Slashdot Mirror
Apple Investigated By France For 'Planned Obsolescence' (bbc.com)
AmiMoJo shares a report from the BBC: French prosecutors have launched a probe over allegations of "planned obsolescence" in Apple's iPhone. Under French law it is a crime to intentionally shorten the lifespan of a product with the aim of making customers replace it. In December, Apple admitted that older iPhone models were deliberately slowed down through software updates. It follows a legal complaint filed in December by pro-consumer group Stop Planned Obsolescence (Hop). Hop said France was the third country to investigate Apple after Israel and the U.S., but the only one in which the alleged offense was a crime. Penalties could include up to 5% of annual turnover or even a jail term.
Very nice, are you ready to pay for a smartphone like you pay for a durable product like a car? A decade of usable life can be arranged as long as you are willing to accept tradeoffs such as price, weight, form factor and features. Not interested? Than STFU. Market delivers what customers are asking for.
Jared tried to set up a secret backchannel to Moscow, Donnie loves to launder money for the Russian mob, and all of this is the New Republican Patriotism.
Thank goodness Trump fired that "nutjob" Comey or we'd never get to see him impeached and subsequently die in prison surrounded by his criminal offspring and lawyers.
Good, more of this, fingers crossed for jail time.
When can the rest of the world grow a pair?
The idea behind capitalism was that the market would continually upgrade and produce better quality or face destruction from competition. What we have instead is a kleptocracy where there is no competition and the quality is dropping. Quality is more than physical though, it is also in things like online product servers which stop functioning, products we cannot modify or repair, and costs that are not in line with reality or market.
This is not an impossible fight either, we as north americans have simply lost our spine. When the banking crisis hit they were 'too big to fail' so they were bailed out with public money, while in iceland they allowed the bankers to go to jail and let the banks handle their own mess which turned out fantastically for them as a whole.
Our leaders need to lead us and stop scraping and bowing to campaign donors for kick backs.
put Tim Cook in Jail for ruining this company.
I can say that the 'el cheapo' (well it was 180 when it came out, and ~50-80 when it was discontinued) has lasted me far longer than basically everyone I knew with a 600+ dollar contract phone. Basically all of them replaced it before the 2 year replacement period due to physical damage, failed batteries, or drops in the toilet.
While my phone wouldn't have survived that last one, it survived the former for years and is still running to this day. It won't be replaced until 2G GSM is turned off for good.
Maybe. Cars have never been better, so "more like a car" is quite appealing, actually. I know I don't want my smartphone (or the other airline passenger's smartphone) to behave like a Samsung Galaxy Note 7. It shouldn't electrocute anybody, it should be secure (and not only when the manufacturer first shipped it), and it should fully honor my privacy requirements. It should be repairable and not more fragile than a snowflake in Bangkok. I should be able to use it to summon an ambulance or police officer reliably, with my correct location, and even if I don't have the correct SIM and only have a weak signal on another carrier's tower (or a Wi-Fi connection). It should support truly important public safety alerting, such as "tornado approaching." It should not jam the signals of the whole neighborhood's baby monitors. If I ever get a hearing aid, I ought to still be able to hear the other caller.
In short, yes, there is some appropriate role for government regulation of smartphones.
Related to this.. but not 100 % ontopic..
Every time I updated my samsung s3 (i still use it) it got slower and slower.. until i just gave up.
Everybody I talked to said the same thing, about other manufacturers too.
I gave up updating my phone. I don't have anything I cannot live without on it (it's a phone people).. I don't install apps on it except maybe 2-3 apps such as Chrome, Guitar Tuner and LINE Messanger.
Apple implemented a technical solution that kept phones usable for LONGER than other phone makers. By not shutting down randomly as the battery aged, by trying to maintain a day of battery life in the phone for a longer period of time, Apple was delaying the time when a user might have to repair or replace a phone.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm sure the overwhelming answer to this question will be "Yes", but I wonder if there are cases where implementing downgrading of capability in technology products is justified and even argued as necessary.
- What about a phone that only provides communications on a radio protocol that is going obsolete and would cost the carrier (and the customer) much more to support it? (In Canada, CDMA service ended on May 31st - would it have been so bad for customers to get new product before the shut off date?)
- What about processor technology that has issues that the manufacturer cannot fix but has software work arounds which are expensive to maintain (especially on older systems), causes problems on other devices in the system and causes an overall performance degradation? (Any apparent relationship to the Intel/ARM64 Spectre and Meltdown bugs is non-coincidental.)
Personally, I think Apple should be fined/jailed for dropping the operating performance of older iPhones in order to drive sales of the new devices - and, I would not label this "Planned Obsolescence" per se but damaging customer-owned product in order to generate new sales.
But, if the supplier can demonstrate that it is in the customer's best interest for strongly encourage them to replace their existing technology AND it is not price gouging the customers (ie the replacement product is made available at cost) should this be illegal?
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
Both these devices received "free" updates to iOS 9 that made them measurably slower in every single task. They take longer to boot, animations aren't as smooth and often stutter, it takes longer to open applications, Safari can't have as many tabs open, etc, etc, etc. Of course, Apple spun that update as a "good thing", despite the fact that they knew it would slow those devices down.
