Apple battery throttling performance management is availalbe today

[ultred ragnusen]

https://9to5mac.com/2018/02/06/how-to-ios-11-3-battery-health-and-battery-throttling-disabling/

[Jolly Roger]

ultred ragnusen <ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:
> https://9to5mac.com/2018/02/06/how-to-ios-11-3-battery-health-and-battery-throttling-disabling/

No thanks. I’ll take extended runtime over spontaneous shutdown every time.
Have fun with your unstable devices if that’s what gets you off though.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[ultred ragnusen]

On 7 Feb 2018 00:04:24 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> No thanks. I’ll take extended runtime over spontaneous shutdown every time.
> Have fun with your unstable devices if that’s what gets you off though.

Why not both runtime & stability?

[nospam]

In article <p5fi0q$tu9$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen
<ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

>
> > No thanks. I▍l take extended runtime over spontaneous shutdown every time.
> > Have fun with your unstable devices if that┬ what gets you off though.

>
> Why not both runtime & stability?

that's exactly what happens before the battery starts to age.

as it starts to age, it's ability to source high current demands is
impacted.

there's no getting around the laws of physics and chemistry.

[Jolly Roger]

That's exactly what the feature does, silly. It increases stability by
preventing power surges that the battery cannot handle resulting in
spontaneous shutdowns. It increases runtime by preventing those
spontaneous shutdowns.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-06 15:56, ultred ragnusen wrote:
> https://9to5mac.com/2018/02/06/how-to-ios-11-3-battery-health-and-battery-throttling-disabling/

Not sure where I read it, but Apple did release some tidbits of information:

Throtting does not start until a phone has had its first unexpected
shutdown.

Throttling is dynamic based on the phone's evaluation of battery
capacity. (so older battery gets more throttlingt than younger one when
technique is triggered).

I *assume* (not confirmed in article I read) than an old battery at full
charge would have its dynamic throttling give 100% CPU and as charge
goes down, throttling would start at the point where the software thinks
full CPU use would cause shutdown.

Note that none of this deals with the issue of phone shutting down when
you start the camera as this is not related to CPU throttling.

[nospam]

In article <AUKeC.19662$9z2....@fx43.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Not sure where I read it, but Apple did release some tidbits of information:
>
> Throtting does not start until a phone has had its first unexpected
> shutdown.

yep. there's no reason to do anything prior to that.

> Throttling is dynamic based on the phone's evaluation of battery
> capacity. (so older battery gets more throttlingt than younger one when
> technique is triggered).

it also depends on momentary needs. if the battery isn't being pushed
hard, there isn't any reason to do anything.

> I *assume* (not confirmed in article I read) than an old battery at full
> charge would have its dynamic throttling give 100% CPU and as charge
> goes down, throttling would start at the point where the software thinks
> full CPU use would cause shutdown.

it depends on battery health and its ability to source sufficient
current, not state of charge.

> Note that none of this deals with the issue of phone shutting down when
> you start the camera as this is not related to CPU throttling.

actually it does. with an aging battery, it will take slightly longer
to launch the camera app to avoid a potential shutdown.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-07 17:21, nospam wrote:

> actually it does. with an aging battery, it will take slightly longer
> to launch the camera app to avoid a potential shutdown.

bringing Camera.App back to foreground isn't the big power hog. It is
turning on the camera circuitry and the portions of the CPU that handle
image processing. Bth happen at same time so big instant power draw.

In some instances, my phone shut not at the time of swicging to "Camera"
but when taking picture (at which point, this would likely be a CPU
issue since it has to do the capture, processing and compression).

[nospam]

In article <E8MeC.119839$qv....@fx33.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > actually it does. with an aging battery, it will take slightly longer
> > to launch the camera app to avoid a potential shutdown.
>
>
> bringing Camera.App back to foreground isn't the big power hog.

it is when first launched. suspend/resume is negligible.

apple said one of the areas in which the device may be slower is app
launch times.

> It is
> turning on the camera circuitry and the portions of the CPU that handle
> image processing. Bth happen at same time so big instant power draw.

that is also an issue.

> In some instances, my phone shut not at the time of swicging to "Camera"
> but when taking picture (at which point, this would likely be a CPU
> issue since it has to do the capture, processing and compression).

high current demands.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-07, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2018-02-06 15:56, ultred ragnusen wrote:
>> https://9to5mac.com/2018/02/06/how-to-ios-11-3-battery-health-and-battery-throttling-disabling/
>
> Not sure where I read it, but Apple did release some tidbits of
> information:
>
> Throtting does not start until a phone has had its first unexpected
> shutdown.

So much for the asinine claim that all iPhones get throttled after a
year, you dumb ass useless trolls. : D

> Throttling is dynamic based on the phone's evaluation of battery
> capacity. (so older battery gets more throttlingt than younger one
> when technique is triggered).

No fucking shit. That just so happens to be precisely what level-headed
critical thinkers (Apple's true loyal customers) would expect Apple to
do, rather than following some hair-brained, brain-dead conspiracy
theory to make people buy new phones. Some of us have been saying this
ever since the useless Apple-hating trolls claimed otherwise.

[sms]

That would be the optimal choice. Why would anyone think that they have
to make a choice between runtime and spontaneous shutdown?

I have had to choose between run-time and performance on my smart
phones. That's a reasonable trade-off. I have had to choose between mpg
and mph on my vehicles, another reasonable trade-off. I have had to
choose between maximum lumens and run-time on my bicycle lights. I have
never had to choose between run-time and stability on any product that I
can recall.

[ultred ragnusen]

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> So much for the asinine claim that all iPhones get throttled

The article said Apple /CHANGED/ the algorithm so it's very different now.

[ultred ragnusen]

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Not sure where I read it, but Apple did release some tidbits of information:

The article explained Apple changed the algorithm which is completely
different now that it's public than it was when it was a secret.

[Bernd Fröhlich]

sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> I have had to choose between run-time and performance on my smart
> phones. That's a reasonable trade-off. I have had to choose between mpg
> and mph on my vehicles, another reasonable trade-off. I have had to
> choose between maximum lumens and run-time on my bicycle lights. I have
> never had to choose between run-time and stability on any product that I
> can recall.

That was Apples original design. It gave you stability without choice.

