Apple iOS 11 Has A Nasty Secret Feature

[Swordsmyth]

Want to upgrade your iPhone or iPad because of poor performance? Close your wallet! New research suggests the fault actually lies with Apple AAPL -0.08%, which has hidden a secret power mode deep inside iOS that deliberately slows your device as it ages…
Credit for this unpleasant discovery is split between two sources. Firstly Primate Labs researcher John Poole who first discovered telltale performance readings in iPhones and iPads. And secondly acclaimed iOS developer Guilherme Rambo‏ who followed up Poole’s work and managed to unearth Apple’s secret power mode in iOS code.


Poole’s breakthrough came after he earlier discovered changing the battery on his iPhone 6S caused performance to almost double - something he confirmed with multiple tests - and it behaved like a new phone. Poole had done this on a hunch as iOS only indicated his iPhone 6S had a battery wear level of 20%.

Consequently Poole went back and plotted the kernel density of Geekbench 4 scores for the iPhone 6S running different versions of iOS. With iOS 10.2.1 (which Apple released to combat the long running 40% Bug - a problem I broke in November 2016) performance suddenly showed signs of being throttled. This effect become “even more pronounced” in the recently released (and controversial) iOS 11.2.
Poole redid these tests with an iPhone 7 and discovered Apple had repeated the trick. Nothing much happened with iOS 10.2.1 (the iPhone 7 was only four months old at the time) but significant impact showed up in iOS 11.2, which came two months after the launch of the iPhone 8. Based on his research, Poole states his believes “the problem is widespread”.
Intrigued Guilherme Rambo‏ followed up and found the power mode Poole theorised was there. Buried in iOS code is ‘Powerd’. In a series of tweets he revealed Powerd is “responsible for controlling the CPU/GPU speed and power usage based on iPhone battery health”. More virtuously Powerd has a failsafe which makes sure your iPhone, iPad or iPod touch doesn’t catch fire, but it also will increasingly slow your device as your battery degrades and operates independently of the official Low Power Mode.

Poole makes the point that until Apple speaks up, “This will likely feed into the ‘planned obsolescence’ narrative.” And while it may not be good publicity to tell a customer their 12-18 month old iPhone or iPad is now having its performance throttled because of battery wear, I’d argue there is a moral responsibility to tell them a new battery can fix things and there’s no need to spend circa $1,000 on new model.

More at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonk.../#46037fcdb8e7

[ClaytonB]

I'm often first in line to criticize these big companies for bad engineering - computer engineering is my field. However, in this case, I think that Apple is getting a bad rap without good cause. The feature is there because of the infamous exploding cell-phone batteries burning people - that's a complete product nightmare and it's better to have a few cranks call your product "planned obsolescence" than having your batteries explode and causing serious bodily injury. Unfortunately, these kinds of safety-override features tend to work based on "throttling" (I know, I've worked on just such a feature-set in a different product space) and throttling is a performance-killer. It sounds like their fail-safe formulas are tuned to be super-cautious so when the battery begins aging even slightly, it starts kicking in that feature ... something that wouldn't show up in the new product testing cycle because the overall design cycle in mobile/phone products is so short (9 months is considered a "long design cycle" for flagship products in that space). I've owned an early iPhone and never had any issues with it, years past its average lifespan. I don't think Apple is intentionally planning obsolescence in their flagship products, I think that they are running into "cross-product" design problems where engineering in one feature operates roughshod over engineering in another area. Safety trumps everything else, obviously - so when the safety engineering dept. drops a bunch of braindead tuning parameters that "increased consumer safety by 15% across the board", these parameters are going to go into the product even though the potential performance degradation over the product lifetime has not been adequately tested.