So this isn't exactly anything new. They just got caught because of the undersized batteries they're using in their "thin" designs, and then admitted it because they knew dealing with the fallout from that would cost the company less than doing a full recall for every affected device (which is to say, all of them, because they're quite literally defective by design).
Someone needs to step up and slap them with a fine that makes the shareholders go "Oh... Oh shit...", because a few million will never be enough. They purposefully built and sold a defective device that they knew was going to fail, and now they should pay dearly for that mistake.
I know a lot of people that use iPhones for many, many years. After a while you may have to replace the battery but that is expected for any battery powered device; in no way is there "planned obsolescence", instead there is a falloff in updates but you can continue to use the device for many years beyond that. It's not like Apple disables devices after a certain period of time, they keep working even after they are no longer supported.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I've worked in this industry for over a decade (never for Apple) What people don't realize is that batteries age, and so do chips especially when pushed to a limit. Ever wonder why military or even automotive grade chips are running so much slower and cooler? It's because they are rated for much longer lifetime than consumer grade devices - they are limited so they last the required number of years. Consumers want top performance, but they trade lifetime due to stress on the hardware. What Apple did here is cap the device performance increasing the device reliability and potential lifespan.
Especially after bringing Coffee Lake to market knowing full well they were insecure.
I would suspect that it would generally be better all around for some kind of discounted exchange, especially if we start putting forth measures to increase the salvage from recycling electronics.
As for CPU performance drops due to inherent security flaws, that's a bit of a tougher question. I think that the only example we have right now is too muddled by a monopolistic control on the market to have a satisfactory solution.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
it's perfectly functional yet it has been rendered obsolete by Apple which quit releasing updates for it without warning.
How is it obsolete?
You can still download apps for it (any apps that originally supported the 4s).
You can still browse the web, or use it for maps/GPS.
You can still email with it.
You can still make calls with it.
Again, it's not obsolete - it just lacks features that newer devices have. But just because newer devices have more or better features does not render a device "obsolete".
My wife has an iPad 2 she still uses. That's not getting updates either but it doesn't matter - she uses it for many hours at a time for Netflix or browsing and it continues to work just fine, as it will until it breaks.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This crap again?
All that would have been nice if they told the user about it. They didn't, so users spent money they didn't have to to replace an intolerably slow phone
Where have you seen a phone, laptop or anything with an adequate lithium battery that shuts down randomly due to it being "old"? That thing pushes multiple of it's capacity in current. "Let's heroically overcome the problem we created on purpose!"
A bug that degrades performance is NOT planned obsolescence, neither is a network that is scheduled to be turned off because it is OBSOLETE and for which many years of notice was given prior to turning it off.
Yes, but how is my phone buying behaviour relevant?
I'm not too familiar with how it was done in Canada with regards to ending CDMA. IMHO, the ideal way would be to have a cutoff date for when CDMA ends. Then have carriers pull all CDMA devices from stores 5 years(at minimum) in advance.
That way they're not selling devices that have a planned obsolescence. While devices older than 5 years will have an adequate lifespan for the average user.
I know my first phone, a flip phone running Java MicroEdition continued to run great, and was still running "fine"(modded) when I finally upgraded to an Android; 8 years later.
Outside of moving parts, batteries and leaking capacitors, have you ever had hardware failures in consumer grade electronics? I haven't.
You two might not, but you must be the 0.01%
I have.
Computers:
Power supplies going bang when they're turned on? Yes.
Stock RAM becoming defective? Yes
Graphics cards going defective? Yes
That's just computer kit, and there's lots more - mobo, cpu, etc, etc.
Now onto cars:
switches, relays, becoming defective? Yes.
ECU/SAM failures due to water ingres (design issue)? Yes
Defective airbag connector and/or airbag recall? Yes
Now house electricals:
My lightbulb stopped working. Amazing. Consumer grade. Yes.
Etc.
The list goes on and on. To say you've never had a failure in consumer grade electronics would basically be akin to an outright lie, or you are the single luckiest person on the planet, or an idiot.
I would not want my phone to reboot in the middle of a 999/112 call because some app needed more current than the battery could supply for a single moment. Throttle the processor, keep the device working, especially in case of emergencies
batteries should be able to be replaced without having to trash the device. My Samsung J1 Ace allows for the battery to be replaced.
My iPad 2 hardware is still going strong but I'm stuck on iOS 9 and I'm not getting any security upgrades, no OS upgrades and apps are starting to drop dead because the developers don't support old OSes.
My iTouch 5 battery lasts a day while just sitting around and I am also stuck on iOS 9 something and having the same issues as the iPad that I soent $500 on.
iOS Apple devices will no longer be purchased by me. They are expensive low value devices.
...or even a jail term.
LOCK 'EM UP! Throw away the keys!
If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
Everything I've ever owned with lithium batteries has this problem. Eg: My first netbook got cooked in the sun with the power off ... it would vanish from 50% after that.
