Your explanation makes sense, but if that's what's happening Apple is being overly cautious.
My iPhone 6 worked fine running the final version of iOS 10. I can remember 2 spontaneous shutdowns over the last two years. Those were annoying when they happened, but they didn't happen often.
The day I upgraded to iOS 11, performance on my phone went into the toilet. It was sluggish. The screen stuttered. I had trouble switching between apps. I had to tap buttons on the screen several times before the taps registered. It has gotten better since then, but my phone still is much less usable than it was with iOS 10.
I get hit by this every day. I would much rather have my phone spontaneously shut down once a month or even once a week than have it be unusable for long periods of time every day.
And yes, it does appear to be directly related to the battery. If my battery charge level is 93% or greater, my CPU runs at 1125 MHz. When the battery charge drops to 91% the CPU drops to 818 MHz. When the battery charge drops to 89% the CPU drops to 600 MHz.
If I could go back to iOS 10, I would. But Apple makes that impossible. They could, however, release a software fix that would make my phone usable again. If there are tradeoffs, they should let me choose among them.
is that you can't tell which applications are running and which are not. In the Tiger dock, running applications have a very visible black triangle under them. In the Leopard dock, there is a much more subtle shadowing effect that indicates running applications. It needs to be less subtle.
I'm an investor in Apple and I also work in the investment industry. My take is that Apple would lose about 40% of its market value immediately if Jobs got the boot. At today's price that's about $37 Billion of equity going poof, supposedly in the name of protecting Apple's shareholders.
Sure, some or all of that value might come back eventually. But the point is, it's never going to happen. The regulators might find some way to publicly reprimand him, but he's too important to the company --- and he's added too much value to the company --- to be pulled out for this.
Technically speaking it shouldn't matter, so there is something of an ethical dilemma. But the market ultimately is more practical than that. It wouldn't serve anyone's good.
Of course, I may be completely wrong. But my portfolio hopes that I'm not.
This is Mossberg's way of pushing the television industry to sign deals with Apple to make their content available legally. It took the music industry years to catch on to the threat of Napster. The film industry understands the problems presented by Bittorrent, but there's not much indication that the TV industry understands it yet. TV executives still, by and large, want you to wait a year before you can buy a show on DVD. This is Walt's little way of lighting a fire under their asses. Good for him.
I don't see why Apple would be leaking this release. If they wanted to let people try out OSX4Intel, they would just put together an official trial download, complete with registration.
Which, actually, does seem like something they should do. Not now, but six months or a year from now, why not let anyone who owns a sufficiently zippy Intel box download and try OSX+iWork? I know, I know, it would kill the "only runs on Apple hardware" story. But they could, if they wanted to, still only sell and support the full release for their own boxes. And this could get OSX into the hands of tens of milions potential switchers.
Quote I want to make the decision about the Macintosh purchase before or at the same time as the decision about your trip to France to visit your sister unquote.
Now it's a little embarrassing that at this point in my life I would rather get a new iMac than spend a week in spring in the south of France. But there are some extenuating circumstances.
Slashdot Mirror
Your explanation makes sense, but if that's what's happening Apple is being overly cautious.
My iPhone 6 worked fine running the final version of iOS 10. I can remember 2 spontaneous shutdowns over the last two years. Those were annoying when they happened, but they didn't happen often.
The day I upgraded to iOS 11, performance on my phone went into the toilet. It was sluggish. The screen stuttered. I had trouble switching between apps. I had to tap buttons on the screen several times before the taps registered. It has gotten better since then, but my phone still is much less usable than it was with iOS 10.
I get hit by this every day. I would much rather have my phone spontaneously shut down once a month or even once a week than have it be unusable for long periods of time every day.
And yes, it does appear to be directly related to the battery. If my battery charge level is 93% or greater, my CPU runs at 1125 MHz. When the battery charge drops to 91% the CPU drops to 818 MHz. When the battery charge drops to 89% the CPU drops to 600 MHz.
If I could go back to iOS 10, I would. But Apple makes that impossible. They could, however, release a software fix that would make my phone usable again. If there are tradeoffs, they should let me choose among them.
is that you can't tell which applications are running and which are not. In the Tiger dock, running applications have a very visible black triangle under them. In the Leopard dock, there is a much more subtle shadowing effect that indicates running applications. It needs to be less subtle.
I'm an investor in Apple and I also work in the investment industry. My take is that Apple would lose about 40% of its market value immediately if Jobs got the boot. At today's price that's about $37 Billion of equity going poof, supposedly in the name of protecting Apple's shareholders. Sure, some or all of that value might come back eventually. But the point is, it's never going to happen. The regulators might find some way to publicly reprimand him, but he's too important to the company --- and he's added too much value to the company --- to be pulled out for this. Technically speaking it shouldn't matter, so there is something of an ethical dilemma. But the market ultimately is more practical than that. It wouldn't serve anyone's good. Of course, I may be completely wrong. But my portfolio hopes that I'm not.
This is Mossberg's way of pushing the television industry to sign deals with Apple to make their content available legally. It took the music industry years to catch on to the threat of Napster. The film industry understands the problems presented by Bittorrent, but there's not much indication that the TV industry understands it yet. TV executives still, by and large, want you to wait a year before you can buy a show on DVD. This is Walt's little way of lighting a fire under their asses. Good for him.
I've had two hard crashes since I installed this. Hopefully it's just software and not that my iMac is dying.
I don't see why Apple would be leaking this release. If they wanted to let people try out OSX4Intel, they would just put together an official trial download, complete with registration. Which, actually, does seem like something they should do. Not now, but six months or a year from now, why not let anyone who owns a sufficiently zippy Intel box download and try OSX+iWork? I know, I know, it would kill the "only runs on Apple hardware" story. But they could, if they wanted to, still only sell and support the full release for their own boxes. And this could get OSX into the hands of tens of milions potential switchers.
Quote I want to make the decision about the Macintosh purchase before or at the same time as the decision about your trip to France to visit your sister unquote.
Now it's a little embarrassing that at this point in my life I would rather get a new iMac than spend a week in spring in the south of France. But there are some extenuating circumstances.
And in any case, it was effective.