https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/06/apple-commits-to-5-years-of-iphone-updates-though-it-usually-releases-more-anyway/
UK regulation requires companies to say how long they plan to provide support.
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?
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
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.
They did offer cheap battery replacements to anyone with the affected models, essentially just covering the labor cost. Like $30 for a brand new battery.
No one makes batteries easy to replace on flagships these days because everyone is more concerned with waterproofing and form factor than they are with ease of battery replacement. I do miss the days of my old HTC Sensation, where I could just pop the back off and swap out the battery. I would carry around charged spares with me, so I would just turn off the phone, swap the battery, and have full battery instantly.
Oh I thought it was just to get some extra juice out of the batteries, thanks for the info
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
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.
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.
A what’s new pop-up that would immediately be closed by 99.99% of users because the patch notes literally take twenty minutes to read (I read them all). It’s not useful to waste time adding a dialog that the vast vast majority of users aren’t going to use and that users that want to see it can literally just click the update notes in the settings dialog.
Pop up
"Hi, you're battery is getting old. Would you like to enable a mode that slows down your phone to preserve battery life, Yes or No."
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
This isn’t why they did it. Degraded Li-ion batteries cannot sustain their rated voltage at high currents due to increased internal resistance. Sufficiently undervolted CPUs/memory cells produce errors (specifically bit flips), which can rather quickly lead to memory corruption and a crash.
Reducing the CPU frequency (thereby reducing the peak current draw) is practically necessary in the face of a degraded battery. Various laptops were infamous for not doing this, because it resulted in a ~20-30 minute battery life, as the voltage drop became too great once the battery charge drops below 80-90%. Within the context of a smartphone, neglecting to use the remaining 80-90% would make it basically useless.
What Apple (and the rest of the smartphone industry, at this point) really needs to do is make their batteries replaceable.
I suppose it may be the Mandela effect, but I thought they did announce it, just not everyone read it.
Just like the idiots at work who ignored a newsletter, two email blasts and announcement on a support text that there would be an upgrade. Then marched blindly ahead for the three week transition, ignored the support threads about upgrading, and it was suddenly our fault when the old systems “disappeared without warning”
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.
when Apple goes to such great lengths to ensure planned obsolescence.
My brother in J-Town, they release full OS updates for five year old phones, and security updates for eight year old phones.
There are LOTS of reasons to hate Apple. Support for older devices isn’t one of them.
Which is completely meaningless when you can't repair the hardware 🤦 It's okay, you don't have to defend the corporations to make yourself feel better about your poor purchase decisions...
Which is completely meaningless when you can't repair the hardware 🤦
Well sure, their anti-right-to-repair shit has been very frustrating. Certainly something worth hating them for. But you can repair those devices if you get a certified shop to do it. Or if you don’t mind not having biometric sensors or NFC. It isn’t an example of planned obsolescence, just an example of poorly communicating and handling potential security concerns. You’ll note that Apple isn’t alone in this (not that this excuses the behavior).
It's okay, you don't have to defend the corporations to make yourself feel better about your poor purchase decisions...
I’m not defending anyone. Hate on whomever you want, just hate them for accurate reasons. I was a proud OnePlus user when the Apple battery throttling went down, but I bothered to educate myself on the subject. It was poorly handled, but it wasn’t planned obsolescence.
They want to support their old devices for the same reason they don’t want to support Android with iMessage: they want parents to give their children their old Apple devices so the whole family gets locked into their ecosystem. That’s shitty. That’s worth hating them for.
But you can repair those devices if you get a certified shop to do it.
No you can't. Apple has contracts with component manufacturers barring them from selling board level components to anyone. You can only buy complete assemblies which usually end up costing close to the price of an entire new device.
They also put a 500% premium on storage upgrades. And if you buy an identical device and drop it in, it will not function at all.
Or if you don’t mind not having biometric sensors or NFC
I dunno how you can just drop this and pretend like it's not fucking appalling and intentionally malicious.