I don't own a single Apple product, but maybe I should start buying ...
All Apple had to do was advertise this from the start as a feature and let you turn it off if you wanted to; competitors would have been rushing to copy it! They've been strung up by their own controlfreakery and secrecy. Idiots.
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
They didn't drop the operating performance. They limited the top speed. A speed which the aging battery already could not support, but now instead of shutting down the phone continues to function. Any operations not requiring that top speed are unaffected and function as always. If you want to complain, complain that the battery wasn't designed to last longer.
If you had worked in the industry you would know that you design your hardware to only work over the lifetime of the battery. Every battery datasheet has graphs and tables giving you the performance over its lifetime.
Keep in mind this started well within the warranty period. Apple did it to avoid millions of warranty battery replacements.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
First, battery and chip wear are independent. You can possibly replace the battery, but less likely to replace the main SoC. If the slowdowns began during the warranty period, that means that either Apple pushed the chip and/or the battery harder to get good benchmarks on new devices, or their modeling of typical usage is too conservative, with people hitting the throttle threshold earlier than expected. Usually throttling will kick in based on battery age, temperature, open circuit voltage, source resistance, and how long the peak current was drawn in the last second, few seconds, days or even total since new. Similar restrictions apply to chips like the main SoC and even voltage regulators.
Bottom line is, the harder you use your phone, the faster it ages. If this French challenge will hold, that will result in Apple "smoothing" the aging by either limiting performance across the board, or start limiting it based on daily or weekly usage (for example you will only be allowed peak performance for so many minutes per day) which isn't necessarily what consumers want, but it would prolong the phone life with everyone getting nice performance in the morning, and those who use it heavily seeing slowdowns later in the day.
I think the first rule should be that there is a clear 'map of obsolescence', that the communication should be clear, and that there are decent warranties. You can't rely on the PR for that. There are a lot of factors involved, some avoidable, some deliberate, some unavoidable. Making it hard to replace a battery is a form of intentional obsolescence so it should be made very clear.
Durability is another area. It is 'optimized' everywhere now and it is hard to measure but it can be covered by warranties.
Obsolescence is becoming a major design issue, and it can even be pushed from above, through laws arranged with lobbyists. Environmental norms for cars for instance generally have built in obsolescence and they raise the bar for newcomers and small players.
As the behavior of the device would have been worse if Apple did nothing, it takes a special kind of shit to suggest Apple was doing this to drive sales.
Many companies do this too. :( Maybe companies can make users pay to keep support of old stuff going.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Not everyone throws stuff away after first use.
Could you remind me, when did switches and relays stop being moving parts and when did light bulbs become electronics?
I may have been lucky, but I have never had a power supply, graphics cards or RAM fail (although I have had to RMA new DIMMs that had errors once) and I don't think I have been particularly lucky. Of course it can happen, but it is much, much less likely for electronics to fail within the first decade or so of use than it is for (electro-)mechanical parts.
If you were a just and honest person, you'd know that suicide is the only proper course for you.
I've worked in this industry for over a decade (never for Apple) What people don't realize is that batteries age, and so do chips especially when pushed to a limit. Ever wonder why military or even automotive grade chips are running so much slower and cooler? It's because they are rated for much longer lifetime than consumer grade devices - they are limited so they last the required number of years. Consumers want top performance, but they trade lifetime due to stress on the hardware. What Apple did here is cap the device performance increasing the device reliability and potential lifespan.
Unless you're one to beat the living shit out of your device physically, the main component going "bad" is the battery, which used to be a component that was replaceable and even upgradable by the end user.
Phones come with a 1-year warranty usually tied to a 2-year contract (where they often finance the cost of the phone with it). Due to the cellular contract length, consumer expectations are two years, plain and simple. Vendors need to stop being so damn greedy and offer a two-year warranty. If they can't design a battery to last more than a year (e.g. 1000 cycles) then offer a free battery replacement after a year. Making these products reasonably more durable isn't rocket science, and hardly requires military-grade hardware upgrades.
The fact they hid it, and never left it in user hand is suspicious, especially since they DO have a mechanism that at 20% you battery you can switch to a low power mode. They could have it pop up like "your telephone is discharging rapidly we will put you in lower power mode". But no, they hid it. to me that is an evidence they were well aware of potential backlash.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
They could have also just made the battery user-replaceable, like in most other phones.
I am still searching for a good rom to run on my I9000. I am currently running the latest CM released just before they disbanded the project. Phone works fine but apps get slower and slower. It is a shame.
Ever wonder why military or even automotive grade chips are running so much slower and cooler? It's because they are rated for much longer lifetime than consumer grade devices - they are limited so they last the required number of years.
No you haven't worked in the industry for a decade. With a line like that I will wager that you haven't worked in the industry for even a day. There are very big differences between the automotive / military grade chips and they go miles beyond life expectancy (something that is usually handled through derrating).
In any case it's quite telling that Apple seem to feel a need to derate their 2 year old phones. (Posted from a non-derated 4 year old phone that has suffered dearly at my hands).
