Other The myth of Apple intentionally slowing down older iPhones…

[RudolphRedNose]

You’re all primarily focusing on the battery.

I’ll always remember my iPhone 4. I’d recently had it replaced as the battery was lasting only a few hours. A while later, I updated to the new iOS back in 2014, and the phone became so frustratingly slow.
Every App was slow to load and the keyboard lag was unbearable. I moved to Android shortly after and never looked back. Apple definitely slowed down my phone so I’d need to upgrade!

I do have an iPad 9 now on iPad OS 17, and I haven’t noticed any battery issues or slowdowns compared with 15 and 16.

 

[FeliApple]

Which is why I gave you the caveat earlier about my limited use of both phones. Here's the thing…I work from home, so I sit in front of computers all day. On my desk are nine phones, five of which are always on. The 6 Plus sits right in front of my keyboard and I use it when I'm too lazy to reach over and pick up my 11 Pro Max. Typically that is to send an iMessage. That's about all the workout it gets. Sometimes I use it as a clock, usually not. But I wanted the 6 Plus back because it was the only phone that I've used in the past that I no longer had. I had no intent to use it as a primary phone, or even a secondary phone.

If I go on walks or at times where I think my phone could be damaged or stolen, I use the 6s Plus. It has an active line, but that's all the use it gets. If neither of those things happen then it sits there. My 11 PM is the only phone that actually routinely goes out with me and as many here can attest I do not use my phones as media devices or computer substitutes. So, the 11PM also sees minimal use, and that's my primary phone.

So you could absolutely be right. If I were to use my 6 Plus or 6s Plus as a regular phone or in the manner some use theirs then it might lag, and the battery life might be bad. But for what I use both for, neither of them give me any problems.

I would say that I do not experience a lot of the same problems other phone users do because of my lifestyle and workstyle.

Yeah, for that usage I don’t think the iOS version is too relevant. As long as it’s half-usable you’ll be fine.

I use an iPhone 5c on iOS 10 for music, and I don’t mind that it’s slow as long as the music app works, and it does, so it’s fine. When usage is limited the importance of this issue diminishes a lot.

Your main phone, even if it’s isn’t used a lot, it’s far more important. I’m not a heavy iPhone user either (I’m running iOS 12 on my iPhone Xʀ, that should tell you everything you need to know), but I do value good performance and battery life a lot. If you don’t expect perfection, then for newer devices like your 11 Pro Max this issue is more diminished, even if it isn’t perfect in terms of both performance and battery life.

A moderately heavy user on iOS 17 would still be fine with your device. Maybe battery life wouldn’t be astonishing, but the original 11 Pro Max’s battery life was good enough to still be usable after iOS 17’s degradation.

 

[FeliApple]

You’re all primarily focusing on the battery.

I’ll always remember my iPhone 4. I’d recently had it replaced as the battery was lasting only a few hours. A while later, I updated to the new iOS back in 2014, and the phone became so frustratingly slow.
Every App was slow to load and the keyboard lag was unbearable. I moved to Android shortly after and never looked back. Apple definitely slowed down my phone so I’d need to upgrade!

I do have an iPad 9 now on iPad OS 17, and I haven’t noticed any battery issues or slowdowns compared with 15 and 16.

The iPhone 4 on iOS 7, the 4s on iOS 9, the 5 and 5c on iOS 10 were Apple’s three worst decisions ever. They were obliterated.

The reason why it’s not discussed as much is because it honestly improved. The issue now is battery life, performance was never as bad again as it was with those three devices.

Battery life on the regular 6s, for example, is unusable if the battery is slightly degraded.

 

[ric22]

It’s a poor comparison. One costs tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars and the other is slightly higher than a grand. I don’t get your logic.

So by your logic it's fine for companies to wreck products they sold unless the products cost 10's of thousands of dollars? What if the person buying the car is extremely rich? Maybe they'd not care that the car that 'only' cost 50k is junked by a software update? Would it be ok then, because it's not expensive by their standards? 🧐

Edit: Sarcasm

 

[eyoungren]

Yeah, for that usage I don’t think the iOS version is too relevant. As long as it’s half-usable you’ll be fine.

I use an iPhone 5c on iOS 10 for music, and I don’t mind that it’s slow as long as the music app works, and it does, so it’s fine. When usage is limited the importance of this issue diminishes a lot.

Your main phone, even if it’s isn’t used a lot, it’s far more important. I’m not a heavy iPhone user either (I’m running iOS 12 on my iPhone Xʀ, that should tell you everything you need to know), but I do value good performance and battery life a lot. If you don’t expect perfection, then for newer devices like your 11 Pro Max this issue is more diminished, even if it isn’t perfect in terms of both performance and battery life.

