Apple Being Sued for Slowing Down Older iPhones

DooKey

DooKey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
12,907
You knew it was coming, but who knew it was going to start this fast? Yes, a class action lawsuit (WARNING auto play video) has been filed in California after Apple admitted they were intentionally slowing down older iPhones to keep them running longer. I just don't understand why Apple thought doing something like this without disclosing it was ok. I bet they lose this case and have to pay up.

They claim that Apple never requested consent from them to "slow down their iPhones." Both plaintiffs are owners of an iPhone 7. Bogdanovich and Speas claim they "suffered interferences to their iPhone usage due to the intentional slowdowns."
 
Sweet, i have receipts for every iphone made... looool.


gonna get me some phat lootz on the settlement.
 
lol, lawyers will get 95%, and we all will get $5.00.

I just replaced the battery in one of my iPhone 6, and it really makes a difference... Considering replacing the battery in the iPad Air2 that's in the house, since it seems to have gotten slower as well...
 
thanks to 13 year old reddit member 0ne_hanglng_1ow69 (/sarc) for figuring this out.
Apple, you should be ashamed.
 
When you do shady crap and think you can pull a fast one, you get found out eventually. Lie all you want to but truth seems to find its way out of the box eventually.
 
xrealm20 said:
lol, lawyers will get 95%, and we all will get $5.00.

I just replaced the battery in one of my iPhone 6, and it really makes a difference... Considering replacing the battery in the iPad Air2 that's in the house, since it seems to have gotten slower as well...
Click to expand...
Well the upside is newer phones won't follow this trend at least without putting a line or two in the 8000 page User Agreement you need to agree to in order to use your phone.
 
ManofGod said:
Apple sued for slowing down phones or Apple sued for allowing the batteries to drain faster because the new OS requires more power to run fast. Well, pick your poison.
Click to expand...
Naaa, now you will get a disclaimer saying the new OS is tested and proven to drain older batteries faster. Apple is smart, they will always turn it back on the consumer.
 
I thought they slowed the CPU down because the aged batteries couldn't provide enough power on time and the phone would crash.

IDK... slower phone or phone that keeps crashing...
Well, the least Apple could have done is give out a notice and offer battery replacements.
 
ManofGod said:
Apple sued for slowing down phones or Apple sued for allowing the batteries to drain faster because the new OS requires more power to run fast. Well, pick your poison.
Click to expand...

That's really the whole story here. It's a device being powered by a battery that goes through at least one charge cycle a day on average. How many people out there depend on their phone being able to last a full day and are willing to sacrifice a performance hit for it to do that 3 years after they bought it? In this case Apple is damned if they do and damned if they don't. I really don't get the vitriol people have over this. A high performance phone doesn't do you any good if it's dead because the battery is shot.
 
I'm curious to know whether Apple did this to: (1) make the battery appear to last longer for the subjective user experience; or (2) avoid an objective technical problem such as damage to components.

If it's the former, I could see this lawsuit gaining some steam...
 
Everyone knew this shit was going on. It was easily observable. But we were constantly told by the bought and paid for tech media that it was all our imaginations. My 6 Plus slowed to a crawl because of this. I hope the lawyers nail them to the wall. This is what happens when phone hardware gets fast enough for what most people need and you haven't done anything innovative in years. You have to come up with shady ways to get people to buy new phones. This kind of crap is also why landfills are full of e-waste. I don't buy their battery explanation for a second either. The real explanation is planned obsolescence to sell people new phones they probably don't even need.
 
That being said, I would appreciate this a lot more if it was a configurable feature. They already have a "low power" mode that's an on-off switch, it seems to me that it would be easy to add these features to that mode.
 
Hmm let me see....
Settle, Apple with admit no wrong doing, customers get pennies, lawyers get millions.

Rinse and repeat.
 
pFFT!
Apple fans all up in arms because their phone 'just worked' all day. Ignorance is bliss.

