As expected, Apple set to vanish Batterygate, dodgy audio lawsuits with money Apple is preparing to settle two lawsuits next month over alleged iPhone flaws, provided the respective judges agree to the terms of the deals. The first planned settlement, for In re Apple Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, 4:19-cv-05153-YGR, aims to resolve investor pique over the impact of "Batterygate" on Apple stock …
It was a reasonable technical fix for a design flaw. The issue is that end users weren't made aware of it and were even gaslit by Apple tech support, though this may have been inadvertent due to non-communication to technicians. If the performance of a device is deliberately degraded, even if said degradation is necessary, the customer should be made aware.
If I'm missing something, I suppose I fall into the category of a complete moron so I'd really appreciate you pointing it out.
The device would throttle its processors to avoid battery voltage droops that would cause it to shut down completely. Successfully making a large set of devices in the field work reliably, AVOIDING the need for device replacement.
Just like every modern device anywhere will throttle back in response to thermal conditions. Phones, tablets, laptops, GPUs, Xeons. Which you were aware of, right? … Right?
Yes, I'm well aware. The difference is that this was rolled out well after the device launch and installed without disclosure, likely because Apple didn't do effective validation of their device's operation after battery degradation (easily simulated). Worse, when caught, they basically lied.
The thermal throttling comparison makes no sense because that performs the same as at launch and is a demonstration of good manufacture diligence. Perhaps a better equivalent would be Spectre. In that instance, it was made clear that the fix would slow the affected processors, like all good manufacturers should do with updates.
“They basically lied”
Either they lied or they didn’t. Cite your sources.
The batteries in question had manufacturing defects that resulted in degradation over time. That’s hard to catch unless you want your vendor to pre-wear your battery by 25% before selling it. Server stuff - maybe. No consumer products get break-in tested to that level.
Thermal throttling is an apt comparison, despite your continued motivated reasoning. Enjoy your $0.17 check from the class action.
It's a bit weird that you're so eager to comment if you're unaware of the timelines but you can brush up here:
https://www.ifixit.com/News/11208/batterygate-timeline
I would say that saying it only affects a 'very small number', then releasing a software patch with no mention of the performance hit before finally admitting to having degraded performance almost a year later, when test results become undeniable, is a lie of omission.
The only way thermal throttling would be an apt comparison is if something happened along the lines of a manufacturer discovering a bad batch of thermal paste was used on a GPU, then issuing a hotfix that throttles the power further rather than admitting to the fault and offering replacements before their arm is twisted. Perhaps the underlying mechanism is similar but that's like saying the VW emissions scandal is okay because all modern IC cars manage their emissions through the ECU; it obfuscates the cause for criticism.
I thought - happy to be corrected - that the problems were caused by Apple's new OS being too much for the older phone. This is something they could have tested and avoided with a build for the older phone without the features that spiked the battery. I know it's a pain maintaining multiple builds or builds with device-specific features, but they do that today - there are features in the latest OS that my 13 and SE can't access.
>It was a reasonable technical fix for a design flaw.
I would have been a reasonable opt-in temporary fix. The correct fix, was a reasonably priced, and easy to do, battery replacement. Apple did not offer this until forced.
In reality it looked more like a convenient bit of planned obsolescence, which encouraged people to replace perfectly serviceable (ok, imperfectly serviceable).
It was also helping to mask the consequences of a glaring failing of the product's un-repairable design, from that small number of customers who might care.
Funny enough, this farce has its own wikipedia page. To quote it:
“Critics argued the slowdown amounted to planned obsolescence, however this may stem from the common misconception that all older iPhones were slowed down. Some have argued that introducing a feature to prevent handsets with degraded batteries from rebooting is in fact the opposite of planned obsolescence since a slower non-rebooting phone would be preferable to the alternative.”
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
