this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
232 points (93.6% liked)
Technology
59219 readers
4404 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.. no… that’s not the case at all. A larger battery with more capacity that is aged would do the same thing as a brand new battery with the same capacity.
They’re a function of each other and your description is now contradicting itself. Capacity is the end function, without voltage can’t have capacity… you’re claiming otherwise.
A 500mah battery can’t provide the same over voltage as a 2,000, you’re claiming it can, come on dude lmfao. Without capacity, it can’t tap the over voltage needed, so the phone crashes and reboots, until you try the same thing. The phone effectively becomes useless after an hour since it can’t do anything demanding anymore, I never said it was dead….
Current is a part of the calculation to get capacity…. You can’t have capacity without current (A)….. you can have current (A), but it’s useless without voltage, and voltage and current gives us… capacity!!
I’m done explaining. You’re still wrong. I understand max capacity is voltage*current but that literally does not matter. Study some electrical engineering and then get back to me.
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.
Sorry I hurt your feelings lol. I was only criticising a multi-trillion dollar company.
Ok cool, but what's the relevance?
Some batteries might be bad, so Apple gets to needlessly cripple your repaired phone's performance, unless you go through Apple?
How could you possibly argue that's not cunty behaviour?
If someone gets a repair with a non-OEM battery, and it turns out to be not good, then either let it shut down or throttle the performance as normal. If it turns out to be fine... don't. The device is capable of doing battery checks.
I really don't understand how you can defend Apple deliberately sabotaging performance over a part they know to be working fine.