It isn’t an example of planned obsolescence, just an example of poorly communicating and handling potential security concerns.
That is some made-up bullshit if I've ever heard it.
The evidence against Apple and planned obsolescence is astounding and undeniable.
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.
It’s more like a phone that slightly slower, or a phone that will randomly turn off. Pretty sure everyone would want the first.
The phone would shutoff because the battery would under volt, it was usually around an hour. So what did you think you were correcting…?
You’re being less specific lmfao.
It had nothing to do with the capacity of the battery. It had to do with providing instantaneous high current when doing something demanding. Old batteries couldn’t do this and voltage would drop to unsustainable levels causing a brown out/black out.
Because the capacity was diminished…. New batteries didn’t have this issues since they were… well new…and had the capacity.
In a fully charged battery you could run demanding stuff, it’s only when the charge depleted that it became an issue, which is it couldn’t acces the capacity for the extra voltage anymore.
Without capacity, you can’t provide the high current… they’re literally related and go hand in hand……..
Again, you’re literally explaining more or less the same thing, in a far less technical way… so sure to a laymen you’re “correct”, but that’s where it ends.
But it’s NOT a capacity problem. The phone would turn off and then turn back on. The batteries still had power.
It’s funny you say I am less technical when I describe the exact technical reason for a shutdown. You just keep saying the same thing.
It’s a chemical aging issue with batteries. As they age they cannot provide the same amount of current at the same charge level.
Current draw is not even close to steady, there are lots of spikes. It’s the spike that is a problem.
If you had a new battery that had say 500mAh of charge remaining the issue wouldn’t happen. If you had an old battery with 2000mAh of charge remaining it’s very possible the issue happens.
Hopefully this is a simple way to describe to you that capacity does not matter. It’s all about current.
Yeah the problem isn't so much that apple did that (a slower but functional device is infinitely better than a device that doesn't function), but that they didn't communicate it to users, and even after a battery replacement, the phone would often stick to being throttled (not sure if this was just for third party repairs or all repairs, but either isn't acceptable).
I believe that was for incorrectly done 3rd party repairs. I believe they did add it to release notes that nobody reads, but essentially you are correct. They got sued not for slowing the phones down, but for not being transparent about it.
If by "incorrectly done" third party repairs, you mean ones that don't subscribe to apple's repair programme that insists on you giving up user's personal information, only using Apple parts both in the device and for the disassembly, and paying Apple fees, then sure.
You even have to disclose financial and tax information of your entire business to Apple. Plus they put restrictions on repairs - i.e no repairing individual components on PCBs, you have to replace the whole board.
But that's not how third party repairs should be done and you'd be massive cunt for championing that kind of bullshit business practice.
I think it’s more about using shitty batteries. Some 3rd party shops will buy the cheapest batteries in order to get a cheaper fee/make more money. From experience the cheap batteries are horrible and don’t anywhere near the performance of a quality battery.
Those updates are easy when you have to release an system update to update the safari browser. Hell, you could call it a major security fix and fix some security issue on an old phone and every fanboy would be like "OMG iPhone 3s got an update.🤤" whereas Google can just ship browser fixes over the app store.
And version history means jack all when you can just name releases as you please. Google has been doing the same thing last 5-10 years. Emoji mixers, magic cleaner, launcher with google search bar at the bottom, turning a toggle into a big button on nav bar, enabling aren't major updates. Sure there are underlying changes, but they're mostly security patches and bugfixes. Android is still a bloated mess that needs ungodly amount of RAM and processing to keep even few apps running reliably in the background.
And guess where did Google learn this deceptive "long term update support" trend from?
The only thing they'll need is to decouple chrome and require a system update, and they could be providing updates for a decade.
Those updates are easy when you have to release a system update to update the safari browser. Hell, you could call it a major security fix and fix some security issue on an old phone and every fanboy would be like "OMG iPhone 3s got an update.🤤" whereas Google can just ship browser fixes over the app store.