Next they'll decide to make their own hamburgers from scratch. Can't wait till they hit 'slaughter the cow' stage.
 
U-238 said:
How many people out there depend on their phone being able to last a full day and are willing to sacrifice a performance hit for it to do that 3 years after they bought it? In this case Apple is damned if they do and damned if they don't. I really don't get the vitriol people have over this. A high performance phone doesn't do you any good if it's dead because the battery is shot.
Click to expand...

It's called disclosure.
If Apple displayed a message, warning that the phone was being slowed down due a weakening battery, then there wouldn't be a problem.

Instead they did it in secret, causing may people to buy a new phone due to the old one being slow, not knowing all they needed was a new battery.
 
InorganicMatter said:
Not going to happen. Removable batteries aren't waterproof, add bulk, and are more expensive to manufacture.

The entire industry is abandoning them. Give it up. The 90s are over.
Click to expand...
It isn't that hard to get a phone with a user-replaceable battery and IP67. Last time I looked that is; which was earlier then the 90s (about three years ago, yeah I don't do the yearly phone thing).


In regards to this lawsuit, Apple probably should have better notices in place, but you buy a phone without a user-serviceable battery...you take it to the store.
They claim that Apple never requested consent from them to "slow down their iPhones."
I'm curious if Apple mentions this in the EULA.
Both people are also claiming damages from Apple because they said the company's actions caused them to suffer "economic damages and other harm for which they are entitled to compensation."
Their phones lasting longer, I'm sure the slight slowdown has cost them greatly.
 
My wife's phone (iphone 6plus) working fine gets ios11 > slows as heck. Takes 5-10 seconds to open apps. If you keep them open they are fine, but it is a dog. The other thing is its constantly syncing/refreshing even with most apps disabled and it also slows down during those times. it just seems worse each time a new ios version comes out.
 
It's not really a big deal...you just pop in a new battery and it's back to full speed...oh, wait...
 
InorganicMatter said:
Not going to happen. Removable batteries aren't waterproof, add bulk, and are more expensive to manufacture.

The entire industry is abandoning them. Give it up. The 90s are over.
Click to expand...
Samsung had removable batteries until the S5. Has nothing to do with the 90s or age of the device at all. It's 100% about the form factor of the device and how it's cheaper to manufacture and support a phone that doesn't allow the owners to remove the battery.
 
even if they made old phones faster so that batteries drained quicker, they would still be slapped with a class action over short battery life.

slow phone = need a new phone

short battery life = need a new phone
 
nutzo said:
It's called disclosure.
If Apple displayed a message, warning that the phone was being slowed down due a weakening battery, then there wouldn't be a problem.

Instead they did it in secret, causing may people to buy a new phone due to the old one being slow, not knowing all they needed was a new battery.
Click to expand...

If with the non-existent "Phone being slowed due to battery condition" message, they included a check box for: Fast - battery expended x hours, Med - battery expending in y hours, Slow - battery expended in z hours; They would likely have been deemed a wonderful thoughtful company.

Now they are an evil corporation that likely has committed acts prosecutable under US computer crimes laws - degrading another party's computer with software delivered via a computer network.
 
It'll get dismissed as soon as the judge realizes that if they don't slow down the phones, the phones would reboot because of power drop during high demand. It's like suing against a feature.
 
ManofGod said:
Apple sued for slowing down phones or Apple sued for allowing the batteries to drain faster because the new OS requires more power to run fast. Well, pick your poison.
Click to expand...

That was actually my first thought on this as well. Someone was going to complain about something either way.
 
ManofGod said:
Apple sued for slowing down phones or Apple sued for allowing the batteries to drain faster because the new OS requires more power to run fast. Well, pick your poison.
Click to expand...

That's just it, though -- they picked, and did so without disclosing what they were doing. If they'd just let customers pick, then it would never have been an issue.