Yea, that's precisely the point. Apple overstated the battery life. Their design switching to slowing down to provide for longer battery life is not what was advertised to users. Certainly, having the iPhone having constantly reduced performance after the battery charge was reduced wasn't well stated and in a conservative design wouldn't happen. Of course, such would have meant a substantially larger battery, probably. That would have possibly cut into sales. Meanwhile, making it clear and maintain the battery size would have meant effectively requiring the battery be replaceable--and I don't mean technically replaceable but an actually, even an idiot could do it, replaceable battery.
So, in its own way, it's clear that wasn't planned obsolescence. It was fraud. It wasn't that Apple had the best tech and great engineers. It was they were doing bad engineering and using software to patch over the inevitable problems. Trying to sell it as some sort of advantage to the consumer misses the point.
If you look at the trends in consumer electronics over the last few years, designed-in obsolescence has become a feature from a range of different classes of device and a broad range of vendors.
For example, consider laptop/netbook computers, which arrive with major components such as CPUs, batteries, RAM and storage all soldered and/or glued in place. All of this makes it much harder to upgrade or use these products in a versatile way.
The same is true for almost all class of tablet, although I'd note that some Android devices [phones and tablets] do come with micro-SD card slots, which do allow for storage upgrades and flexibility.
On the desktop we are moving away from the "assembled" style of computer offered by Dell or Gateway from the 90s and 00s and now we seem to be trending towards all-in-one systems where, once again, everything is soldered or glued down and the potential for upgrades of individual components is virtually non-existent.
Or in the software business, where the latest editions of software are no explicitly programmed so that they cannot be operated on older generations of processors [which, ironically, may not have some of the vulnerabilities found with more modern chips] but with the net effect of forcing people to upgrade what might have been perfectly reasonable hardware just if they want to run modern software. Nor is this limited to Operating Systems - the same deadly embrace includes things like graphics cards and driver stacks and the compatibility demanded by "modern" games... all of which force upgrades to new GPUs, which in turn force upgrades to new OS editions... which force upgrades in hardware.
The hard part about this - for consumers at least - is that this sort of change is a "self-fulfilling prophecy" from the perspective of a tech company. This is because the companies that follow the trend will make more sales, be more profitable and thus displace those companies who had been willing to put the customer first. In other words, we have a situation in which market forces [profits for manufacturers] actually induce and encourage them to adopt practices which will be harmful to consumers in the long run.
Our society anticipated that situations like this might come to be from time to time, setting up regulatory institutions of government to ensure that consumer rights were protected and that facilities such as "right to repair" and "right to upgrade" were included. Unfortunately we are slowly but surely seeing these protections eroded, either by cuts to those agencies and/or [witness the recent actions of the FCC dumping telecoms disputes on the FTC] woefully overloaded.
We are told that in a capitalist environment, market forces win out and thus the consumer is protected because the market demands that only the best companies survive to offer the best products or services to people. Unfortunately, as we've seen with consumer electronics, the consumer now has virtually no worthwhile protection from any of these questionable practices.
We should applaud what France are trying to do here, and we should hope that this drives positive change.
The Consumer Electronics Industry has been sorely in need of a "Weinstein Moment" for a while now. Forced Upgrades, inability to repair and built-in-obsolescence have been spreading like cancer throughout the modern technology world, making a few companies super-rich at the expense of millions or billions of consumers' pockets.
That needs to change.
Lightbulbs became electronics when they started to include switched mode power supplies.
All Compact Florescent Light-bulbs (CFL) and LED lamps contain them, and often the power supply fails before the light emitter.
Driving CFLs
LED Driver
Wow.
if Apple did nothing, it takes a special kind of shit to suggest Apple was doing this to drive sales.
It takes a special kind of dullard to believe that corporations are your "buddy", and looking out for your best interests.
In the EU the minimum warranty period is 2 years, although some countries go even further.
Obviously batteries are consumable items, but the way the law usually looks at this is that if the battery is cheap it's okay for the consumer to replace it regularly. If it's really expensive like iPhone batteries are, requiring a special service appointment and considerable cost to get replaced, it needs to last a reasonably long time, like considerably more than the warranty period which is the absolute minimum.
So even if Apple argues that the battery is consumable, the speed with which it died (my girlfriend's iPhone 6 was about a year old when it started to go from 50% to 2% instantly or randomly crash) they are still on the hook for it.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
So your argument here is that I used the word "limited" instead of "derated"?
If you don't believe that all high end chips get slowed down, go build your favorite high end PC hardware (gamer PC built for performance). Image the hard drive, run your favorite CPU and GPU benchmarks. After a couple of years of gaming use, restore the imaged drive and re-run the benchmarks - I bet you would expect your benchmarks to be the same, but they won't be - even though the software will be identical, the hardware will have aged an will be throttled (or as marketing will sometimes call it - the "turbo boost" will no longer boost as high for as long as it did before).
Of course you wont see "tortured and executed duck" on any menus.
Thats not a crime apparently
But trying to save a battery is.
I say turn off the protections in France and make their phones crash.
And yeah, because cars are durable ... Can't even handle a fucking key scratch. Or bumping againse something!