A moderately heavy user on iOS 17 would still be fine with your device. Maybe battery life wouldn’t be astonishing, but the original 11 Pro Max’s battery life was good enough to still be usable after iOS 17’s degradation.

Typically, my 11 PM is used for messages, some email and phone calls. If I'm out, I might use it a bit for news apps and light internet. But the sum total of my being out each weekday is roughly four hours and all of that is driving (when I should NOT be using my phone).

99.99% of the time, my hands are on a physical keyboard and mouse connected to one of the many computers I have at my desk. It's just easier (and better) to me to use a computer for internet/email/texting than to reach over, unlock and use my phone. I also find that I much prefer desktop websites to trying to use a browser on the iPhone.

I won't get into media on the device. I have a 55" HDTV and two 30" Cinema Displays. The largest iPhone screen is not even in that league.

So, my 11 PM works just fine as do my other devices for the purposes I put them to.

Now, you get my wife and kids and it's an entirely different story.

 

[I7guy]

The iPhone 4 on iOS 7, the 4s on iOS 9, the 5 and 5c on iOS 10 were Apple’s three worst decisions ever. They were obliterated.

Yes all 32 bit processors. They built those CPU’s without much headroom in them unlike the recent spate of 64 bit processors.

The reason why it’s not discussed as much is because it honestly improved. The issue now is battery life, performance was never as bad again as it was with those three devices.

Yes. Updating a 5 year old device with an old battery and new operating system that runs with more functionality puts a strain on older comments. One gets more but also uses more. In the case of my Xs max with a new battery in iOS 17 it’s as good as it was when I purchased it— which was just ok in terms of battery life.

Battery life on the regular 6s, for example, is unusable if the battery is slightly degraded.

Yep, prior to the a12 there is little headroom and the 6s wasn’t an efficiency king to begin with.

 

[Annv]

It wasn't a "saga", but a lawsuit where Apple was found guilty and had to pay 500 million dollars. So, it's a fact they did it.

My guess is that the iPhones from that generation (year 2017): SE, 6s and 7 are still useable today thanks to that lawsuit. OG SE is pretty fast even on iOS 15.8.

 

[I7guy]

[…].

Why do you expect it to be slower? My 5-year-old iPhone Xʀ is amazing on iOS 12. Just as fast as the iPhone 15 with general use.

This is false. I can compare my Xs max with my 14PM and there is a noticeable difference in performance between those two phones in every aspect of operations. If you want to say your iPhone XR operates to your satisfaction that opinion can’t be refuted. But since hairs continue to be split in these conversations the fact is the statement above is false.

 

[FeliApple]

Typically, my 11 PM is used for messages, some email and phone calls. If I'm out, I might use it a bit for news apps and light internet. But the sum total of my being out each weekday is roughly four hours and all of that is driving (when I should NOT be using my phone).

99.99% of the time, my hands are on a physical keyboard and mouse connected to one of the many computers I have at my desk. It's just easier (and better) to me to use a computer for internet/email/texting than to reach over, unlock and use my phone. I also find that I much prefer desktop websites to trying to use a browser on the iPhone.

I won't get into media on the device. I have a 55" HDTV and two 30" Cinema Displays. The largest iPhone screen is not even in that league.

So, my 11 PM works just fine as do my other devices for the purposes I put them to.

Now, you get my wife and kids and it's an entirely different story.

Yeah, your usage is too light (and the phone has enough headroom on iOS 17), for you to notice any serious issues. You don’t use it enough for it to be relevant.

Like I said, the issue nowadays is more battery life than performance, so you won’t be too annoyed by that either. It probably isn’t perfect on iOS 17, but then again, you don’t need that.

 

[FeliApple]

This is false. I can compare my Xs max with my 14PM and there is a noticeable difference in performance between those two phones in every aspect of operations. If you want to say your iPhone XR operates to your satisfaction that opinion can’t be refuted. But since hairs continue to be split in these conversations the fact is the statement above is false.

You run iOS 17 on the Xs Max...

 

[I7guy]

You run iOS 17 on the Xs Max...

And it’s on par as to when I bought it. But that aside as one example the processor of the xr cannot render JavaScript as fast as the newer models. The 14 and 15 obliterate the a12 processor. Anything that depends on raw speed will be faster. Anything that doesn’t is not relevant.

And you can try to explain it away but that’s my anecdotal experience. Now do you have proof or is that statement more of a factoid.

 

[Al Rukh]

So by your logic it's fine for companies to wreck products they sold unless the products cost 10's of thousands of dollars? What if the person buying the car is extremely rich? Maybe they'd not care that the car that 'only' cost 50k is junked by a software update? Would it be ok then, because it's not expensive by their standards?

