David Hanak As soon as Apple officially admitted that the changes in iOS are slowing down iPhones, it was clear that it would be even more fun. Basically, the second day after the publication of the official press release, the first lawsuit was already filed, where else than in the USA. It followed several others, whether it was common or classic. Currently, Apple has almost thirty lawsuits across several states, and it seems that the company's legal department will be quite busy at the beginning of 2018.
It could be interest you
Dan Pražák There are 24 class action lawsuits against Apple (so far) in the United States, with more being added every week. In addition, Apple also faces lawsuits in Israel and France, where the whole case could be the most complicated, since Apple's behavior there is classified directly as a violation of a specific consumer law. The plaintiffs want a plethora of different compensations from the company, whether it is financial compensation for all those affected due to the targeted slowing down of their devices, or asking for a free battery replacement. Others are taking a slightly more lenient approach and only want Apple to inform iPhone users of the state of their phone's battery (something similar should arrive in the next iOS update).
It could be interest you
The law firm Hagens Berman, which has one nutritious legal duel with Apple behind it, also opposed Apple. In 2015, she managed to sue Apple for $450 million in compensation for unauthorized price manipulation within the iBooks Store. Hagens and Berman join everyone else in saying that Apple engaged in "a secret implementation of a software feature that purposefully slows down the affected iPhone." As one of the few lawsuits, it thus focuses on Apple's collusion, instead of challenging iPhone slowdowns per se. It will be very interesting to see how these lawsuits develop further. This whole case could cost Apple a lot of money.
Fingers crossed for all the plaintiffs.
Fingers crossed for Apple.
Fanaticism is the worst thing in the world
So if you like those examples, here is one especially for you, so if you have a car (a Porsche is needed) and someone limits your speed to 40 km/h so that your engine wears out less, you will thank him and say wonderful, that is very deviant logic
But it's clear that Apple didn't do it for the customers, but for themselves and bigger profits to force you to buy a new model, it's impossible to say
That's logic like a pig! ??
Your analogy is correct like this:
You have a high performance car and you are running out of gas. By temporarily limiting the power/speed, the consumption will be reduced and you will be able to drive even further on the last remaining gas. As soon as you fill up with gas, the car's performance will return to its original value.
Instead of your engine unexpectedly shutting down in the middle of an intersection and your car stalling.
And according to you; if you drive your car in a crisis situation, does that force you to buy a new car?? Wouldn't it force you more that the car wouldn't run anymore? ???
PS: If you wanted to respond to my examples, you didn't even hit the thread. ? It just adds to your logical reasoning ability. You fanatic! ?
Is the reduction in performance necessarily temporary?
That's how Apple declares it.
1) The slowdown should only be for more demanding operations.
2) The old battery will be replaced with a new one, and it will not slow down even the most demanding operations.
This reminds me of the hijab case at school.
The cat got an asylum with us, i.e. help and protection. And instead of gratitude, he sues our country for not providing positive discrimination.
The same applies to people suing Apple for extending the possibility of using a phone with an old battery, or that the phone with an old battery does not turn off at a critical moment, and the user can continue to use it.
Like suing the ice cream man for giving you more ice cream. Or a baker, for a bigger roll. Or a shoemaker, for a better sole. … ?
So what you write are stupid examples. You don't get anything bigger or extra from Apple here. The slowdown is so drastic that you can't avoid your phone when the battery is less than one percent, but it is crazy and extremely slow even when you have a full battery. So take your pick. Full power until, let's say, 20% battery, or slow crap all the time? Personally, my phone is ringing, I can already hear it but I still can't pick it up and I can't see the ringing screen. Great.
Silly, because it's not about the current percentage of battery charge, but about the total wear, or battery age.
When you have a 6 year old battery, you will understand. Even at 100% charge, the phone can turn off when you want it to do a more demanding task.
However, no one has yet been able to verify this with the iPhone6. My experience is with an even older iPhone, where, unfortunately, they did not yet have the functionality of slowing down to prevent spontaneous shutdown integrated.
What you describe is a completely different case.
You are mixing apples and pears.
You stupid examples. ?
The "extra" is the possibility of using the phone even when it would otherwise be switched off.