[Swordsmyth]

I'm often first in line to criticize these big companies for bad engineering - computer engineering is my field. However, in this case, I think that Apple is getting a bad rap without good cause. The feature is there because of the infamous exploding cell-phone batteries burning people - that's a complete product nightmare and it's better to have a few cranks call your product "planned obsolescence" than having your batteries explode and causing serious bodily injury. Unfortunately, these kinds of safety-override features tend to work based on "throttling" (I know, I've worked on just such a feature-set in a different product space) and throttling is a performance-killer. It sounds like their fail-safe formulas are tuned to be super-cautious so when the battery begins aging even slightly, it starts kicking in that feature ... something that wouldn't show up in the new product testing cycle because the overall design cycle in mobile/phone products is so short (9 months is considered a "long design cycle" for flagship products in that space). I've owned an early iPhone and never had any issues with it, years past its average lifespan. I don't think Apple is intentionally planning obsolescence in their flagship products, I think that they are running into "cross-product" design problems where engineering in one feature operates roughshod over engineering in another area. Safety trumps everything else, obviously - so when the safety engineering dept. drops a bunch of braindead tuning parameters that "increased consumer safety by 15% across the board", these parameters are going to go into the product even though the potential performance degradation over the product lifetime has not been adequately tested.

If it isn't planned obsolescence why don't they tell you about it so you can replace the battery?

[DamianTV]

If it isn't planned obsolescence why don't they tell you about it so you can replace the battery?

Because buying a whole new iPhone makes them more money than just selling a battery.

This Light Bulb Has Been Burning for 115 Years!


Just goes to show that Planned Obsolescence and Broken Window Fallacy are pretty much the exact same thing.

[Valli6]

Also, it thinks all Chinese people look alike.

Apple has been accused of racism, amid reports that the Face ID authentication technology on its new iPhone X is failing to distinguish between Chinese users.

A man from Shanghai bought his wife the new gadget soon after it was released last month, but she was shocked to discover it could be unlocked by her teenage son.

The man, identified only by his surname Liu, phoned Apple's customer service hotline to report the problem.

"Our son was using it and didn't know the password", he said, according to Shandong TV Station .

He was told it was an isolated case and was due to the fact his wife and son look very similar. However, Apple has reportedly launched an investigation into the Liu family's claims.

This is not the first reported incident of Chinese users being able to unlock each other's iPhone Xs...

(more) http://www.mirror.co.uk/tech/apple-a...-face-11735152

[ClaytonB]

If it isn't planned obsolescence why don't they tell you about it so you can replace the battery?

It goes to that old quote - don't assume malicious what can be explained by incompetence. I'm not saying Apple is incompetent - but I've been on teams (working for a different, major tech corporation) where this particular area of cross-product resulted in many, highly unexpected bugs. As I said above, throttling is the culprit because throttling is a preemption measure. Engineering in other parts of the design typically assumes non-preemption (i.e. that their clocks are reliable, that their code-sequences will execute in contiguous order, and so on) and system-wide preemptions, like throttling, break that assumption, inevitably resulting in unexpected behavior (bugs) that are typically not found in the product testing cycle precisely because... they're unexpected.

[Swordsmyth]

It goes to that old quote - don't assume malicious what can be explained by incompetence. I'm not saying Apple is incompetent - but I've been on teams (working for a different, major tech corporation) where this particular area of cross-product resulted in many, highly unexpected bugs. As I said above, throttling is the culprit because throttling is a preemption measure. Engineering in other parts of the design typically assumes non-preemption (i.e. that their clocks are reliable, that their code-sequences will execute in contiguous order, and so on) and system-wide preemptions, like throttling, break that assumption.

I've never believed in that proverb, In my experience the reverse is true more often.

I do recognize however that it does happen that way sometimes.

[Swordsmyth]

For years, we’ve reassured people that no, Apple doesn’t secretly slow down their older iPhones to make them buy new ones. If this must be done, it should be a setting. If it’s on by default, the user should be alerted the first time it happens.