Is it fine for companies to wreck products? Nope.

 

[FeliApple]

And it’s on par as to when I bought it. But that aside as one example the processor of the xr cannot render JavaScript as fast as the newer models. The 14 and 15 obliterate the a12 processor. Anything that depends on raw speed will be faster. Anything that doesn’t is not relevant.

You keep repeating that and it’s not true, regardless of how many times you say it.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I think every iPhone should be able to be put on any version of iOS that occurred during its lifespan/support cycle.

I'd love to have my old SE's (4") on the OS they shipped with (or close)

 

[I7guy]

You keep repeating that and it’s not true, regardless of how many times you say it.

I at least put some proof up. You keep repeating this and it’s not true no matter how many times you say it.

 

[eyoungren]

I think every iPhone should be able to be put on any version of iOS that occurred during its lifespan/support cycle.

I'd love to have my old SE's (4") on the OS they shipped with (or close)

Part of the reason Apple does not allow this is support. So, hypothetically, lets say you have a device running iOS 17 and you want to revert to iOS 14. Fine great, Apple lets you. But you want all your data too? Your last backup was on iOS 17. That's not compatible with iOS 14. And when Apple changed its file system in iOS 10? If you're going back to iOS 9 or earlier it's going to be even harder getting your data reverted.

So, now Apple either has to make an app or some process that allows newer backup data to be reverted to older versions of iOS. Then it's got to explain all this to its customers. It's also got to spend time supporting everyone that has problems on a wide variety of iOS versions. If you think Apple stores are crowded now, wait till this happens.

And do you really want to be the Apple genius trying to help the confused customer who can't understand why it's so difficult for Apple to get all their data from iOS 17 back to iOS 12 or earlier? Or why X feature no longer works or is not there?

There is a reason Apple touts that 'X' number of customers are on 'X' version of iOS. And it's control. Apple is trying to control the number of support issues that its people have to deal with. That's a major reason why you are often asked at an Apple store to restore and update before they will even deal with you.

I agree, this would be great, but from Apple's perspective it is a nightmare.

 

[FeliApple]

Part of the reason Apple does not allow this is support. So, hypothetically, lets say you have a device running iOS 17 and you want to revert to iOS 14. Fine great, Apple lets you. But you want all your data too? Your last backup was on iOS 17. That's not compatible with iOS 14.

So, now Apple either has to make an app or some process that allows newer backup data to be reverted to older versions of iOS. Then it's got to explain all this to its customers. It's also got to spend time supporting everyone that has problems on a wide variety of iOS versions. If you think Apple stores are crowded now, wait till this happens.

And do you really want to be the Apple genius trying to help the confused customer who can't understand why it's so difficult for Apple to get all their data from iOS 17 back to iOS 12 or earlier? Or why X feature no longer works or is not there?

There is a reason Apple touts that 'X' number of customers are on 'X' version of iOS. And it's control. Apple is trying to control the number of support issues that its people have to deal with. That's a major reason why you are often asked at an Apple store to restore and update before they will even deal with you.

I agree, this would be great, but from Apple's perspective it is a nightmare.

Can’t Apple just say “we allow it but you’re on your own, we provide no support whatsoever”?

 

[turbineseaplane]

Can’t Apple just say “we allow it but you’re on your own, we provide no support whatsoever”?

That would be my expectation… and I’d be fine with it being a very power user thing only to even accomplish

 

[FeliApple]

That would be my expectation… and I’d be fine with it being a very power user thing only to even accomplish

Absolutely, allow it and don’t help me, I’m fine with that.

 

[eyoungren]

Can’t Apple just say “we allow it but you’re on your own, we provide no support whatsoever”?

That would be my expectation… and I’d be fine with it being a very power user thing only to even accomplish

What do you believe jailbreaking is, but that?

You jailbreak your device, you're on your own. Yet Apple can't even bring itself to not talk down jailbreaking.

If Apple allows this, they legitimize jailbreaking.

 

[ngel22]

Apple basically has some sort of committee or council if you wanna call it like that - like in every big organization. These are key people that literally know everything (the top heads of engineering, design, material etc..). These people have signed strict NDA's and are paid a fortune on top of their salary and bonuses to make it worth to keep quiet. See it like a pyramid, only at the top you get to see and know everything, and the more you are below, the less you do, the more orders you follow without questioning, even if it doesn't make sense. These people decide and exactly calculate on how to intentionally design flaws, planned obsolescence, use of certain materials that will degrade over time and cause failure of components, software flaws for older models to slow them down, use of certain battery chemistry to not give them a too long lifespan etc.., in order to maximize profits. Call it stupid or conspiracy theory, but that's how it is, that's the world we live in, accept that. We don't live in a world that is driven by technological innovation to better ourselves, our world is driven by pure capitalism, it's simple as that. Almost anything that Apple does is calculated and known by the key people, even small things such as the use of inferior plastic for the keyboards (yes the ones from 2015 for example still look like brand new while newer models degrade in like 6 months, talking about the shiny keys that you cant wipe away). That's just one example of many things.