Lol, you really picked THE dumbest possibe argument.
Besides, my Backview BV6000 has no trouble being thrown against a wall and go through a full washing cycle, and is so repairable, the manufacturer himself posted a full disadsembly video, and sells replacement parts on e-bay. They even send you two screwdrivers in the box!
It does not lack any feature. Only the anti-features. Vanilla Android. Better reception and battery life than any of the big ones.
Price? 180EUR.
If you pay Apple prices, you can probably get a handheld supercomputer that survives nukes or something.
If only that indicator would, next to how much charge is left, say something about the batteries internal resistance under load ...
Also: most battery charge indicators are of the relative kind (to the maximum charge they can currently hold). That means that that those indicator show 100% charge, even if that charge would be a fraction of what it could store when it was new.
Example: How long does your phone currently last on one "100% full" charge, compared with when it was new ?
.
But the problem is not about how much charge the battery can hold, it is about how much power gets lost in the ageing battery itself when its under (heavy) load, causing its voltage to drop - until the device cannot function anymore and crashes.
And maybe help everyone else out by investigating other privacy diminishing companies?
I currently run the DirtyCow TWRP LineageOS 13.x Rom, and I am concerned about future BLU Devices such as the BLU Life One X3. I don't want to go back to the BLU Stock Rom under any circumstances. I don't even run GApps. I can't run the LineageOS 14.x Rom because of the Requirement the camera work and I have a Bluetooth headset.
I got lucky and picked up refurbished R1 HD. to Replace my Studio 5.x. It had not been updated and used the older Rom that could be unlocked to load LineageOS... More than 6 months have passed and here I am debating another handset because unless I move back to the Stock Rom, I have no means to patch against KRACK.
So the question becomes: Where do I go from here? Do I buy a BLU R2 or BLU Life One X3 now, stick it in a Drawer, and wait some months until a LineageOS Build is made for it?
XDA Developers Forum doesn't even organize the new devices. News about them is scattered around other forums. I'd hate to have move manufacturers because we are constantly battling BLU's Bullshit on this.
This needs to be investigated. BLU needs to put up a thing that says: Running a Custom Rom? Need Camera Drivers? Install this APK. And stop locking bootloaders on devices we buy outright! If I can do fastboot oem unlock, it should work.
Do. You. Eat. Meat? How is killing a duck for food any different from the pigs, chicken, cows, fish, and other animals you eat? Have you got any idea what meat production looks like in America? It's the very definition of animal cruelty.
Ever wonder why military or even automotive grade chips are running so much slower and cooler?
They use slower parts because they are cheaper. They use no more hardware than is necessary to do a job, because when Bosch makes a run of a couple million ECUs that will go into various different VWs, Audis, and Lamborghinis, they want to avoid unnecessarily spending tens of thousands of dollars. If a hotter part were necessary to do the job, they would add a fat heat sink to it and fin the case, and in fact automotive manufacturers have done this in the past.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
They run cooler because they support a wider operating temperature range.
So yeah, unless you care about handling, feel, or visibility, new cars are better.
Visibility depends on the particular car. There have always been cars with good and with bad visibility. The 1976 Chevy Impala I drove in high school definitely did not have good visibility (or handling, or fuel economy, or acceleration, or comfort). The safety features of newer cars are a consideration but visibility and safety are not mutually exclusive and never have been. Not to mention that new cars have cameras, sensors and other safety features to provide situational awareness not dreamed of by cars from back in the day.
As for handling, the argument that old cars handle better is quite simply nonsense unsupported by any evidence. As a general proposition, new cars handle better in pretty much every measurable way, even allowing for their generally heavier curb weights as long as you compare vehicles in similar categories. (no comparing a 1976 Ferrari to a 2010 half ton pickup)
I like it. French jails must be full of inkjet printer manufacturer employees.
If you have a complaint, complain that the battery wasn't designed to last longer.
That's not the problem. The problem was that they didn't tell anyone they were doing it. Had they been up front about this behavior, people could have evaluated whether they cared or not (most probably wouldn't care) and made their purchasing decision accordingly. But instead Apple tried to pull a fast one and now that is biting them in the ass.
Them slowing down the device for a reasonable technical problem is fine. Not telling anyone they are doing it and pretending it doesn't happen is not fine.
That is actually incorrect - military grade chips are not from the discount bin. Are the they the fastest bin of parks coming off the line, of course not, but that's not because of cost, but purely because that is not what the spec calls for (and in some processes slower parts are more power efficient, hence less heat). A heat-sink is not going to solve a problem of wear either - it would help, but not. That said, I cannot say any more on the topic, so if you still think so, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.
I think you flipped the cause and effect. If they run cooler, they may operate at a more narrow temperature range simply because they don't heat up as much. That said, often military or automotive spec parts actually support a wider range of temperatures. Go to ti.com or other chip manufacturers and lookup temperatures for higher grade/more expensive chips, sometimes called "enhanced".
