- cross-posted to:
- apple_enthusiast@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- apple_enthusiast@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
This isn’t new at all. Apple has been consistent with long term updates for a while.
iPhones have been getting at least 5 major annual updates sense the iPhone 4. The average is 6 updates.
If anything, it gets to a point where the old hardware can barley handle the newer OS.
This is the equivalent of them promising to be called Apple in 5 years - it changes absolutly nothing.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_version_history
Edit: thinking about it, this gives them an excuse to reduce the number of years they support phones. Instead of 6-7, can we now expect that to become only 5 years?
This could be a huge loss disguised as a win
If they wanted to limit support to 5 years, they could’ve done so already. Apple never guarantees any support length, so they’re just committing to the minimum this new UK regulation requires. This is probably nothing more than a formality.
Didn’t Apple push updates to older devices that made them slower so that you’d buy their newest?
Depends how cynical you want to be and whether or not you trust Apple.
They claimed to slow things down so the aging batteries could run for close to as long as they could when they were new
and whether or not you trust Apple.
You mean the company that repeatedly lies about being eco-friendly? The one that lied about refurbishing traded-in phones that they sent off to be crushed? The one that constantly lies about repairability, citing “privacy and security”?
Why wouldn’t you trust them?
My guy, I never said whether you should trust them or not. I simply said “whether or not you trust Apple.” That is up for you to decide
My dude, that’s what we call a rhetorical question. It wasn’t some sort of accusation.
The one that lied about recycling traded-in phones that they sent off to be crushed.
Got a source for us on this?
The company they used for recycling services only deconstructed like ten percent of the phones due to the very complicated machines they use for deconstruction. They crushed (and then recycled) the rest. OP (that you responded to) is just making stuff up to get reactions.
Thank you for the article, but after reading the entire thing, all fault lay with the shitty recycling company not correctly following regulations and instead selling off phones, not on Apple since Apple has no way to recycle their devices themselves. I’m not an Apple dick-rider, but what you are saying and what the article is saying are two different things.
Can you please elaborate on where you determined Apple was fucking around so I may use it to spread the word? Because, no offense, but you sound like you are full of bullshit like everyone else in the internet. Please do not take this as a non-sequitur I’m really passionate on giving Apple the middle finger and you’re not helping.
What the recycling company did with the phones is completely irrelevant. The point is that Apple was advertising that these devices would be refurbished when they were sending them out to be destroyed.
When the lawsuits came to light, first reported in late 2020 by the Logic, a Canadian news outlet, industry observers were stunned. It wasn’t just the shocking scale of the purported heist; the incident implied that Apple was forcing a recycling partner to shred tens of thousands of iPhones that were apparently in prime condition for refurbishment. The timing was awkward: That same year, Apple had publicly committed to reaching 100% carbon neutrality across its product life cycle by 2030 and specified in an environmental report that “reuse is our first choice.” The shredding, critics said, contradicted Apple’s green marketing and was likely a way to keep cheaper used hardware from interfering with sales of new products.
https://9to5mac.com/2024/04/18/100000-iphones-stolen-instead-of-scrapped/
No one even knew about this until Apple sued said recycling company because they were not destroying them. They dropped the lawsuit because of all the bad press it was bringing them.
Just give me a performance slider so I can slow my phone down myself when I need it.
Anyway I have an android, battery lasts 2-3 days with normal usage (like 3h SoT per day for 3 days usage) so I don’t think I’ll have to worry about battery - and batteries are getting better with every new model, we’ll eventually reach a point where they’re a non-issue
It was more that older batteries can’t handle the power draw, so they would shut down if the power draw spiked by an expensive operation.
It was a really bad user experience so Apple throttled so phones wouldn’t crash.
Oh I thought it was just to get some extra juice out of the batteries, thanks for the info
If only they made their batteries easier to replace so this would be a non issue.
Never forget the iOS 4 update for the iPhone 3G and iPod Touch 2G.