Then some people howled because their devices worked stable but slower.
Now you have the choice: stable or slow. Thanks to some clueless people
:-/

[sms]

The choice should be a manual selection of a) stable, low-performance &
long run-time or b) stable, high performance, & short run-time.
"Unstable, high performance, and short run time" should not be a
necessary or available choice on any device. Even with a new battery,
many users would likely opt for longer run time and lower performance.

It would be perfectly okay to do a graceful shutdown when a phone is in
high-performance mode and the battery level is too low to support
high-performance mode, regardless of the total battery capacity.

It would also be perfectly okay to do an automatic transition to
low-performance mode when the battery level is too low to support
high-performance mode, regardless of the total battery capacity. This is
how many electronic devices work.

Many vehicles have performance mode and economy mode. Economy mode is
necessary to achieve a high EPA MPG rating, but many drivers prefer the
added safety of performance mode.

[nospam]

In article <p5hp8f$bpv$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> >> I have had to choose between run-time and performance on my smart
> >> phones. That's a reasonable trade-off. I have had to choose between mpg
> >> and mph on my vehicles, another reasonable trade-off. I have had to
> >> choose between maximum lumens and run-time on my bicycle lights. I have
> >> never had to choose between run-time and stability on any product that I
> >> can recall.
> >
> > That was Apples original design. It gave you stability without choice.
> >
> > Then some people howled because their devices worked stable but slower.
> > Now you have the choice: stable or slow. Thanks to some clueless people
> > :-/
>
> The choice should be a manual selection of a) stable, low-performance &
> long run-time or b) stable, high performance, & short run-time.
> "Unstable, high performance, and short run time" should not be a
> necessary or available choice on any device. Even with a new battery,
> many users would likely opt for longer run time and lower performance.
>
> It would be perfectly okay to do a graceful shutdown when a phone is in
> high-performance mode and the battery level is too low to support
> high-performance mode, regardless of the total battery capacity.

the problem is that the shutdown is *unexpected*, so you *can't* do a
graceful shutdown.

[Alan Browne]

The sole error on Apple's part was lack of transparency before this all
occurred.

--
“When it is all said and done, there are approximately 94 million
full-time workers in private industry paying taxes to support 102
million non-workers and 21 million government workers.
In what world does this represent a strong job market?”
.Jim Quinn

[ultred ragnusen]

On 7 Feb 2018 19:55:27 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> That's exactly what the feature does, silly. It increases stability by
> preventing power surges that the battery cannot handle resulting in
> spontaneous shutdowns. It increases runtime by preventing those
> spontaneous shutdowns.

You misunderstood everything everyone else understood.

[nospam]

In article <p5i4gu$vtl$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

<ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

>
> > That's exactly what the feature does, silly. It increases stability by
> > preventing power surges that the battery cannot handle resulting in
> > spontaneous shutdowns. It increases runtime by preventing those
> > spontaneous shutdowns.
>
> You misunderstood everything everyone else understood.

nope. it's other way around. *you* misunderstood, along with a few
others in this group.

[ultred ragnusen]

On Thu, 08 Feb 2018 13:31:25 -0500, nospam wrote:

> nope. it's other way around. *you* misunderstood, along with a few
> others in this group.

Stability or performance but not both after a year.

[nospam]

In article <p5i82q$16ck$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

<ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

>
> > nope. it's other way around. *you* misunderstood, along with a few
> > others in this group.
>
> Stability or performance but not both after a year.

wrong.

[sms]

Precisely. His statement is incorrect on multiple levels.

First, there should never be "power surges that the battery cannot
handle." The whole point of the DC-DC switcher inside the phone is to
provide a fixed voltage, at sufficient current, as the battery voltage
decreases, until the battery is exhausted.

"It increases runtime by preventing those spontaneous shutdowns" is
especially clueless and untrue. It increases run-time not by preventing
spontaneous shutdowns, it increases run-time by decreasing the load on
the battery. The prevention of spontaneous shutdowns is a side effect of
decreasing the load on the battery, but the spontaneous shutdowns should
never occur in the first place.

[nospam]

In article <p5ieph$lnd$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> >> That's exactly what the feature does, silly. It increases stability by
> >> preventing power surges that the battery cannot handle resulting in
> >> spontaneous shutdowns. It increases runtime by preventing those
> >> spontaneous shutdowns.
> >
> > You misunderstood everything everyone else understood.
>
> Precisely. His statement is incorrect on multiple levels.

it's exactly correct.

> First, there should never be "power surges that the battery cannot
> handle."

unfortunately, there are, and not just with iphones.

several android phones have sudden shutdown issues.

> The whole point of the DC-DC switcher inside the phone is to
> provide a fixed voltage, at sufficient current, as the battery voltage
> decreases, until the battery is exhausted.

the voltage is constant. it's the ability to source current that's the
problem.

> "It increases runtime by preventing those spontaneous shutdowns" is
> especially clueless and untrue.

wrong on both. it's exactly correct.

> It increases run-time not by preventing
> spontaneous shutdowns,

yes it does

> it increases run-time by decreasing the load on
> the battery.

also that.

> The prevention of spontaneous shutdowns is a side effect of
> decreasing the load on the battery, but the spontaneous shutdowns should
> never occur in the first place.

except they do occur, and not just with iphones.

the laws of physics and chemistry get in the way.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-08 10:27, nospam wrote:

> the problem is that the shutdown is *unexpected*, so you *can't* do a
> graceful shutdown.

Actually, in my experience, it does a graceful shutdown. The screen goes
dark, but you see a faint rotating thing as it shuts down then screen
goes black. This was for the post software fix at least, can't rememeber
if it did that on the first year before Apple admitted to problem and
provided software.

Note: the "shutdown" once Apple provided the software fix, wrote
information to disk about the sudden shutdown which would eventually get
reported to Apple.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-08 13:07, Alan Browne wrote:

> The sole error on Apple's part was lack of transparency before this all
> occurred.

No. the error is in designing phones whose power draw exceeded battery
capability after a year and not document that.

Imagine fuses in a home that, as they aged, would start to trip at much
lower amperage than rated, so everytime you turned on a stove element,
the whole house would shut down because fuse tripped.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-08 16:17, sms wrote:

> First, there should never be "power surges that the battery cannot
> handle." The whole point of the DC-DC switcher inside the phone is to
> provide a fixed voltage,

Is there DC-DC conversion between battery and circuitry? I know there
is between external power and battery (and would include charging logic
circuitry). But since battery voltage output has very narrow range, I
have to wonder if there is a need for DC/DC to run circuitry.