It's really just another example of the same "we know best" attitude that Apple is known for.
 
katanaD said:
maybe they should just have made iphones so that one can readily change the battery??
Click to expand...
But if you then swap said battery they would remove all responsibility on themselves and place it squarely on the customer. "well its not the original battery so the warranty is void....or.....it exploded because its not our battery we placed in the phone originally. Their arguments would be endless. Its the Apple way.
 
MrDeaf said:
I thought they slowed the CPU down because the aged batteries couldn't provide enough power on time and the phone would crash.

IDK... slower phone or phone that keeps crashing...
Well, the least Apple could have done is give out a notice and offer battery replacements.
Click to expand...

Or phones with batteries that can provide enough power for the CPU for longer then about a year? You know phones that act like every other phone, battery life gets worse, phone CPU runs just as fast.
 
t
InorganicMatter said:
I'm curious to know whether Apple did this to: (1) make the battery appear to last longer for the subjective user experience; or (2) avoid an objective technical problem such as damage to components.

If it's the former, I could see this lawsuit gaining some steam...
Click to expand...

It seems likes its more 2. Without throttling, the phone will just shut off if you run a demanding app because the CPU will draw too much power. Apple engineering fail
 
nutzo said:
It's called disclosure.
If Apple displayed a message, warning that the phone was being slowed down due a weakening battery, then there wouldn't be a problem.

Instead they did it in secret, causing may people to buy a new phone due to the old one being slow, not knowing all they needed was a new battery.
Click to expand...

No, the disclosure would need to happen from Day 1. Heres your new iPhone, it will run 20% slower about a year from now.
 
ChoGGi said:
It isn't that hard to get a phone with a user-replaceable battery and IP67. Last time I looked that is; which was earlier then the 90s (about three years ago, yeah I don't do the yearly phone thing).


In regards to this lawsuit, Apple probably should have better notices in place, but you buy a phone without a user-serviceable battery...you take it to the store.
They claim that Apple never requested consent from them to "slow down their iPhones."
I'm curious if Apple mentions this in the EULA.
Both people are also claiming damages from Apple because they said the company's actions caused them to suffer "economic damages and other harm for which they are entitled to compensation."
Their phones lasting longer, I'm sure the slight slowdown has cost them greatly.
Click to expand...

Their phones no longer perform like they did when new. (as in how fast they run)
 
They're not new phones, they can always replace the battery (well Apple can for a fee) if they want the original performance.

Like SomeoneElse mentioned: It's Apple...It's how they always act (their way is the only way / you're holding it wrong).
 
Apple will just move their business to China and write on their phones "made entirely in China".
 
iOS Terms and Conditions
A. 7 & 8.

So when we agree to the terms; we can choose to only agree to the terms that suit us? In my country when we agree to Terms and Conditions; we agree to ALL terms and conditions. Maybe this doesn't apply in the USA? Or people genuinely make a living from suing. :-P
 
When you change the battery, even when Apple does it, the "slowdown mode" remains.

Once enabled, the slowdown is permanent, so it looks like they've set up planned obsolescence while maintaining plausible denial on the surface. They just "forgot" to include a feature to undo the slowdown when a battery is replaced.
 
xrealm20 said:
lol, lawyers will get 95%, and we all will get $5.00.

I just replaced the battery in one of my iPhone 6, and it really makes a difference... Considering replacing the battery in the iPad Air2 that's in the house, since it seems to have gotten slower as well...
Click to expand...

I replaced the battery on my 6 plus that's on 9.3.3 and it still slows down and crashes
 
oROEchimaru said:
My wife's phone (iphone 6plus) working fine gets ios11 > slows as heck. Takes 5-10 seconds to open apps. If you keep them open they are fine, but it is a dog. The other thing is its constantly syncing/refreshing even with most apps disabled and it also slows down during those times. it just seems worse each time a new ios version comes out.
Click to expand...

I'm still on 9.3.3 and have the same issues. Can't even swipe right on tinder anymore :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top