This myth keeps propagating online and it seems people never try to even Google what the issue was.
I think the main issue (amongst the tech community) was that they did this with out making it known to users (patch notes don’t count - especially with autoupdates, who reads them?) the device just started getting slower.
If there was an option that was presented to users once the device got below 80% battery health to slow down the system to make daily batter life longer, then that would be an actually welcome feature. The problem was Apple just went a did it, and to a normal non-technical user, that means their phone is dying and they need to upgrade.
Why in the world do patch notes “not count”? The whole point of those is to communicate changes to the users.
Because in the world of auto updates, patch notes aren’t presented to users, and the average user isn’t seeking them out to read them. They essentially just wake up to a new OS.
A what’s new pop up or something would be more effective.
We know what Apple claims the issue was. You can’t blame someone who doesn’t believe Apple when they give them explanations of why their old devices suck when Apple goes to such great lengths to ensure planned obsolescence.
A battery that lasts 8 hours and is a little slower, or a battery that lasts an hour… huh that’s a pretty easy choice, but yeah it can always be swung to make someone look bad.
Public commitment to what? That’s two years less than Google’s latest Pixel.
Dude. Relax. This is definitely new, in that Apple never publicly committed to these updates in the past. They just did them. I would expect them to continue doing them.
From first supply date.
I’d be more impressed if the did it from last supply date.
They still sell the 13, so you’ll only get 3 updates, not 5 with this announcement.
My last phone lasted me 10 years, and even then I was tempted to just swap out some parts to keep it running.
There’s no reason 10+ years couldn’t be the norm for a smartphone, at least for people that don’t need a portable RTX 4090.
My Pixel 4a 5G just died. Screen turned off, nothing turns the phone back on. Had it for just over 3 years.
I have a Samsung S8 that I’m using right now, and it accomplishes the vast majority of my day to day needs. I’m only missing a better camera, and Android 9 prevents the use of some apps. This this is from 2017! Glad I kept it in a drawer.
iPhones routinely last 5-7 years just from security updates. I’ve heard of Genius Bar employees supporting iPhones over ten years old.
My iPhone 6 was still getting security updates last year. Battery lasted all day (I replaced it myself 2yrs before that). Solid phone. Handed it down to my daughter. Definitely at that point with technology that the requirements for a phone aren’t going up as fast as tech has so there’s less reason to replace things all the time. My last PC was up to 12years before I turned it into a server and built a new one.
All in all, Apple had to agree to this in writing to be compliant with PSTI. They’ve already been doing this for a long time.
This is kind of like asking the Fast and Furious franchise to agree, in writing, to talk about family.
Big difference: on android you can stay 6 version behind and you probably find any incompatible app during real life use. Browser and framework (google play services) continue to get updates
On iOS once your device stops getting updates it becomes ewaste as almost every app becomes incompatible after 1-2 years . Browser stops getting updates at all so your browsing experience will degrade fast
Not sure where you got that, my iPhone 6 was still getting OS updates last year (mostly security ones). I didn’t have any issues with the App Store either. Now there were a few apps like Pokémon Go that the phone couldn’t handle, but that’d be true io any old PC. Devs gear their apps to the larger percentage of devices so they can leverage the newer tech. Progress is what it is. Devs aren’t going to code for a 10yo phone if 0.5% of people have it.
That’s true, but this happens because usually 95% of people are always on the latest version a few months after the new version was released. For developers, it’s really not worth supporting older versions when the overwhelming majority of users already upgraded.
Still, many large companies still support older versions when the user base is very huge. I work for a huge bank and we had to support all the way to iOS 10. Only this year it was recently upped to iOS 14, which now covers probably 99.99% of users.
Don’t forget you can get 10+ years of software support through third party devs
LineageOS comes to mind
I’m on Android 9 and the only apps that haven’t played nice are a couple banking apps.
Unfortunately banking apps are a necessity for lots of people.
Certainly. Though of the 9 that I attempted to install, 1 required a newer OS.