And even if there were a DC/DC converter between battery and circuitry,
this converter likely has limits on input voltage and if that drops
below the limit, the DC/DC circuit would fail.

> especially clueless and untrue. It increases run-time not by preventing
> spontaneous shutdowns, it increases run-time by decreasing the load on
> the battery. The prevention of spontaneous shutdowns is a side effect of
> decreasing the load on the battery, but the spontaneous shutdowns should
> never occur in the first place.

Apple has released that at least with 10.3, the throttling will not be
triggered until after first sudden shutdown. So unless you have a
shutdown, there is no throttling to extend battery autonomy.

Secondly, once that flag has been set, Apple has not yet documented
whether the throttling is always in effect, or if it kicks in only when
batter goes below a certain charge percentage (calculated based on
battery age/capacity/health). For instance, a 1 yera old battery might
have throttling kick in only when it gets to 30% charge, while on less
healthy battery, it might kick in at 60%.

This has not been documented so we don't know. Apple did state it was
dynamic so there is logic that calculate how much throttling is needed
at a particular time.

[nospam]

In article <ms3fC.18082$CZ2....@fx39.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > The sole error on Apple's part was lack of transparency before this all
> > occurred.
>
>
> No. the error is in designing phones whose power draw exceeded battery
> capability after a year and not document that.

except that they didn't do that.

the power draw is *within* the capability of the battery.

the problem is as batteries age, the battery's capability decreases,
while the phone still needs the same power to do the same things.

> Imagine fuses in a home that, as they aged, would start to trip at much
> lower amperage than rated, so everytime you turned on a stove element,
> the whole house would shut down because fuse tripped.

not a good analogy at all.

a better analogy is with cars, which modify performance and *don't*
tell you what's going on. an older engine won't perform the same as a
newer engine. even buying crappy gas might affect performance.

[nospam]

In article <jq3fC.18081$CZ2....@fx39.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > the problem is that the shutdown is *unexpected*, so you *can't* do a
> > graceful shutdown.
>
> Actually, in my experience, it does a graceful shutdown. The screen goes
> dark, but you see a faint rotating thing as it shuts down then screen
> goes black. This was for the post software fix at least, can't rememeber
> if it did that on the first year before Apple admitted to problem and
> provided software.

if it can shutdown gracefully, it will, but not all shutdowns will be
graceful.

if the battery is pushed too hard, the voltage will drop below what the
device needs to operate, at which point it simply shuts off. boom.
there is not enough power to keep it going to do a graceful shutdown.

[nospam]

In article <ay3fC.23922$d03....@fx37.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 2018-02-08 16:17, sms wrote:
> > First, there should never be "power surges that the battery cannot
> > handle." The whole point of the DC-DC switcher inside the phone is to
> > provide a fixed voltage,
>
> Is there DC-DC conversion between battery and circuitry? I know there
> is between external power and battery (and would include charging logic
> circuitry). But since battery voltage output has very narrow range, I
> have to wonder if there is a need for DC/DC to run circuitry.

not likely, and he's confused as to what a dc-dc switcher is used for.

> And even if there were a DC/DC converter between battery and circuitry,
> this converter likely has limits on input voltage and if that drops
> below the limit, the DC/DC circuit would fail.

yep.

as usual, he's talking out his ass.

> > especially clueless and untrue. It increases run-time not by preventing
> > spontaneous shutdowns, it increases run-time by decreasing the load on
> > the battery. The prevention of spontaneous shutdowns is a side effect of
> > decreasing the load on the battery, but the spontaneous shutdowns should
> > never occur in the first place.
>
> Apple has released that at least with 10.3, the throttling will not be
> triggered until after first sudden shutdown. So unless you have a
> shutdown, there is no throttling to extend battery autonomy.

yep.

> Secondly, once that flag has been set, Apple has not yet documented
> whether the throttling is always in effect, or if it kicks in only when
> batter goes below a certain charge percentage (calculated based on
> battery age/capacity/health). For instance, a 1 yera old battery might
> have throttling kick in only when it gets to 30% charge, while on less
> healthy battery, it might kick in at 60%.

they have documented what's going on, although not the precise levels.

> This has not been documented so we don't know. Apple did state it was
> dynamic so there is logic that calculate how much throttling is needed
> at a particular time.

that part is true.

it's a *momentary* throttle, not an overall impact.

most people won't even notice in typical use, which is why it took a
year to even be noticed, and only after scrutinizing benchmarks.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-08, ultred ragnusen <ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> So much for the asinine claim that all iPhones get throttled
>
> The article said Apple /CHANGED/ the algorithm

Show a shred of proof that Apple throttled all iPhones after a year. Not
holding my breath... #trollfail

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-08, ultred ragnusen <ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

It was never a secret since it Apple announced the feature in the iOS
release notes. And you're lying: The extent of the changes is unknown;
for all we know it's basically the same with *minor* tweaks - in fact
the article itself *says* "Apple has also tweaked the algorithms". Don't
be so foolish to think those of us with critical thinking facilities
don't notice the absence of the phrase "completely different". You're
trolling, plain and simple. Lame.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-08, ultred ragnusen <ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

Projection.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-08, ultred ragnusen <ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

The entire "after a year" lie is easily disproved by anyone who has
owned an Apple device for more than a year. You have no credibility
repeating that outright lie.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-08 16:57, nospam wrote:

> if the battery is pushed too hard, the voltage will drop below what the
> device needs to operate, at which point it simply shuts off. boom.
> there is not enough power to keep it going to do a graceful shutdown.

My guess is that follwoing a sudden drop in power, when hardware stops
consuming, voltage immediately returns and at that point, it does some
processing before powering off. (such as logging the power-caused
shutdown).

From my experience, that shutdown takes over 10 seconds, and probably at
a thorttled/slow CPU, so not sure how much processing it actually does.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-08 16:57, nospam wrote:

> the power draw is *within* the capability of the battery.

If you design a phone to last 2 years, you design the battery to be able
to supply enough current for peak load for those 2 years. This is a core
design flaw which didn't exist in pre iPhone 6s or 6 phones because peak
demand was not as great.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-08 16:57, nospam wrote:

> it's a *momentary* throttle, not an overall impact.

Not sure about that. Recently, when I depleted the battery and tried to
restart (thinking I would get the red battery "plug me in" indicator,
the phone instead booted, but would take forevery to boot and would fail
during that time. This is an indication that during boot, the phone
would already be throttled. It was very very noticeable.

