hold someone else accountable for.
true, as long as you never have to do a restore in recovery mode via iTunes.
however, there should be a means to try out new software before committing to it and a simple means on how to restore via itunes rather than hunting down the IPSW file and hoping apple still signing it. Many people don't know how to restore the older version while signing window is still open.
Last edited:
My wife has worked with lawyers and in the industry for decades, and I can tell you that a lawyer doing something pro bono is a rarity. Most of the time, its for charity or the affected party needs help, but has no ability to pay. The other way to avoid a retainer fee is that the lawyer will get a portion of the settlement. I can't see how that could be in play here, especially if the lawyer has to work hard at trying to get the lawsuit recognized as a class action.
Bottom line, is that this may not be a great case where a lawyer expects reap lot in return for the work effort.
A petition is a start, thing has over 300000 signers. Granted it is an older petition but still.
https://actions.sumofus.org/a/planned-obsolescence-is-why-apple-isn-t-a-green-company
I am a forced march person.
I dislike using old software.
Whenever there is a new version, I gotta have it now.
I believe sincerely that you should upgrade or buy a new device that runs the software properly.
However, you do make a good point. What's so wrong with a prompt with the word "Go Away, I am not Upgrading, Thank you." If people have an older device that may not run the software properly or are just stubborn troglodytes who still think Windows XP and Mac OS X Tiger are the "greatest OS ever", they should be allowed to stay behind.
Majority of us will move forward.
But I agree on giving the user the option to hold back.
It may be a stupid reason in some cases, but I remember trying to run Leopard on an iBook G4 and I couldn't downgrade any faster than I did!
I'm also an upgrade kind of guy. While I have some sympathy for the choice to stay on an older OS, I also have to recognize that today's security/anti-exploit environment gives Apple a strong motive for pushing users to upgrade. Apple owns the problem, so it needs to push the solution. Consider the latest Wikileaks release (exploits that run on Snow Leopard and Lion). Those are 6- and 7-generation old products, soon to be 7- and 8-generation old. The only benefit Apple would see in continuing to patch them would be to avoid bad publicity. Considering the small percentage of active users, it's far more cost effective to give them a free upgrade and push them forward.
Inevitably, in the wake of an exploit, there would be some who would argue, "You gave me the choice to stay behind, you have to honor that choice with support!" It won't matter that they clicked "I read and agree," Apple will still be blamed by some individuals and by some in the media for whom, "New Horrific Apple Malware!" will be the headline, and "...only affects a 7-year-old version of the OS" will barely make it into the footnotes.
Virtually no-one who purchases a computing device is unaware of the fact that the thing will eventually become obsolete. This has been going on for as long as there have been computers. I know, as we age, we wish that wasn't so - we're more likely to keep listening to favorite music than to embrace new artists and styles, to watch old favorite films and TV series, perfect our execution of favorite recipes... So the thought of buying a new computer just in order to keep sending/receiving email and browsing the web isn't a happy one. "Why do I need Siri, and who is she, anyway?" Change and obsolescence is a normal part of the life cycle, not some evil plot hatched in California.
I think the security argument is overinflated, imo. There are upwards of 1 billion iOS devices in use in the world, as of January, 80% of them were using iOS 10. That means there is an awful lot of devices out there in use without security updates. Some aren't even eligible for security updates. When was last time you read of an iOS exploit that has really caused issues for anyone? With 200 million or so devices out there using iOS 9 or earlier, I'm sure an exploit would sure cause some havoc.
iOS 6 doesn't nag you to update. Newer firmware versions do. Both my mom and dad have accidentally updated their iOS devices because they thought they were just unlocking it. Thankfully, they've got fairly recent devices (iPhone SE, iPP 9.7 and 2017 iPad). Mind, with their usage and performance tolerance, they should be fine to update until Apple drops support. We really do have a lot of processing power available on mobile devices nowadays. A10 is what, 10x as fast as A5 in single-core?
Civil suits need some basis in law. They're called "courts of law" for a reason. If no law directly addresses an issue, a plaintiff in a civil suit must persuade the court to stretch the definition of current law to cover new circumstances.
"Breaking a law" is a poor term when it comes to civil law. We tend to think of crimes against society that the police are empowered to enforce. Enforcement of property rights is generally left up to the property owner. If they can't be resolved through self-enforcement, the courts may have to be recruited to rule on the dispute.
Sure, it's counter-intuitive to buy a product that includes components that the buyer doesn't own, but there are legal precedents going back centuries that say otherwise. A computing device can be defined as "a machine that runs software," little different than any kind of music player, even pre-dating the Edison cylinder ("Put another nickel in, in the Nickelodeon"). The fact that the manufacturer bundles a license of the OS with the initial purchase rather than selling it separately doesn't change the nature of software, or software licensing. Selling any product does not guarantee that it won't wear out, or become obsolete over time. You may as well sue an obstetrician for failing to deliver immortal beings.
Yes I agree that there are laws governing the civil process.
http://people.howstuffworks.com/lawsuit.htm
Civil vs. Criminal
First, let's start off by establishing that there is a difference in a civil trial and criminal trial. When you sue someone and take him to court, it is usually based on a tort. When someone breaks a criminal law, then the public prosecutor takes him to court for a criminal trial.
Torts are different from criminal laws in that a person may not have broken a law, but may have acted negligently (either intentionally or not) and as a result, someone else was injured physically, emotionally, and/or monetarily.
Not a good analogy at all , obstetrician has no control over the creation and development of a human being. He or she is the "mailman" helping with delivery.
Has anyone here used http://ipsw.me to try to downgrade the OS on their iDevice? I have an iPad 2 on iOS 9 (similar situation as the OP).
Also have an iPad Air that I've kept on iOS 10 because of worries that iOS 11 would slow it down.
Also have an iPad Air that I've kept on iOS 10 because of worries that iOS 11 would slow it down.
It's not really about having the installer, it's about what Apple is signing, and generally speaking they are usually signing the latest publicly available version for the device (sometimes maybe one or two previous updates, in case of a major or recent update that just came out).
Those would be the same as the Mac, excluding the 'Don't remind me'
However, what your sayiny if u want the opion necer to be up-to-date. You gotta upgrade at some point, so why should that be put off forever?
"Check for updates" telling you the last version your device can support would be good to have. I hate having to checck websites just for basic info.
Well with the warnings, you play "devil's avocate" as how many warnings "should" warn the user before downgrade to alert them. If you thrn device to have an user option for thr user to adjust how mant notifications they should receive, then it becomes an "i didn't know where the option was", or 'i forgot" type of issue.