What about a phone that only provides communications on a radio protocol that is going obsolete and would cost the carrier (and the customer) much more to support it? (In Canada, CDMA service ended on May 31st - would it have been so bad for customers to get new product before the shut off date?)
Most cell providers offered low-cost phones as replacements, or even free replacements for low-income individuals. Wind was doing that 6mo ago, Bell has had an "upgrade in place" plan for a few years.
On the other hand, my parents have a 2013 Terrain which was hit with the CDMA upgrade, GM sold millions of vehicles with technology that was being phased out. Then there's cases like Samsung that directly designed their refrigerators to fail after a particular period of time. There's multiple class action lawsuits in the US and Canada over that one.
Om, nomnomnom...
The amount of uninformed nonsense on here is astounding.
The update doesn't "slow down" the phone as such - it limits peak power draws when the battery is down on overall capacity and the spike would cause a reset (which happens in many other manufacturers' phones - FFS google this, people). Most operations of the phone will remain utterly unchanged, just heavy workloads will be slower than previously.
Say what you like about non-replaceable batteries (hardly specific to Apple) or a badly communicated update, or anything else about them, but the "planned obsolescence" claim is patently nonsense - unless you believe that a phone that runs *some* tasks slightly slower as it ages is forcing users to upgrade more than one that reboots when it hits a CPU intensive task.
Realistically, this feature should have been in place from the start - it's basic power management, but as usual the howling mob would rather jump on the OMG APPLE EV1L BURN THEM bandwagon than actually take an objective viewpoint.
-Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience-
I would say your CDMA analogy is flawed. Usually when an older standard like this is eventually disabled, there have been phones on the market for at least half a decade that are dual band CDMA/LTE phones. When that shut off eventually happens your phone just stops using its CDMA radio and uses LTE only. There is no way you could have bought a NEW phone that was CDMA only just months before the CDMA network was turned off. If by chance you were still using a half decade old CDMA only phone, you have reasonably used more than the expected life time of that phone, and usually carriers will go out of their way to identify customers that are still using old CDMA only phones and notify them that they need to upgrade before X date or they will loose service.
What Apple did here is secretly cap the device performance without notifying the user in any way, and despite massive amounts of speculation they kept their mouths shut until their scheme was detected by a third party.
And that would be because intel, amd, nvidia are all pulling the same BS that apple is doing. They are pushing their hardware beyond a reasonable limit to get that extra 5 FPS in a review benchmark so they can claim to the the top dawg for a couple months before the competition leap frogs over them.
If you go back to an era before we had these silly things like turbo boost, like lets take a Pentium 3 for example and did the exact same thing you described a new install nearly 2 decades ago, imaged it, and bench marked with that image today. The performance would be exactly the same as it was 2 decades ago. things like turbo boost are nothing else then sanctioned by the manufacturer overclocking. Overclockers knew 2 decades ago what the risks were of pushing the limits, they would then make that choice that their hardware wouldn't last as long.
So, in its own way, it's clear that wasn't planned obsolescence. It was fraud.
It is both fraud and planned obsolescence. All the fanboi spin in this thread will not change that.
Of course you wont see "tortured and executed duck" on any menus.
Is that like "tortured and executed calf" here in the US?
Moron.
"They didn't drop the operating performance. They limited the top speed."
When the fuck is speed not considered part of operating performance? What are you smoking?
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
It's not "planned" obsolescence.
I think your talking to one of apple lawyers.
"They use slower parts because they are cheaper."
No. They often use slower parts because the specification often calls for lower heat, or a design needs to be rigorously tested so there's something older that already meets those requirements and has the testing already validated.
On the other hand, as I look at my 1970's W-grade (military) tubes driving my 1978 Super Reverb, sometimes things just needs to be overdesigned.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
No my argument is they fucked up the design from the onset and that CPUs in milspec equipment don't run slow because of the reasons you think.
Please lead by example
I'm not sure if you mean that a processor chip can degrade over time; but, if you do... NO.
A processor works or it doesn't. A battery can hold less of a charge the more it's used, till the point it can't hold a charge anymore; but, a processor is either going to work, throw errors, or not work at all. If you are using a windows machine or even an android or an iphone, yes, the performance over time may slow down in general; but, that is do to background processes building up. It has nothing to do with the hardware.
And, yes, planned obsolescence is a thing, and yes, it is absolutely disgusting.
Planned obsolescence is when some one discovers a light bulb that can be on for 50 years with out burning out; but the company either chooses to bury the technology and keep making light bulbs that burn out every year or so. Or they take the technology, use it, and just make sure the bulb stops functioning after 3 years so you'll have to buy a new one.
Batteries wear out. Processors, NO. The internal flash storage, I think, yes, can become non-functional at some point, perhaps; but, no, not a processor. Trendy computer phones are usually phased out of existence by unneeded software changes that require more compute power. An Iphone or Android OS update usually means performance degradation because the software is pushing the same hardware harder.
First day shilling for apple?
There are engineering tradeoffs of doing that, mostly in volume/weight. Making the battery replaceable requires adding interior barriers, bulkier contacts, latches, etc. those tradeoffs may be worth it to some but not others. For something that most people would do once a year or less, the tradeoffs is a valid option. It can can be replaced with some more skill if it needs to be.