Obviously, reboot doesn't happen often, and it is a big CPU hog. But
when the boot is throttled, it feels like a 1960s mainframe performance.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-09, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2018-02-08 16:57, nospam wrote:
>
>> it's a *momentary* throttle, not an overall impact.
>

> Not sure about that.i

Ever the FUDster...

[nospam]

In article <uY5fC.5864$gZ2....@fx23.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > if the battery is pushed too hard, the voltage will drop below what the
> > device needs to operate, at which point it simply shuts off. boom.
> > there is not enough power to keep it going to do a graceful shutdown.
>
> My guess is that follwoing a sudden drop in power, when hardware stops
> consuming, voltage immediately returns

your guess is wrong.

if the voltage drops too low to operate the phone, then the phone shuts
down.

the voltage will return when the load is removed (because the phone is
off), at which point it will automatically reboot.

some android phones suffer from a boot loop, where the boot process
puts high demands on the battery and it shuts down in the middle and
reboots.

> and at that point, it does some
> processing before powering off.

if that's possible, sure. it isn't always possible.

> (such as logging the power-caused
> shutdown).

that can be determined when it boots.

certainly you've seen this:
<https://support.apple.com/library/content/dam/edam/applecare/images/en_
US/osx/shut_down.png>

if you haven't, yank the plug from the wall, then plug it back in and
reboot.

> From my experience, that shutdown takes over 10 seconds, and probably at
> a thorttled/slow CPU, so not sure how much processing it actually does.

that's not a sudden shutdown.

[nospam]

In article <4_5fC.5865$gZ2....@fx23.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> > the power draw is *within* the capability of the battery.
>
> If you design a phone to last 2 years, you design the battery to be able
> to supply enough current for peak load for those 2 years.

battery aging can't be predicted.

*most* batteries will last 5 years at 80%, which is what they design
for.

nothing is perfect and some will fail prematurely (and be replaced
under warranty) while others will be very healthy well past 5 years.

> This is a core
> design flaw which didn't exist in pre iPhone 6s or 6 phones because peak
> demand was not as great.

it's not a flaw.

[nospam]

In article <a16fC.5866$gZ2....@fx23.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > it's a *momentary* throttle, not an overall impact.
>
> Not sure about that.

fortunately, those who understand it are quite sure, and have explained
it many times already.

> Recently, when I depleted the battery and tried to
> restart (thinking I would get the red battery "plug me in" indicator,
> the phone instead booted, but would take forevery to boot and would fail
> during that time. This is an indication that during boot, the phone
> would already be throttled. It was very very noticeable.

it's an indication that your battery was depleted, possibly even
defective.

it's also an indication that you don't understand what the issues
actually are and what apple is doing about it.

> Obviously, reboot doesn't happen often, and it is a big CPU hog. But
> when the boot is throttled, it feels like a 1960s mainframe performance.

uh, no.

[Alan Browne]

On 2018.02.08 16:39, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2018-02-08 13:07, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> The sole error on Apple's part was lack of transparency before this all
>> occurred.
>
>
> No. the error is in designing phones whose power draw exceeded battery
> capability after a year and not document that.

Not at all. If they put in code to manage it, they should have
explained what was going on. Nice and clear, then you don't get the
howling maniacs.

[Lewis]

Yes, YOU did.

--
A good friend will come and bail you out of jail but a true friend will
be sitting next to you saying, "Dang, that was fun."

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-08 20:08, nospam wrote:

> if the voltage drops too low to operate the phone, then the phone shuts
> down.

Since I experienced the cold sudden shutdown many times, I can garantee
to you that while the screen goes off suddently, it does not go fully
"black" and you can see there is still some activity on the phone for a
number of seconds as it shuts down. (the circle of bars thing).

As this has happened to me in the dark often, I was able to notice this
and it may not be obvious during the day.

If the power i totally cut, when it returns, the phone does something
before powering off. Or the phone itself cuts power consumers and then
shuts down in a controlled (but quick) fashion).

> certainly you've seen this:
> <https://support.apple.com/library/content/dam/edam/applecare/images/en_
> US/osx/shut_down.png>

This is due to a "flag" file on the system disjk that indicates of
proper shurtdown completed or not.

On a iPhone, the equivalent of a power failure (curcuitry cuts power to
phone because of low voltage) would not result in the phone spending
some time shutting down and would instead be instantly available to
power up.

Secondlt, as Apple wants to log these power events, capturing it to disk
when it happens is important to differentiate from a software crash.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-08 20:08, nospam wrote:

> battery aging can't be predicted.

Apple has plenty of experience with batteries. And chemists know about
the chemical deterioration inside the batteries and would know speed of
deterioration when you change the formula.

> *most* batteries will last 5 years at 80%, which is what they design
> for.

Yet, for the last 2years, Apple has produced models knowing batteries
lose ability to supply sugfficient power within 1 year.

[JF Mezei]

For 6 months, Apple denied to 6s customers who had a problem with cold
shutdown that there was a problem. And the staff at the Apple Stores
were given the script on how to react to these 6s customers. Then, all
of a sudden, a recall with free battery replacement was announced at end
of november 2016.

At that time, Apple said that the next software release woudl include
logging of such shutdown for apple to have better grasp of how often it
happens and to what batches of 6s. This cameout in January as I recall,
and that is when the throttling would have been introduced.

[nospam]

In article <hu7fC.10307$BX2....@fx22.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > battery aging can't be predicted.
>
> Apple has plenty of experience with batteries. And chemists know about
> the chemical deterioration inside the batteries and would know speed of
> deterioration when you change the formula.

it's an *average*.

the battery in *your* phone is *probably* average (it's a bell curve,
so most people's are), but you could be lucky and it's above average or
you could be unlucky and it might be below average.

apple has no control over that.

> > *most* batteries will last 5 years at 80%, which is what they design
> > for.
>
> Yet, for the last 2years, Apple has produced models knowing batteries
> lose ability to supply sugfficient power within 1 year.

absolutely false.

[nospam]

In article <xs7fC.10306$BX2....@fx22.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Since I experienced the cold sudden shutdown many times, I can garantee
> to you that while the screen goes off suddently, it does not go fully
> "black" and you can see there is still some activity on the phone for a
> number of seconds as it shuts down. (the circle of bars thing).

cold shutdown is *not* the same issue as an aging battery being pushed
too hard.

