Posted on 01/03/2018 9:10:20 AM PST by fireman15
Most phone owners come to realize that an old battery is a weak battery, one that gradually loses capacity. But it turns out that an old battery can also be a performance-killing battery, as evidenced by Apple's recent revelation: Owing to an intentional software feature, some iPhones will run slower if they have older, failing batteries.
Fortunately, there's a simple fix: Get a new battery. Previously, Apple charged $79 for such a swap, but effectively immediately, you can get a replacement battery from Apple for just $29. That's for any iPhone 6 (£27.00 at uSwitch) or later.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnet.com ...
There are fifteen.
Maybe. But the only winners will be the attorneys. To Apple this is more of a publicity fight than a legal battle. Class action attorneys are already sensing blood in the water and a whole batch have jumped into the pool. They are obviously hoping that Apple will pay off the class action attorneys to get this all swept under the rug with as little fanfare as possible.
I turn 60 this year so I switched to Cricket. I got a Samsung Amp Prime 2 for $20 when I switched. I gave my S6 to my son because he broke his
YAY!
So the phones that need it the most...the 5 series and older, aren’t eligible. Real nice, Apple.
When Apple stopped the Final cut Pro app at FCP7, and introduced Final Cut Pro X, they ended the business relationship with video equipment sales companies.
That move cost me about $60,000 a year, so I am not going to feel sorry for Apple and their battery problem, much less the lawsuits. LOL.
The batteries in those older iPhones were made by Amperex Technology Limited, the same battery maker who supplies Samsung phones. As of the iPhone 8 and X, LG supplies the batteries.
I have an on going pay out from Kia class action lawsuit about mileage statements. So far I’ve collected almost 380 dollars
None of those iPhones 5s models and earlier will load the modern processor intensive apps nor will they use the iOS 10.2.1 or iOS 11.2 that has the Battery Management System that promulgated this tempest-in-teapot that began this kerfuffle because people had not replaced their batteries.
In addition, the percentage of people who are using pre-2014 iPhones was only 7% as of March 2017, it is much smaller now. The iPhone 5s was released in 2013.
Good to hear from you my friend. But Swordmaker, are you throwing me softballs these days? Ha ha!!! You mean the same supplier whose battery caught on fire on a Southwest Airlines flight, and caused Galaxy Note 7 phones to be banned from all commercial airliners and passenger trains ?
Could be. Apple elected to settle a class action suit after 3M found out that their water damage indicators would turn red or pink—which voided Apple's warranty due to "water damage" which was listed in Apple's warranty as specifically voiding the warranty if the iPhone got wet by falling into water—by mere exposure to atmospheric humidity of as low as 50%. Oops!
People living in foggy or rainy environments had Apple deny legitimate repairs or replacements of their iPhones while they were still under Warranty due to 3M's defective water damage indicators. The settlement for class action members was a bit more than $200.
The attorneys involved got several million. The total settlement was $53 million. The cost of the suit was shared by Apple and 3M due to 3M's warranty to Apple.
3M came up with a much less sensitive water damage sensor for later iPhones.
Or a battery replacement certificate to get your battery replaced for $39!!!
Or a $29 credit towards a new iPhone...
depends on what court the case is in...
Well there you go being all logical and stuff...
What does Apple need to be sued for? Can you enumerate their sins and the tangible losses from said sins?
But if you make the device larger -that doesn’t diminish the need for a protective case - which means an even BIGGER package after all is said and done.
Consumer demand - it is what the free market/capitalism is all about. The vast majority of consumers want bigger screens, but smaller and lighter devices overall. They don’t want a brick -
I am sorry, I forgot to italicize the words of the person I was quoting. The primary reason they currently have 15 different class action lawsuits filed against them are because the attorneys are all betting that Apple will pay them all off. They smell blood in the water.
Softballs? No, I just set you up.
You don't seem to be aware that the REASON the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 batteries were catching fire, and even exploding in a few instances, was not defective batteries, but rather, a defective engineering design by Samsung in how they designed and BUILT the Note 7.
Samsung's final report on what caused the fires found a cascade of causes:
In an effort to keep the size down, Samsung's engineers did not allow sufficient space inside their phone case for the normal expansion a Lithium Ion battery must have when it normally charges and discharges. . . but then they designed the Note 7 for fast charging, which causes even more expansion than slow charging does.
Then, in assembly, after not allowing sufficient space for expansion of the selected battery, a decision was made by management to increase the battery size by 5% capacity which fit in the space available, but used the entire expansion space and then a bit more, so they actually compressed the battery as they closed the case, which in some instances, put the circuitry of the cells inside the battery too close together so that when they did swell, they would arc across.
It was determined that all of these errors on the part of Samsung, design, manufacturing, compression, fast-charging, swelling with no room for expansion, choice to use a 5% greater capacity battery by management at last moment, arcing of compressed swelling cells under charge/discharge, all resulted in a perfect storm causing the failures of the batteries. . . which had nothing to do with the quality of the batteries suppled by Amperex Technology Limited, which actually tested normally.
The batteries supplied to Samsung by Amperex, used in other models of their phones, had the expected one in 8 million to 10 million per year failure rate of all other Li-Ion batteries in the industry. . . the same failure rate observed in Apple iPhones. The batteries installed in the Note 7, after all of the errors above, were exhibiting a failure rate of one in 8000 per month (!), which when calculated out of a period of two years, indicates that almost all of the Note 7 models would have exhibited problems by the end of that time. Samsung had to recall all of them considering in just six weeks on the market they had already had multiple personal injuries, two houses burned and four cars destroyed.
The primary reason that attorneys are suing is that they are greedy. One of these suits claims that his clients claim that Apple's only solution for their slowed iPhones 7 models was to buy a new iPhone X. . . but the timeline they are asserting cannot be correct because when they claim this the Battery Management addition to iOS was not yet released for the iPhone 7. . . and would not be until December 4, 2017. Ergo, Apple could NOT have deliberately slowed their iPhones and their claim is bogus. This lawsuit is demanding $999 BILLION!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.