Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pessimizer 1471 days ago
Apple was intentionally and silently slowing down aging iDevices to make it seem like they had just become obsolete under the higher requirements of newer software, rather than just having dying batteries. While the person you're responding to is mischaracterizing what happened to some extent and implying that it is still happening (they may still be throttled to protect from sudden shutoffs, but everybody knows now), you're propagandizing about it.

If they had the users' interests in heart at all, they could have thrown a modal that explained that the batteries were dying, and asked if the user wanted the phone to be throttled to avoid incidents of sudden power loss. If Apple had done this, they would have immediately lost sales and had complaints about expensive and inconvenient battery replacement, so they chose not to. This was the result of nothing but greed.
1 comments
thebruce87m 1471 days ago
They weren’t slowing down ageing devices, only handsets that had degraded batteries. It’s an important distinction. The change that they made is now when your battery degrades you can choose to get peak performance at the risk of reboots.
link
fartcannon 1471 days ago
If you could easily change the battery, there'd be no problem with this function. As it stands, the glued in battery is also planned obsolescence.

There's quite a bit of it, isn't there? If your battery doesn't die, the software will cripple your phone. If you choose not to let it, you'll exepreince random reboots.

Its all a big elaborate plan to make you upgrade.

They're smart folks at Apple. They'll try something even more sneaky next time.

link
thebruce87m 1471 days ago
I can easily change it. I simply pay them £69 and get it changed. Maybe I’ve found the loophole? Or maybe they’re really bad at planning obsolescence?

To me this is no different than when I pay for new parts for my car. Could I do it myself? Maybe, but I’ll happily pay someone who knows what they’re doing to do it properly. If a bush wears down is that planned obsolescence? Should I be outraged after 60,000 miles that I have to replace it?

I’m actually old enough to have owned phones with removable batteries. Guess how many times I changed a battery? 0. All the way from the 3210, t68i, P900, Note II and a bunch I’ve forgotten and I’ve never needed to change a battery. I’ve had maybe 4 Apple phones with non removable batteries and never needed to either.

link
fartcannon 1470 days ago
That 69 dollars happened AFTER the lawsuit (a petty reaponse) and is yet further example of planned obsolescence! Pay 70 bucks, or put 70 bucks towards a new phone.
link
thebruce87m 1470 days ago
A quick Google shows you that the price of battery replacements has always been around the same price:

https://www.techradar.com/uk/news/apples-iphone-battery-repl...

“In the US, for example, the battery replacement price went from $80 to $30.”

https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/service/battery-powe...

Price now in the US: $69

I think I’ve come to the conclusion that you use the term “planned obsolescence” incorrectly.

link