> > certainly you've seen this:
> > <https://support.apple.com/library/content/dam/edam/applecare/images/en_
> > US/osx/shut_down.png>
>
> This is due to a "flag" file on the system disjk that indicates of
> proper shurtdown completed or not.

what makes you think iphones don't have the same (or similar) flag?

>
> On a iPhone, the equivalent of a power failure (curcuitry cuts power to
> phone because of low voltage) would not result in the phone spending
> some time shutting down and would instead be instantly available to
> power up.

at which point, it knows something went wrong.

[B...@onramp.net]

I've always wondered....do you have auto correct?? :-)

[Jolly Roger]

That’s an outright lie. Anyone who has owned Apple devices for more than a
couple years knows they typically last much longer than one or two years
before needing a new battery. Your trolls are pathetic.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-09 03:12, Jolly Roger wrote:

> That’s an outright lie. Anyone who has owned Apple devices for more than a
> couple years knows they typically last much longer than one or two years
> before needing a new battery. Your trolls are pathetic.

Yes, my 4 and 5s lasted more than 2 years without problems.

The 6s, purchased in October 2015, started to experience cold shutdowns
in early April 2016. 6 months.

If the phone typically lasts more than a couple years, it wouldn't have
started the shutdowns within 6 months.

[joe]

Wasn't that due to a defective battery? You can't use a defective
battery to characterize typical behavior.

Also, anecdotal observations from one example don't necessarily reflect
the entire population. There are too many factors that determine the
useful life of any individual battery.

[nospam]

In article <A1dfC.33951$d03....@fx37.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > That零 an outright lie. Anyone who has owned Apple devices for more than a

*one* sample means nothing.

[sms]

On 2/8/2018 6:14 PM, JF Mezei wrote:

> Yet, for the last 2years, Apple has produced models knowing batteries
> lose ability to supply sugfficient power within 1 year.

You keep saying that, but is not clear at all that it is a problem with
the batteries or something else, despite a battery change fixing the
issue. It's highly unlikely that there is something wrong with 2 year
old batteries that would cause unexpected shutdowns. It's more complex
than that.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-09, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 2018-02-09 03:12, Jolly Roger wrote:

>> JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>>> On 2018-02-08 20:08, nospam wrote:
>>>
>>>> *most* batteries will last 5 years at 80%, which is what they design
>>>> for.
>>>
>>> Yet, for the last 2years, Apple has produced models knowing batteries
>>> lose ability to supply sugfficient power within 1 year.
>>

>> That’s an outright lie. Anyone who has owned Apple devices for more than a
>> couple years knows they typically last much longer than one or two years
>> before needing a new battery. Your trolls are pathetic.

[Nice try snipping your own quotes above in an attempt to remove
context. I've helpfully restored them for everyone so there is clear
context.]

> Yes, my 4 and 5s lasted more than 2 years without problems.
>
> The 6s, purchased in October 2015, started to experience cold shutdowns
> in early April 2016. 6 months.

Your personal anecdote with an iPhone 6s, which you have publicly
admitted to (a) sweating all over, (b) getting wet with sea water, and
(c) disassembling and replacing parts in it while it was still connected
to the battery, doesn't equate to "Apple producing models knowing their
batteries couldn't supply sufficient power within 1 year".

> If the phone typically lasts more than a couple years, it wouldn't have
> started the shutdowns within 6 months.

Bullshit - you mistreat your electronics. If, according to little, old
you, all of Apple's iPhone 6s models supposedly can't last more than a
year on the original battery, why do so many people other than little,
old you claim theirs are running just fine a couple years later?

"I have the 6, which is a couple years old at this point. The battery
lasts about 8 hours under normal use (light web browsing, texts, emails,
no calls). 8 hours is not enough to last me until 5pm, so I use a
battery case (see link below). With the case, the battery lasts about a
day and a half." - October 2017

<https://www.quora.com/How-long-does-the-battery-last-on-the-iPhone-6s/answer/John-Read?share=21c85be6&srid=pDaZ>

"brother and my sister both have a 6s and have around 15% wear level,
so it is quite okay I think" - September 2017

"I have 7% wear on my 6s that I’ve had for almost two years and use
constantly and been on iOS 11 beta since it went public. I’ve also had a
mophie on it since the day that I got it and I keep the phone charge
level between 60% and 80% all day and then charge it to 100% at night. I
read that iphone batteries do best when kept in that range, I’m not sure
how accurate that is but it’s what I do and I have yet to have any
battery problems" - September 2017

"2 year old 6s Plus here as well and it's still getting me through a day
is usage at half brightness with 20-30% charge" - September 2017

"2 year old 6plus says I'm good 86% capacity 14% wear. I use my phone
constantly. " - September 2017

<https://www.reddit.com/r/iphone/comments/6v3qyw/is_this_normal_battery_life_of_iphone_6s_after_2/>

"I ran Geekbench 4 after your post to test my 2 year old 6S with its
original battery and it scored same as yours with the new battery. Mine
is covered by Apple’s replacement program (although I haven’t used it)
and is around 86% health according to coconut battery. Throttle might
only affect faulty ones?" - January 2018

"Interesting, my 6S Plus doesn't have this issue. I'm at 79% original
battery capacity (according to Coconut Battery), but I'm actually
slightly higher than the Geekbench average (I scored 2536/4438 vs
Geekbench's 2441/4174)." - January 2017

<https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/7kfmqi/difference_in_performance_with_new_and_old/>

I suppose you want us all to (a) ignore the fact that you abuse your
electronics AND (b) believe that all of these other people with
perfectly functional iPhone 6s models are liars. No.

Your personal anecdote with an iPhone 6s doesn't equate to a widespread
problem with all iPhone 6s models. And Apple's not doing anything
nefarious.

As nospam correctly stated above in the quoted material you purposefully
snipped, "*most* batteries will last 5 years at 80%, which is what they
design for". That's the truth.