From:
https://twitter.com/marcoarment/stat...rc=twsrc%5Etfw

[Swordsmyth]

Apple faces lawsuits over its intentional slowing of older iPhones

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/22/apple-lawsuits-intentional-slowing-older-iphones

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile...se-to-upgrade/

Yes, Apple is slowing down your old iPhone. But if you’re angry, you’re crazy

It’s true, there is a “feature” on your iPhone that slows it down over time. This isn’t a conspiracy theory anymore, Apple has said so after a researcher for Geekbench, and others before it, illustrated how much slower an aging iPhone 6S was compared to a sparking new iPhone 6S. Apple, most likely through gritted teeth, revealed the presence of algorithms that manage processing power on iPhone devices with batteries that are in poor condition.

Apple throttles the eager chip to avoid unexpected device shutdowns due to the processor asking too much of a doddering old battery. The iPhone remains active, just not performing at its best. If you own an iPhone 6, iPhone 6S, or an iPhone SE then it’s already embedded inside the software, ready to spring into action when the day comes. It’s also coming to the iPhone 7 as part of iOS 11.2, and presumably to other iPhones in the future.

It’s the end of the world as we know it. Planned obsolescence is real, Apple is actively pushing it, and we’ve been tricked into buying a phone that will absolutely need replacing in the future because Apple’s making it that way. Why weren’t we told? We needed that information to make an informed buying decision! Batteries last forever, right? After all, I planned to keep my current iPhone for at least two decades, and I expected it to be as spritely on day 12,875 as it was on day 1.

Chemistry 101
Settle down and stop being so 2017 about it. Apple was stuck between the internet and a hard place on this. Those crying about transparency would have been the same ones crying over said transparency if Apple had talked about this before it was forced to. Apple, like every business out there, was hardly going to make a big deal — and it would have been a big deal however the news was revealed — over what would have inevitably been construed as admission of fault in its hardware.

Planned obsolescence is real, Apple is actively pushing it.

Except it’s not a fault. It’s chemistry. Batteries don’t supply infinite power at a steady rate, they get less efficient over time because we’re right on the limit of what a Lithium-Ion battery can do. Add in our regular abuses of the battery, whether it’s running it out until the phone switches off, then using every charger to hand — fast chargers, battery packs, third-party chargers, in-car chargers — to top up the battery a little every day, and it’s perhaps surprising they last as long as they do.

Anyone complaining about the slowdown would also be complaining if the phone kept shutting down unexpectedly each day. Understandably so, especially if they were right in the middle of an angry tweet or Reddit post. Apple’s solution — yes, solution — avoids that, and the world will just have to wait a while longer to read said angry tirade because switching between apps took a few seconds more than it did six months ago.

If anything, Apple’s algorithm and throttling of old iPhones proves again how desperate the technology industry is for new, improved batteries. We’ve been waiting for years, and since a viable alternative hasn’t arrived yet, we’re left with clandestine software “features” making our old phones feel even older.

The solution no-one wants

Except we’re not. There’s a cure. It’s not expensive, it can be done in your Apple Store, and it’ll return your iPhone to tiptop condition. It’s called a new battery, and it costs from $80, depending on your phone. Tests have shown this stops the throttling, and as a wonderful surprise, your phone will last longer between charges too.

But that’s not good enough. CNBC’s Todd Haselton says Apple should offer one free “goodwill” battery swap to all those affected. Why, exactly? Companies (and people, if they cared to admit it) know the battery is the weak link in a phone, and many don’t even cover the cell for the entirety of its device warranty. Apple is one of the good guys, and covers it for a year. Honor, for example, covers the battery and charger for six months, while the phone is covered for 24 months. Demanding a freebie is like asking for free car tires because you spent hours doing donuts in the car park, and now they’re a bit bald.

How about the iOS equivalent of a check engine light?

Apple says its batteries are designed to retain 80 percent capacity for at least 500 charging cycles, which should take a couple of years to reach under normal use. At that time, if Apple’s throttling has kicked in, you can go and get a new battery fitted and everything will be fine. If it’s within a year, then you’ll probably get it under warranty.