The alternative is to face the fact that the phone is broken. You said it yourself, random shutdowns and restarts, get Apple to fix your broken phone.
Your first assumption has not been proven, the batteries failed due to age. It is possible they are bad due to manufacturer defects because there was a small batch that Apple confirmed are bad from manufacturing errors and issued a recall already.
With a Samsung Note 4 and the USB port no longer charging. After trying a couple charger cables, she mentioned it to my sister who got her a new phone. Right after buying the new one, the old one suddenly started charging again... on the same cable.
We are pretty sure at this point it was some sort of soft-obsolescence thing, but aren't sure how or why.
because of the backglass, which is there for exactly that purpose. The added weight is also why it shatters when it hits the ground. To be fair to the 4, it was the most durable of the iPhones I've bought for my kid.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
because they look nice in the shop (even though they cause eye strain). First impressions matter in sales. It only takes hours to make a sale for a product you're going to have for years.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
But Timmy likes to drop the soap
I was speaking to the automotive stuff, sorry. I should have made that more clear, although I thought my example did that.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Apple glued the battery to the case for the sole reason to prevent you changing it yourself.
As the behavior of the device would have been worse if Apple did nothing, it takes a special kind of shit to suggest Apple was doing this to drive sales.
Precisely.
Outside of moving parts, batteries and leaking capacitors, have you ever had hardware failures in consumer grade electronics? I haven't.
I have. And as a former electronic bench-tech, I have seen many failures from bad design and under-spec'ed components.
The iPhone battery is neither of those.
I would not want my phone to reboot in the middle of a 999/112 call because some app needed more current than the battery could supply for a single moment. Throttle the processor, keep the device working, especially in case of emergencies
Well put, sir!
They implemented a technical solution that saved them money.
Sorry, but that is totally false.
Without Apple's solution, phones would not last a day on battery after a few years, and/or would be random restarting.
Either way, an iPhone user would have to go to Apple and PAY THEM MONEY - either for a new battery or new phone.
With Apple's solution in place, it would be a while longer before people would come in for either a new phone or new battery. There is no scenario under Apple's fix where they get more money.
This issue is well understood
Not by you it would seem.
The datasheet for the battery... ...tells you nothing about how the battery will react after two years, under varying loads.
Other manufacturers did that.
What you mean is, other manufacturers did NOTHING. If you search you can easily find reports of older Android phones that randomly restart as the batteries age, of phones that mono longer last a day after just six months. Apple's fix means those phones would still be working but I guess the manufactures just want people to buy phones more often...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Batteries wear out. Processors, NO.
Sorry, but processors can wear out. It won't be slower, but it will die of frequent use eventually.
https://m.hardocp.com/article/1998/12/10/intel_employee_on_electro_migration
I've conducted an experiment. Admittedly a rather lengthy one. I use an iphone 3gs that still works okay. I decided not to allow upgrades many years ago, so it's still on ios3! Okay, so I have not been able to install apps for a while, but the ones I want are still working fine, (and I do not want the latest shiny anyway). Yes, security updates have not happened for ages, but then I will never use a phone for important security related things.
Here's the point: I get better battery life out of my old iphone3 than my friend who bought a new iphone a couple of years ago...
Sure, I can't use Facebook or other similar stuff on my phone, but for me, that's a bonus. I have a phone that works, and I can take notes, schedule reminders and important stuff like that. I'm just wondering how long it can last.
apple should be fined and assigned a corporate watchdog like they had when they were found guilty of ebook price fixing. apple has proved itself too corrupt a company to be trusted to function unchecked.
It's France mate. Never heard of foie gras?
No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
If I buy an android phone that only gets one OS update, perhaps 12 months from the purchase date, is this not also just as bad? The (lack of) software updates are in fact planned vs. a battery that is subject to user-specific usage patters like charge cycling.
I am pretty careful charging my phone at work, so I've got a good condition Galaxy Note 3 running its original battery that I consider obsolete due to security holes in its Samsung Android distribution. Now I use an iPhone.
So you fully understand it as a deficient design but refuse to call it that? It's a bad design. Plain and fucking simple.
If you had kept reading for just one more sentence you would have seen the answer to your question, but I will paste it here for your convenience: "A speed which the aging battery already could not support"
Cheapness is a thing. A-pillars have grown and making them small and still having rollover resistance is expensive.
Of course cost is a consideration and a crude design will typically be cheaper than an expensive one. However thick A pillars do not necessarily make for bad visibility if they are shaped cleverly and even if they did would you prefer a car that turns into crumpled aluminum foil in the event of a rollover?
Raw, unassisted handling peaked in the 1990s, when suspension geometry technology reached essentially the point we've reached today, but when vehicles were lighter.
Even if I accept your premise about "raw unassisted handling peaking" (which I do not) that doesn't mean handling has degraded since then. It's pretty clear that handling has improved quite a lot in the last 20 years. You don't have to take my word for it either - cars from the 90s are still on the road. It's not even a contest. Furthermore there is a LOT more to handling than suspension geometry and I disagree that suspension technology hasn't improved in the last 20 year either.