You're a useless FUDster troll who abuses your own electronics then
turns around and blames Apple when they malfunction.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-09, joe <no...@domain.invalid> wrote:
> On 2/9/2018 2:33 AM, JF Mezei wrote:
>> On 2018-02-09 03:12, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>
>>> That’s an outright lie. Anyone who has owned Apple devices for more than a
>>> couple years knows they typically last much longer than one or two years
>>> before needing a new battery. Your trolls are pathetic.
>>
>> Yes, my 4 and 5s lasted more than 2 years without problems.
>>
>> The 6s, purchased in October 2015, started to experience cold shutdowns
>> in early April 2016. 6 months.
>>
>> If the phone typically lasts more than a couple years, it wouldn't have
>> started the shutdowns within 6 months.
>
> Wasn't that due to a defective battery?

He's publicly admitted in these forums that he has:

a. Sweated all over his phone
b. Got it wet with sea water
c. Disassembled and replaced parts in it WHILE IT WAS CONNECTED TO THE
BATTERY

> You can't use a defective battery to characterize typical behavior.

Yet he does so REGULARLY here.

> Also, anecdotal observations from one example don't necessarily reflect
> the entire population. There are too many factors that determine the
> useful life of any individual battery.

Yep.

[Jolly Roger]

He's publicly admitted in these forums that he has:

a. Sweated all over his phone
b. Got it wet with sea water
c. Disassembled and replaced parts in it WHILE IT WAS CONNECTED TO THE
BATTERY

Is it any wonder he has problems?

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-09 05:49, joe wrote:

> Wasn't that due to a defective battery? You can't use a defective
> battery to characterize typical behavior.

Apple initially claimed it was due to deffective battery and limited
batch of serial numbers allowed the free battery exchange.

Problem for me surfaced within 6 months of phone being purchased (cold
morning walks at +2°C in early April 2016). Note: the phone didn't
shutdown during 2015-2016 winter before that April).

Problem again surfaced in October 2016 in 12°, Apple still denied it was
a problem, but had me spend about an hour performing remote diagnostics
and sending them to Apple.

November 2016: Apple admits to problem, announces recall program to
change batteries.
December 2016: Apple replaces battery for free.

October 2016: problem starts to happen again. Because low temperatures
are seasonal, the battery may have already been weakened by july/august
but it woudln't be until first cold weather use that the problem would
be noticed.

So the "bad batch" argument may have been just a PR thing to fix early
buyers of iPhone while Apple studied the problem more closely. But since
the replacement batteries excibited basically the same problem, that
"bad batch" argument lost a lot of credibility.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-09 09:01, nospam wrote:

> *one* sample means nothing.

But one who has exprienced the problem with 2 batteries, has seen how
Apple dealth with customers experiencing the problem is worth a lot more
than some Apple apologists who haven't experienced the problem.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-09 13:26, sms wrote:

> You keep saying that, but is not clear at all that it is a problem with
> the batteries or something else, despite a battery change fixing the
> issue.

A battery change does not fix the issue. The issue will start again as
that new battery ages.

[nospam]

In article <pFpfC.21733$s_2....@fx42.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > *one* sample means nothing.
>
> But one who has exprienced the problem with 2 batteries,

2 samples out of hundreds of millions of phones means nothing.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-09 13:55, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Your personal anecdote with an iPhone 6s, which you have publicly
> admitted to (a) sweating all over, (b) getting wet with sea water, and
> (c) disassembling and replacing parts in it while it was still connected
> to the battery, doesn't equate to "Apple producing models knowing their
> batteries couldn't supply sufficient power within 1 year".

The salt water accident happened in december 2017, problems with battery
shutdown started in April 2016. Problems with the new Apple battery
installed in Dec 2016 manifested again in Oct 2017 BEFORE the trip to
Florida, before the salt water incident, before I opened the phone to
fix it myself because Apple clearly told me I was on my own and had to
pay full $95 price to have battery replaced again.

So you're constantly bringing this up when I have shown multiple times
that that trip to florida had nothing to do clearly shows that your
intent is to discredit me instead of advancing debate/conversation.

> year on the original battery, why do so many people other than little,
> old you claim theirs are running just fine a couple years later?

Someone who lives in warmer climate, someone who always drives from
heated garage to heated garage instead of walking outdoors in winter
would not experience the cold weather shutdown when trying to take
picture outdoors.

Note: my phone never shutdown in cold while listening to music or just
turning on the phone to check email/twitter.

[nospam]

In article <pNpfC.12214$9%2.1...@fx36.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Note: my phone never shutdown in cold while listening to music or just
> turning on the phone to check email/twitter.

low demand activities.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-09 17:57, nospam wrote:

>> But one who has exprienced the problem with 2 batteries,
>
> 2 samples out of hundreds of millions of phones means nothing.

And someone who hasn't experienced this problem means even less. Boggles
the mind as to why you insist on trying to discredit people who have
experienced the problem when you don't know about it first hand.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-09, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 2018-02-09 09:01, nospam wrote:
>
>> *one* sample means nothing.
>
> But one who has exprienced the problem with 2 batteries

On the SAME PHONE that you've admitted to (a) sweating all over, (b)
getting wet with sea water, and (c) taking apart and replacing parts of
WHILE THE BATTERY WAS STILL CONNECTED.

So nospam is right: One sample of a mistreated device means nothing.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-09, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 2018-02-09 17:57, nospam wrote:
>
>>> But one who has exprienced the problem with 2 batteries,
>>
>> 2 samples out of hundreds of millions of phones means nothing.
>
> And someone who hasn't experienced this problem means

Many more than just one person, which means is that there isn't a
widespread problem affecting all iPhone 6s devices.

> Boggles the mind as to why you insist on trying to discredit people
> who have experienced the problem when you don't know about it first
> hand.

If you'd stop claiming Apple designed iPhone 6s batteries to fail after
a year, which is an outright lie, perhaps your mind wouldn't be so
boggled.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-09, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 2018-02-09 13:26, sms wrote:
>
>> You keep saying that, but is not clear at all that it is a problem with
>> the batteries or something else, despite a battery change fixing the
>> issue.
>
> A battery change does not fix the issue.

I've read *many* reports of people claiming otherwise: that after
replacing their dying battery, the device functions as new. Your
anecdotal sample of one means nothing.

[nospam]

In article <kmqfC.23707$NZ2....@fx40.iad>, JF Mezei

i didn't say you didn't experience it.

i said that you can't make generalizations for hundreds of millions of
phones based on your personal experience with just *two* batteries.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-09, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 2018-02-09 13:55, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Your personal anecdote with an iPhone 6s, which you have publicly
>> admitted to (a) sweating all over, (b) getting wet with sea water,
>> and (c) disassembling and replacing parts in it while it was still
>> connected to the battery, doesn't equate to "Apple producing models
>> knowing their batteries couldn't supply sufficient power within 1
>> year".
>
> The salt water accident happened in december 2017,

Yes, I remember - you said:

"Unfortunately, whil on a dive trip, there was salt water ingress on the
phone. It was via earpeace, and I surpect it was combination of having
wet hands and the wind as the boat was moving to/from dive site."