But you don’t want to do that, and you never have either, right? We don’t want to know slowdown is due to natural degradation of the battery. We don’t want an easy and cheap fix, or a free battery replacement. We want to whinge and moan as we wander off to our nearest Apple Store, begrudgingly ordering a new iPhone because “the old one has got so slow.” You’ll swear it’s a conspiracy, and bask in the joy of the dopamine hit as the Genius hands over your shiny new model. “See you in 24 months,” you’ll imagine he slyly whispers as you leave the store.

Replacing the battery is boring. Conspiracy theories about slowdown and planned obsolescence, or just ignorance of the entire problem, are simply used as an excuse to upgrade. Which, if we’re honest with ourselves, we all want to do anyway.

Check your iPhone’s engine
Apple still needs to manage this situation now, so how does it get out of this and placate the angry mob? Now it has told us all about the throttling, because it was forced to, we’d suggest owning it. Not with great big notifications on the phone saying it’s throttling, or that the battery is coming to the end of its life, because those would be hateful. Instead, how about the iOS equivalent of a check engine light? A little indicator alongside the battery level meter that appears once 500 cycles have elapsed, or throttling kicks in early due to a duff battery.


When a car goes into limp home mode, or the check engine light comes on, we usually take it back to the dealer for a service. Why shouldn’t we do the same with a phone? Transparency achieved, and a hidden, misunderstood “feature” is turned into something helpful. All without much of a fuss. Ultimately, we want to understand why these things happen, and not feel as if we’re going mad because our phones do feel slower over time.

Imagine the happiness (and justification) of seeing the “time to upgrade” icon flash up on your old iPhone. The day has come, and you can point it out to everyone you meet. “Oh no, I need a new phone,” you’ll tut. It won’t actually mean that, but that’s what you’ll read into it. Will that make you feel better?

Alternatively, buy an Android phone and enjoy the eventual slowdown without anything being done about it at all.

[Swordsmyth]

https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile...se-to-upgrade/

Nice try but they could have had the phone notify you that the battery was old and slowing down your phone, then their customers would know to buy a new battery for much less than a new phone.

[AZJoe]

[AZJoe]

Well look at that pattern. Now isn't that special.




"The U.S. study analysed worldwide searches for 'iPhone slow' and found that the search term spiked significantly around the time of new iPhone launch.

It then compared those results with similar searches for the term 'Samsung Galaxy slow', and discovered the term was unaffected by new releases from Samsung.

The study, compiled by Harvard University PhD student Laura Trucco, follows claims that the Cupertino-based company is deliberately sabotaging its old products. ..."

[fisharmor]

It goes to that old quote - don't assume malicious what can be explained by incompetence. I'm not saying Apple is incompetent - but I've been on teams (working for a different, major tech corporation) where this particular area of cross-product resulted in many, highly unexpected bugs. As I said above, throttling is the culprit because throttling is a preemption measure. Engineering in other parts of the design typically assumes non-preemption (i.e. that their clocks are reliable, that their code-sequences will execute in contiguous order, and so on) and system-wide preemptions, like throttling, break that assumption, inevitably resulting in unexpected behavior (bugs) that are typically not found in the product testing cycle precisely because... they're unexpected.

Thanks, I'm always interested in hearing from people in the industry, as there's often a lot of chicken-little-ing here over IT issues.

The ultimate problem, as I see it, is that users of Apple products have been conditioned to think - as shown in this very thread - that cellphone batteries are supposed to cost $80 and are supposed to be only serviceable in an Apple Store.

Apple themselves keep the chassis (the ones I've been in, anyway) screwed together with star-headed screws. So you need to get specialty tools to get into one... and their internal layouts (again the ones I've seen) are generally more complicated than necessary, when compared to their competitors. So they take active measures to keep you from getting inside.

I think I've owned one Android phone that took longer than 3 seconds to get to the battery using just my fingers. That's only because it had a button catch.

The iPhone batteries themselves cost the same amount as any other cellphone battery, if you go with a non-OEM... under $15.

