Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

text.npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 266 posts

Re: Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

#221

Post by madjam002 »

kencausey wrote: post #205
yoz-y wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t battery a consumable and thus not covered by warranty by default? (Unless it has a manufacturing defect)

Is it reasonable to consider an element of a device a consumable if it is not user replaceable?

No, exactly. I got a free battery replacement on my Macbook Pro after 3 years of having it because the battery was unusable.

After going into the Apple store, they said that the battery was a "consumable part" and therefore not covered by the warranty. However, when I asked what the part number was and how I could order a replacement myself, they said that the batteries weren't serviceable and even they had to replace the keyboard unit as that contained the battery and it was all glued together.

I pointed out that they've therefore designed this product to fail after a few years as you can't order replacement batteries as a consumer, and they agreed to replace it for free.

Re: Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

#222

Post by Nullabillity »

arcticbull wrote: post #133
AlisdairO wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The battery may not be defective, but the device is. It previously performed acceptably, then started performing poorly, with no indication to the user that there was an action needed to restore acceptable performance. Nobody expects a magic battery fix, but they do expect to be told that their device has been slowed down.

The device is fine, and so's the battery. What I'm suggesting is that you consider the 100% performance mark to be far side of the performance curve at the end of the expected life of the device, so 80% capacity after 1000 charge cycles or 2 years, give or take. With that as your baseline ("100%"), if you can make the phone perform better than the that in the first few years you're offering an early-life performance…

The initial state is what the devices are reviewed on, and bought based on. And that's really the only reasonable approach, you can't really delay the reviews until the model is already dead and buried.

Re: Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

#223

Post by Nullabillity »

arcticbull wrote: post #128
stale2002 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can avoid this by reducing performance for the entire time you owned the device so nobody noticed, I guess, but that's all. Or you could notify people of the situation, and sell replacement batteries. That would have been the best solution.

Again, the battery is not defective, it is a certain number of years old. That is how batteries perform at a certain age. Batteries are consumable parts like tires and ink cartridges. It's like returning an ink cartridge at 50% capacity because it's only got half the ink left. Yes, that's the point, that's what cartridges do. This feature is designed to always get the most out of a battery. Is that really something t…

An ink cartridge at 50% still performs about the same as at 100%, it's just got less life in it.

A better comparison would be an unevenly worn toner cartridge, where someone keeps going "I don't see the problem, it prints just fine on the sides!".

Re: Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

#225

Post by acdha »

atlgator wrote: post #88

Is this not still happening though? My iPhone 8+ is incredibly sluggish on the latest iOS.

Look in the Battery section of Settings. The health will be displayed and there is an indicator if performance is being throttled due to battery degradation.

Re: Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

#226

Post by Tepix »

Spooky23 wrote: post #99
gpm wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fix for this is simple. Appropriately size the battery when designing and manufacturing the device so that it is still capable of running the device a few years into it's lifetime, instead of a few months. The after the fact fix for this is also to not refuse to fix your defective devices when customers bring them in under warranty claims , and definitely to not lie about them not being defective . You don't make…

I'm on year 3 of my iPhone 8, with 82% battery health. My total talk time is over 36 days , and I probably actively use it for non-talk tasks for 3-4 hours/day. In my experience, which included managing and oversight of the operations/budgets for BlackBerry, iPhone and Android fleets with 10-50k devices, early battery death is usually accounted for by poor environmental conditions like temperature extremes. The AFRs…

My iPhone 6S shut down in the cold (5°C) with the battery at 40-50%.

Apple replaced the battery.

Re: Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

#227

Post by pessimizer »

mlindner wrote: post #180
reducesuffering wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the crux of the issue. Apple had to make a call for their customers: ensure the low battery is as long-lasting and predictable as possible around 1-5%, or keep high performance as the phone battery degrades quicker and shuts off. I think many people thoroughly understand how crucial it can be to have that last 1-2% and going into a situation where you think you have 5%, but then the phone dies, is a p…

You're not understanding the issue here. This had nothing to do with how fast the battery degrades. This was only ever about how the phone acts with an already degraded battery. The two choices are 1. Shut off the phone suddenly if any high performance tasks are attempted 2. Throttle the phone performance to keep it from shutting off. Apple chose #2, which is best for customers, and got forced to pay $113M from it. I…

Apple chose to silently degrade the performance of their device, which would lead customers to think that their device wasn't capable of keeping up anymore, rather than that they just needed to change the battery. My guess is that they made a good portion of $113M from this (it's best for customers to drain their bank accounts) so no need to cry for them.

edit: and I'm reading that this would happen within the warranty period. It's best for customers to keep them from getting their device fixed during the warranty period.

Re: Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

#228

Post by pessimizer »

xchip wrote: post #68

What is the fine amount per user? I bet is going to be $5

I bet it's less than the profit made from people upgrading their iPhones early, or not sending them in for battery replacement while they were still under warranty.

Re: Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

#229

Post by Retric »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #166
arcticbull wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there some reason to think that's the case? Batteries are pretty consistent technology, roughly equivalent across manufacturers and all sourced from a pretty small pool of OEMs. If that's the case I'd love to know more!

Lithium ion chemistry can vary things significantly, but I was picturing simply putting in a larger battery for the hypothetical. The motivation is more hours of runtime, but as a side effect you have more peak watts available.

Now you’re paying to change voltage, which adds cost and heat. Sure, users don’t really notice that something’s wrong, but they get a worse device that costs more money and needs to heat throttle anyway.

Re: Apple Agrees to Pay $113M to Settle 'Batterygate' Case over iPhone Slowdowns

#230

Post by eknkc »

Razengan wrote: post #219
eknkc wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This right here is the reason Apple fans irritate me. I love Apple devices but the quality regressed in recent years, to the point that I left most of the ecosystem. But you can not have a healthy discussion about that because some people will come out and defend apple with their blood and tears. No matter ridiculous their stance is.

This right here is the reason Apple haters irritate me. I love Apple devices and the quality improved in recent years, to the point that I will never leave the ecosystem. But you can not have a healthy discussion about that because some people will come out and attack apple with their blood and tears. No matter ridiculous their stance is. It’s a real shame if hate and anger are more socially acceptable than defending…

I rest my case.
Post reply on HN