 

[FeliApple]

What do you believe jailbreaking is, but that?

You jailbreak your device, you're on your own. Yet Apple can't even bring itself to not talk down jailbreaking.

If Apple allows this, they legitimize jailbreaking.

While this is true, I think allowing users to have decent devices instead of obliterated ones trump allowing jailbreaking. It’s a very valid point which may really be Apple’s main consideration, but I don’t think it’s appropiate to say “well, since we can’t prevent exploits from appearing, we can only prevent jailbreaking by destroying devices and disallowing the one thing which would help you. Sorry, goodbye”.

The one thing I will say is that barring specific issues, they don’t mess with devices that aren’t updated. I have contacted support and when I said “I’m not updating” they didn’t push. Barring that A9 on iOS 9 issue Apple allows devices to stay outdated, when they have the technical ability to just force everything to the latest version.

 

[eyoungren]

While this is true, I think allowing users to have decent devices instead of obliterated ones trump allowing jailbreaking. It’s a very valid point which may really be Apple’s main consideration, but I don’t think it’s appropiate to say “well, since we can’t prevent exploits from appearing, we can only prevent jailbreaking by destroying devices and disallowing the one thing which would help you. Sorry, goodbye”.

The one thing I will say is that barring specific issues, they don’t mess with devices that aren’t updated. I have contacted support and when I said “I’m not updating” they didn’t push. Barring that A9 on iOS 9 issue Apple allows devices to stay outdated, when they have the technical ability to just force everything to the latest version.

To be fair to Apple they did change their policy on supporting jailbroken devices about 8+ years ago. If you bring in a jailbroken device for service and they can ascertain that it is not your JB causing the problem you do not void your warranty and they will fix the device (or replace it). The most they will ask is that you update your device.

So, this is less of an issue now, but a lot of people have been trained that jailbreaking is bad and insecure and they won't let go of that. Since some people jailbreak specifically to downgrade (assuming they meet the specific requirements), Apple freely allowing it legitimizes them and eliminates all the security barriers and effort Apple has long put out there to prevent it.

That opens the floodgates…'Hey since you now allow this, why can't we ALSO do THIS?' Given that jailbreaking is now stuck with semi-untethered jailbreaks because devs won't release exploits that allow for fully untethered jailbreaks anymore, and that Apple has adopted a sufficient amount of things that were previously only available via jailbreaking - Apple has basically 'won'. They no longer need to badmouth jailbreaking and it's current state no longer 'threatens' them.

Don't get me wrong, I see your point and I agree. I just don't see Apple agreeing.

 

[FeliApple]

To be fair to Apple they did change their policy on supporting jailbroken devices about 8+ years ago. If you bring in a jailbroken device for service and they can ascertain that it is not your JB causing the problem you do not void your warranty and they will fix the device (or replace it). The most they will ask is that you update your device.

So, this is less of an issue now, but a lot of people have been trained that jailbreaking is bad and insecure and they won't let go of that. Since some people jailbreak specifically to downgrade (assuming they meet the specific requirements), Apple freely allowing it legitimizes them and eliminates all the security barriers and effort Apple has long put out there to prevent it.

That opens the floodgates…'Hey since you now allow this, why can't we ALSO do THIS?' Given that jailbreaking is now stuck with semi-untethered jailbreaks because devs won't release exploits that allow for fully untethered jailbreaks anymore, and that Apple has adopted a sufficient amount of things that were previously only available via jailbreaking - Apple has basically 'won'. They no longer need to badmouth jailbreaking and it's current state no longer 'threatens' them.

Don't get me wrong, I see your point and I agree. I just don't see Apple agreeing.

Yeah, I guess Apple is happy with the current situation regarding jailbreaking and has no reason (which benefits them instead of users) to revert it. You provided a great explanation, thank you.

Also, people simply don’t care. They just keep updating, so the demand isn’t there for this either. People were angry en masse after the iPhone 6s battery fiasco, unlike this situation, situation which users clearly don’t care about, as they keep updating and Apple keeps breaking adoption records.

All I can do as a user of an extreme minority is to stay behind like I do.

The point you made about downgrades undermining their long-standing security policy is a very interesting one.

 

[bumblebritches5]

I just GeekBenched my iPhone Xr and it’s 25% slower than it should be…