You likely fucked up your phone.

> problems with battery shutdown started in April 2016. Problems with
> the new Apple battery installed in Dec 2016 manifested again in Oct
> 2017 BEFORE the trip to Florida,

Nope, according to you, your next unexpected shutdown due to cold
weather happened in *November* 2016. Eat your own words:

"In December 2016, Apple replaced my iPhone 6s battery under its
"recall" program, at no cost... Late november comes the first cold
nights and my phone starts to exhibit the issue again."

> before the salt water incident, before I opened the phone to fix it
> myself because Apple clearly told me I was on my own and had to pay
> full $95 price to have battery replaced again.

The sweat incident happened.

The salt water incident happened.

The incident where you took the phone apart and replaced
internal parts without first disconnecting the battery happened.

We know this because you told us right here in these news groups.

What is crystal clear to anyone paying attention is: You don't take very
good care of your phones.

Not only are the things you've willingly divulged potentially damaging
to your phone, but for all we know, there are *other* incidents you
haven't bothered to tell us about that also contributed to your phone
misbehaving. You'd rather blame Apple than take personal responsibility.
You're like the idiot who sits on his expensive phone in his back pocket
every day, then turns around and blames Apple when it bends or
malfunctions due to too much physical stress.

> So you're constantly bringing this up when I have shown multiple times
> that that trip to florida had nothing to do clearly shows that your
> intent is to discredit me instead of advancing debate/conversation.

Nah. You do a fine job of discrediting yourself without any assistance
from anyone else here. Your own words are on record.

>> year on the original battery, why do so many people other than
>> little, old you claim theirs are running just fine a couple years
>> later?
>
> Someone who lives in warmer climate

Are you now suggesting that nobody that lives in a cold climate has a
perfectly functioning iPhone 6s? Bullshit.

[Jolly Roger]

Two batteries on a single iPhone that he previously admitted to sweating
all over, getting wet with sea water, and replacing internal parts while
powered on by the battery. ; )

[Lewis]

In message <080220182122396912%nos...@nospam.invalid> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <xs7fC.10306$BX2....@fx22.iad>, JF Mezei
> <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>> Since I experienced the cold sudden shutdown many times, I can garantee
>> to you that while the screen goes off suddently, it does not go fully
>> "black" and you can see there is still some activity on the phone for a
>> number of seconds as it shuts down. (the circle of bars thing).

> cold shutdown is *not* the same issue as an aging battery being pushed
> too hard.

He's been conflating these for over a year. When it's pointed out to him
he ignores it and keeps doing it.

--
No matter how fast light travels it finds the darkness has always got
there first, and is waiting for it.

[Lewis]

In message <A1dfC.33951$d03....@fx37.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2018-02-09 03:12, Jolly Roger wrote:

>> That’s an outright lie. Anyone who has owned Apple devices for more than a
>> couple years knows they typically last much longer than one or two years
>> before needing a new battery. Your trolls are pathetic.

> Yes, my 4 and 5s lasted more than 2 years without problems.

> The 6s, purchased in October 2015, started to experience cold shutdowns
> in early April 2016. 6 months.

See? He's still doing it.

--
Oh! I thought they smelled bad on the *outside*!

[ultred ragnusen]

Apple secretly throttled the iPhones to hide their accidental design flaw
which is nested within the /combination/ of the phone drawing too much too
quickly out of a too small battery.

[ultred ragnusen]

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

>> A battery change does not fix the issue.
>
> I've read *many* reports of people claiming otherwise: that after
> replacing their dying battery, the device functions as new. Your
> anecdotal sample of one means nothing.

Since the fatal iPhone design flaw is baked into the /combination/ of the
phone drawing too much power too quickly out of a too small battery, the
moment the battery chemically ages a bit, the problem returns again, and
again, and again.

[nospam]

In article <p5lo4d$ptd$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

<ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

>
> Apple secretly throttled the iPhones to hide their accidental design flaw
> which is nested within the /combination/ of the phone drawing too much too
> quickly out of a too small battery.

false.

[nospam]

In article <p5lo8k$qdp$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

<ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

>
> Since the fatal iPhone design flaw is baked into the /combination/ of the
> phone drawing too much power too quickly out of a too small battery, the
> moment the battery chemically ages a bit, the problem returns again, and
> again, and again.

false.

[ultred ragnusen]

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> It was never a secret

Except that it was.

> since it Apple announced the feature in the iOS release notes.

Except that they didn't.

> And you're lying: The extent of the changes is unknown.

I said the article said they /CHANGED/ the algorithm, which it does.

[nospam]

In article <p5log5$qmt$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

<ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

> > It was never a secret
>
> Except that it was.

it wasn't.

> > since it Apple announced the feature in the iOS release notes.
>
> Except that they didn't.

they did.

> > And you're lying: The extent of the changes is unknown.
>
> I said the article said they /CHANGED/ the algorithm, which it does.

apple is constantly tweaking things. every company does.

[ultred ragnusen]

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>> Since the fatal iPhone design flaw is baked into the /combination/ of the
>> phone drawing too much power too quickly out of a too small battery, the
>> moment the battery chemically ages a bit, the problem returns again, and
>> again, and again.
>
> false.

Changing the battery every year merely updates the "chemical age" of the
battery every year which simply forestalls the inevitable shutdown/slowdown
choice for a year.

[ultred ragnusen]

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>> Apple secretly throttled the iPhones to hide their accidental design flaw
>> which is nested within the /combination/ of the phone drawing too much too
>> quickly out of a too small battery.
>
> false.

Apple secretly throttled iPhones and dropped the price of batteries
temporarily because the design flaw is fatal and there is no way around it
other than throttling the CPU or replacing the battery every year.

[nospam]

In article <p5lolf$qrf$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

there is no need to change the battery every year.

[nospam]

In article <p5loou$qv4$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

false. you are wrong.

[ultred ragnusen]

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>>> It was never a secret
>>
>> Except that it was.
>
> it wasn't.

Yes it was secret.