Bollocks
What an eloquent rebuttal. Full of facts and logic. I bow to your debating prowess.
You could get all that stuff on cars before, or swap it on. And it was common to do so.
Your argument is that because we could tune a car to perform better that cars from 20 years ago are the equal of those today? Dumbest argument I've heard in quite a while.
Got news for ya - That's not the battery, that's the fault of the Apple designers. I've taken plenty of 'dead' iPhone batteries and hooked them up to an ammeter. They're more than capable of delivering 1C or greater.
This is entirely the fault of Apple engineers for failing to understand basic electronics design.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Whatever the reason, the phones already could not support that processor speed without shutting down. So your smart-ass comment was inapplicable, but instead of simply acknowledging that like a civilized person you change your tack. Good on you.
That's because you didn't understand the argument.
Disagreeing does not mean I didn't understand the argument but thanks for the condescension.
The cars themselves from 20 years ago were mechanically the equal of cars today, power output aside.
I'm an automotive engineer with 20 years in the industry and run a company that makes parts for car companies. That argument is simply not true. Pick any measure you want and any automotive engineer worth their salary can show you how cars today have overall improved on cars from 20 years ago. Reliability, performance, power, traction, safety, durability, handling, materials, etc. It doesn't matter - cars today have as a whole improved across the board even in the fact of additional complexity. Your argument that cars haven't improved mechanically in the last 20 years is easily shown to be false as a general proposition.
If you want to argue that we are into diminishing returns on the improvement in cars then I can probably get on board with a reasonable argument to that effect. But claims that car mechanicals peaked in the 1990s and have gone no where since is just preposterous.
Anyway, back on topic; the cars of 20 and even 25 years ago had all of the important things we demand from cars, like being able to go over bumps gracefully, but none of the things we didn't, like remotely compromisable infotainment systems.
Saying cars 20 years ago could go over bumps adequately is true but it's false to say cars today don't do it any better. To argue otherwise is to claim that tens of thousands of automotive engineers have wasted their time for the last 20 years.
Therein lies the rub: If vehicles have become substantially heavier, and tires have only gotten a little wider, then handling is actually compromised
The width of tires is not remotely the only consideration. What tires are made of matters FAR more and that has improved. Furthermore, there is a lot more to handling than simply the tires. A car can be heavier and have better handling. While weight does play an important role, it isn't even close to the only factor that matters. Handling is a function of the sum of the parts and there is more than one equation to get it right.
People love the BRZ because it returns to that lightweight formula. The new Miata could have had more power, but that would have made it heavier.
Seriously? You're using a 2 seat sports car as an example of why all cars are no better than ones from 20 years ago? People love the BRZ and Miata because it's a fun and inexpensive little sports car for people who want fun and inexpensive little sports cars that drive well. Not everyone wants that and it's inappropriate to extrapolate that market segment to cars in general. It's one way to get a great handling car but not the only way. Good handling can be achieved in many ways. You'd be daft to argue that a Corvette or a BMW M4 doesn't handle well but light weight wasn't the primary goal of those cars. The lightweight sports car is merely one way to get excellent handling and not the only way. But even staying with the example you provided the Miata of today is measurably better than the one from 20 years ago.
Sounds like your girlfriend would have a warranty claim if she lived in the EU (you don't say whether or not she does). Stuff does fail within warranty periods, and nobody seems to complain about it if the device is actually fixed or replaced. I don't see the connection with the Apple soft slowdown to avoid crashes, though.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Batteries wear out. Processors, NO. The internal flash storage, I think, yes, can become non-functional at some point, perhaps; but, no, not a processor.
False. Processors absolutely will degrade over time. There are a variety of mechanisms, mostly involving quantum mechanics stuff - traps, damage due to high energy electronics, and so forth. Diffusion of the gates is another issue.
Some of the issues will cause failures, others will cause slowdowns.
You can not escape thermodynamics: everything fails eventually.
Many of the failure modes for older chips operated over very long time spans, so nobody worried about them. But as we push the limits on density, power, and so forth we also force shorter lifespans.
If this isn't clear, then read a textbook on IC fabrication. You may need to read a book on solid state physics as well.
Presuming Apple are found guilty, and don't overturn it on appeal, take it to a higher court......and don't have a few BILLIONS to throw at lawyers..... that 5% might actually only be a few million dollars, since we all know Apple are not exactly transparent in their accounting....
I wish the French legal system a lot of luck and hope they really sting Apple, but somehow I doubt even a 'good' result will make much of a dent in the Apple juggernaut.
They often have to underclock chips to be able to work from -40 to +85C (or even +125C). It has nothing to do with lifetime. Commercial and industrial grade should last the same as long as they are operated between 0 and 70 C.
"Whatever the reason, the phones already could not support that processor speed without shutting down. So your smart-ass comment was inapplicable, but instead of simply acknowledging that like a civilized person you change your tack."
You say as your first words are "Whatever the reason," which means you lost. good on you!
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.