I have no pity on anyone caught up in this throttling problem. If you want to have some say over your phone, go get a phone you can control. Apple made it clear from the get-go that your input is not welcome. If you have an iPhone and want to learn how to tweak and maintain your own equipment, please do. I would be really happy for you to send money specifically to one of the Android phone makers that aren't trying to turn Android into Apple... if everyone leaves Apple and goes to someone like Motorola, then maybe Samsung will start to get the idea that one Apple is enough.

[ClaytonB]

OMG, here come the just-price theorists with their lawsuits. Two articles I stumbled on, recently:

Anti-poverty activist files $1 billion class-action lawsuit over bread price-fixing scheme

Computer latency: 1977-2017

The first link happens to correlate well with this outrage over Apple's products as if the obvious solution to the problem isn't to just use some other product available on the market. Consumer choice is the fuel that drives the discipline of the free market - when enough consumers abandon your product(s), you can go bankrupt, the ultimate disciplinary measure of the market. The State's central-planning interventions in the free market are always either redundant or damaging.

The second link shows that the problem of product slowness is affecting many products across the board and, in fact, Apple's devices are consistently among the most responsive devices out there. This is probably why people noticed the effects of this safety measure so easily - it's inconsistent with Apple's usual UX quality. I have long noticed the increasing latency in my own devices. The link explores some of the problems but the real issue is that manufacturers have been "persuaded" to design their devices with gaping backdoors called "updates" - all these uncontrolled, conflicting updates are slogging devices down to a crawl. You can test an update across a "representative set" of machines but, unless you're Apple, you cannot test it across all machines. And, of course, the "representative set" is always defined in terms of late models, old devices are defined to be "deprecated" so the effects of updates on old machines is simply ignored. This is why your Windows 7 desktop with a 4 gigahertz processor takes a noticeable 500-3000 milliseconds to respond to a user input from standby at the lockscreen.

If you (generic) want your UX back, stop blindly purchasing devices that are manufactured by companies who are being NSL gagged by the US intelligence complex to maintain backdoor-able "update services" that are then re-purposed to all kinds of feature bloat that is only tested on the most recent models, necessarily giving rise to obsolescence of older devices. You would think that the Snowden revelations would have been enough to open people's eyes but they weren't because people truly do not care about freedom from government surveillance. As long as you tolerate these insane USA PATRIOT Act powers like gagging National Security Letters, you can be sure that your mainstream devices will be slow as snot because they are not really consumer electronics devices, they are intelligence agency spying platforms. As with facebook, you are not the user, you are the product.

[Swordsmyth]

The chairman of a U.S. Senate committee overseeing business issues asked Apple Inc to answer questions about its disclosure that it slowed older iPhones with flagging batteries, according to a letter seen by Reuters on Wednesday.
The California-based company apologized over the issue on Dec. 28, cut battery replacement costs and said it will change its software to show users whether their phone battery is good.
Senator John Thune, a Republican who chairs the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, said in a Jan. 9 letter to Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook that “the large volume of consumer criticism leveled against the company in light of its admission suggests that there should have been better transparency.”
Apple said it will cut the price of a replacement for an out-of-warranty battery to $29 from $79 for an iPhone 6 or later. The company also will update its iOS operating system so users can see whether the battery is in poor condition and affecting the phone’s performance.

More at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-a...-idUSKBN1EZ1HE

[Swordsmyth]

Apple has been limiting the maximum performance of iPhones as the batteries within get older. The goal, they've stated, is to prevent random device shutdowns as time goes on and the battery's output starts to wane.But that's something they ought to have explained better from Day 1 of the software change; most users would never expect that swapping a battery could impact a phone's speed. It's a misstep that has since resulted in apologies and the rollout of a new battery replacement program.
And soon, it seems, you'll be able to turn off the battery/performance balancing system all together. Tim Cook mentions the coming change in an interview with ABC News' Rebecca Jarvis:

"We will tell somebody we're slightly reducing performance by some amount in order to not have an unexpected restart. If you don't want it? You can turn it off. We don't recommend it, because we think people's iPhones are really important to them, and you never can tell when something is so urgent..."

More at: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tim-c...020003352.html