Except that’s not what Apple means when they say they’ll update phones for five years. Security fixes aren’t the same as full iOS versions.
iOS 17, which came out September 2023, is available for the iPhone XR and XS, which came out in September of 2018. That’s a full OS update with all the non-hardware-based bells and whistles.
Security patches may very well release for older phones, but not full OS updates. Earlier this year they dropped a security patch for the iPhone 6S, a phone from 2015.
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.
They’ve been doing this, but because others have not been doing this, there is now regulation in this space.
Apple had to disclose this in writing to be fully compliant with PSTI.
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.
First of all, you're implying it runs latest Windows - but Windows 11 shipped a few years ago.
Second - not really a fair comparison. 18 years ago the iPhone didn't even exist. And the oldest model (17 years old) had really weak hardware. 4GB of storage, 128MB of RAM, and the CPU was an order of magnitude slower than current spec CPUs (it was also 32 bit - and 64 bit ARM is a completely new architecture - similar to the failed Itanium).
Even if it was supported, it would be a horrible experience.
I don’t believe you. There’s no way 20 yesr old hardware can run windows 10 you’re just lying
try it yourself, but dont expect it to be good. a lot of hardware sold today, especially very cheap hw on the 3rd world, still has similar performance than 15year old hardware. think atoms celerons and such.
if it were up to me id be running linux on it, but it works if you need it to.
x86 hardware is standardized in a way where you don't need to port an os to them, it just runs with generic drivers.
arm still needs a custom kernel and completely different drivers to even boot, because every manifacturer can implement it completely differently.
there are efforts to fix this (namely project mainline and some work on arm uefi standards) but they arent done and wont be for a good while.
arm still needs a custom kernel and conpletely different drivers to even boot, because every manifacturer can implement it completely differently.
Dunno why you’re getting downvoted, this is correct. ARM makes comparatively very expensive to maintain an OS over a variety of CPU models. The specialization required by each Cortex revision (and beyond that, each manufacturer adaptation) is too intense for a world trying to conserve resources.
x86 hardware is standardized in a way where you don't need to port an os to them, it just runs with generic drivers.
That being said, I’m honestly shocked your friend doesn’t run into issues. Several ISA extensions have been released for x86 since the Core 2 Duo days, and I have to imagine software incompatibilities appear semi-frequently. Running Windows 10 on that can’t be a good experience.
I have to imagine software incompatibilities appear semi-frequently. Running Windows 10 on that can’t be a good experience.
actual issues are rare actually, it pretty much just works as long as the hardware supports the features the application requires. if it doesn't it will likely throw an error and not run.
you are right in that its an awful experience though, its usable but you have to debloat it and even then its slow. can't watch hd video either.
Still low, my lineageos phone is going 8 years and is on latest android (and the device wasn't new when I bought it).
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
And if you stay that many versions behind, you carry a gold mine of vulnerabilities that can be exploited. Your phone might work, but it’s far from a safe or good idea.
I'm on Android 9 and the only apps that haven't played nice are a couple banking apps.
You apple fanboys are exaggerating that. On the 2.5 billion android devices, 88% of them aren’t running the latest version and probably would never get it. Yet I don’t see any widespread hacking.
I responded to the wrong comment. The same person said that they are still running android 9 on their phone. It is a couple comments up from this one.
902 security vulnerabilities published for Android 9, 179 of which are “critical” (9+) vulnerability scores.
Including “This could lead to remote escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.”
Yeah, no thanks.
most of them if not all are mitigated by google play services. otherwise there would be 2 billion of infected android phones and there would be many alarmist posts like when ten years ago stagefright happened
Android and iOS developer here. Web and app.
I have so many damn phones floating around my damn desk. I have near old iOS devices that are still solid for web browsing.
The bigger problem is that mobile processors saw MASSIVE performance changes over the past decade, and apps that are developed for new silicon run like shit on old ass hardware.
In other words, performance with new apps is the pain I feel first. Browsing the web on an old iPhone 6 is generally fine.