Tech Industry
2d
52914
Goog Employees Arrested
2024 Tax
Yesterday
3101
Biden’s new tax proposal is wild
Layoffs
2d
40729
Google CFO confirms 'large-scale' layoffs (Apr 17)
Tech Industry
Yesterday
448
Which company’s employees are most insecure?
Tech Industry
Yesterday
481
Chances of meta clearing E5 with screwing up one coding one round and acing all other
This is interesting, but I don’t think Apple made the wrong call on their decision. Maybe it should have been explained to the public, which is a PR problem...but the decision Apple made was the correct one based on a User Experience/Product Management perspective in my opinion. The issue is, Lithium batteries are not great...but it’s the best one on the market today. Batteries die. Apple chooses to prolong the life of your battery, but reducing the performance. It makes sense. So the worse your battery gets, the slower your phone gets. Why have a phone that is speedy, but needs to live on a charger? Is it not better to have a phone that is functional, but is slower when transitioning between apps? I personally believe it is more important to have a phone that lasts longer throughout the day than it is for it to be speedy and responsive. But now that you know...battery health effects the performance of your device, you understand that if you are experiencing intolerable performance, it might be time to take it to a shop to replace your battery. This more than likely this happens around that 2-3 year mark when you are eligible for an upgrade. Which is normal, it even happens to laptops. I used to work at Best Buy and some people would come in after 6 months to a year to replace their battery. Lithium batteries make them last longer, but they still wear out in a couple years...maybe a little longer depending on the work that you do. So you do the math.... 1) you can replace your own battery, there are plenty of tutorials on how to do it on YouTube. If you don’t feel comfortable changing your own battery: 2) Pay to replace the battery which can cost about $100+/- at Apple or another store.... 3) or get into another contract for 24-30 months which will cost you $800+/-. Your choice. What are your thoughts? Do you agree with their decision? Should they have been more transparent? Do you think other companies also do this?
I don’t know how much I believe this excuse... If they really cared, they’d let you keep your phone permanently in battery saver mode. As soon as your phone charges over 80%, it gets disabled... & if your bluetooth has been off for > 1 day, they automatically turn it back on.
That’s true. I haven’t really thought about leaving the phone in battery saver mode.
I have used phones and laptops in the past. Their batteries degraded over time and I would either replace the battery or the device. With the iPhone I have, it takes 10-15 sec to open any app that is not in memory and the slow down started a few months ago after a certain upgrade. Would Apple rather have the battery degrade and consumers think the problem is the battery OR have people think Apple is doing something sinister to get them to upgrade their device?
Well judging by the post how much did you get paid buddy?
Zero. I think it was a good conversation to have among other designers.
How about giving users the option to make an informed choice?
That’s not what Apple does though. They are design first. They take away that choice because they put so much emphasis in User Experience. They feel that these things are issues that should be resolved by the designers, not the consumers. “It just works” wouldn’t just work, if they left that choice to the consumer.
I get that - I really do; but in this kind of instance it feels disingenuous to pretend the decision to not allow that control in the settings menu isn't plain dishonest. Anyway - we'll see where it goes from here or if they even do anything with this.
Are they going to speed it up again after you replace the battery? I think not. Otherwise they would make it run at full speed while connected to a charger
Bastards! what if car manufacturers did this kind of stuff in thier software. Maybe like one company did with diesel engines.
That’s interesting...I don’t think auto manufacturers are concerned with making a car last longer. They would rather you trade in and buy a new car. Once you get out of warranty, your car begins to break down and costs of repair is really expensive. Apple has invested interest in making sure their devices last longer because they will continue to get revenue through iTunes. An auto manufacturer, is similar to Samsung, LG, Motorola or HTC. Their profits only come from that initial sale. They do not make money off of the Google Playstore. This is why I don’t think they put as much effort to making updates readily available for their devices.
At least the class action suit got start today.
Fuck those guys
It was the right call. Just very poorly communicated.
Yeah, they’re thinking about prolonging the life of your device, that’s why they slow it. Cause that’s how they make money, right? Oh, wait...
Doesn’t most of their revenue come from iTunes, not hardware. The sales of apps, music, tv/movies. I was told that-that was the reason why they push updates as far back as they could, so older devices can have access to the App Store.
But you’re right, it will help push consumers to purchase another device. Especially since this would typically be the time they could renew their contracts.
The problem is that you were not informed that $100 option exists when you hit the slowdown.
I totally agree, which is why I’m thinking this is just a bad PR thing. Maybe being a little more transparent would have been much better.
I guess what is important is to know how much the user needs to know. There are a lot of decisions made on a daily basis on many products that never are explained to the consumer.