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2018/02/06/apple-on-ios-10-2-1-throttling-disclosure/
"iOS 10.2.1 was the very first iOS release with CPU throttling targeting
older iPhones with worn-out batteries. The original releases notes,
displayed on customers' devices and published on Apple's website, made no
mention of this whatsoever."

>>> since it Apple announced the feature in the iOS release notes.
>>
>> Except that they didn't.
>
> they did.

Except that Apple has already been proven to have lied about that.

"It was only after the throttling issue went mainstream that Apple quietly
amended the iOS 10.2.1 release notes on its website to note that the
software update also 'improves power management during peak workloads to
avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone.'"

>>> And you're lying: The extent of the changes is unknown.
>>
>> I said the article said they /CHANGED/ the algorithm, which it does.
>
> apple is constantly tweaking things. every company does.

Apple lied about it.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/18/01/31/apple-confirms-receiving-inquiries-from-government-agencies-over-iphone-battery-throttling
"CEO Tim Cook in an interview this month said Apple informed customers
about the battery issue when it released iOS 10.2.1, but release notes
issued at the time conflict with that assertion."

[ultred ragnusen]

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>>>> Apple secretly throttled the iPhones to hide their accidental design flaw
>>>> which is nested within the /combination/ of the phone drawing too much too
>>>> quickly out of a too small battery.
>>>
>>> false.
>>
>> Apple secretly throttled iPhones and dropped the price of batteries
>> temporarily because the design flaw is fatal and there is no way around it
>> other than throttling the CPU or replacing the battery every year.
>
> false. you are wrong.

Due to the hardware design flaw, replacing the battery chemical age of the
battery every year simply forestalls the throttling by another year.

[nospam]

In article <p5lpi3$s08$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

<ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

>
> >>> It was never a secret
> >>
> >> Except that it was.
> >
> > it wasn't.
>
> Yes it was secret.

it wasn't.

> http://www.idownloadblog.com/2018/02/06/apple-on-ios-10-2-1-throttling-disclos

> ure/
> "iOS 10.2.1 was the very first iOS release with CPU throttling targeting
> older iPhones with worn-out batteries. The original releases notes,
> displayed on customers' devices and published on Apple's website, made no
> mention of this whatsoever."

what's on people's devices isn't the only source of information.

> >>> since it Apple announced the feature in the iOS release notes.
> >>
> >> Except that they didn't.
> >
> > they did.
>
> Except that Apple has already been proven to have lied about that.

nope.

> "It was only after the throttling issue went mainstream that Apple quietly
> amended the iOS 10.2.1 release notes on its website to note that the
> software update also 'improves power management during peak workloads to
> avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone.'"

nope. it was there *before* it went mainstream.

> >>> And you're lying: The extent of the changes is unknown.
> >>
> >> I said the article said they /CHANGED/ the algorithm, which it does.
> >
> > apple is constantly tweaking things. every company does.
>
> Apple lied about it.

nope.

> http://appleinsider.com/articles/18/01/31/apple-confirms-receiving-inquiries-f

> rom-government-agencies-over-iphone-battery-throttling
> "CEO Tim Cook in an interview this month said Apple informed customers
> about the battery issue when it released iOS 10.2.1, but release notes
> issued at the time conflict with that assertion."

they did inform customers.

as usual, you're trolling.

[nospam]

In article <p5lpv7$sgv$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

<ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

> >>>> Apple secretly throttled the iPhones to hide their accidental design flaw
> >>>> which is nested within the /combination/ of the phone drawing too much
> >>>> too
> >>>> quickly out of a too small battery.
> >>>
> >>> false.
> >>
> >> Apple secretly throttled iPhones and dropped the price of batteries
> >> temporarily because the design flaw is fatal and there is no way around it
> >> other than throttling the CPU or replacing the battery every year.
> >
> > false. you are wrong.
>
> Due to the hardware design flaw,

it's not a flaw.

> replacing the battery chemical age of the
> battery every year simply forestalls the throttling by another year.

it's not a yearly thing.

you are wrong and are also trolling.

[ultred ragnusen]

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>>>> Since the fatal iPhone design flaw is baked into the /combination/ of the
>>>> phone drawing too much power too quickly out of a too small battery, the
>>>> moment the battery chemically ages a bit, the problem returns again, and
>>>> again, and again.
>>>
>>> false.
>>
>> Changing the battery every year merely updates the "chemical age" of the
>> battery every year which simply forestalls the inevitable shutdown/slowdown
>> choice for a year.
>
> there is no need to change the battery every year.

Except that there is.

[nospam]

In article <p5lq1f$sii$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

there is not.

plenty of people have 2-3 year old phones *without* any throttling
whatsoever.

you are wrong and are trolling.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-09 19:20, Jolly Roger wrote:

> If you'd stop claiming Apple designed iPhone 6s batteries to fail after
> a year, which is an outright lie, perhaps your mind wouldn't be so
> boggled.

You obviously have comprehension problems.

I argued Apple designed a phone whose peak power consuption exceeded
battery capacity as it aged within expected lifetime of phone. This is
either because battery is undersisez or phone is oversized (in terms of
peak power needs).

[ultred ragnusen]

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>> Yes it was secret.
>
> it wasn't.

It was a secret.

> what's on people's devices isn't the only source of information.

In addition to not stating it in the phone's release notes, the original
release notes on the web site also didn't mention it.

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2018/01/30/don-sec-iphone-throttling/
"The company quietly refreshed the iOS 10.2.1 release notes on its website
with a vague mention of iPhone throttling."

>> Except that Apple has already been proven to have lied about that.
>
> nope.

Tim Cook lied because it was never in the original release notes and yet he
said people weren't paying attention when it has been proven Apple quietly
inserted the vague reference to throttling later.

"Apple's chief executive Tim Cook inadvertently made matters worse by
saying recently that 'a lot of people weren't paying attention' to the
release notes accompanying the iOS 10.2.1 update."

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-09 19:21, Jolly Roger wrote:

> I've read *many* reports of people claiming otherwise: that after
> replacing their dying battery, the device functions as new. Your
> anecdotal sample of one means nothing.

Twisting the story again. Yep, replacing the battery gives you a phone
that doesn't shutdown, until months later when the problem starts AGAIN.

So if new phone starts to fail after X months, and replacing battery
causes phone to start to fail after X months, then replacing the battery
does not fix the problem.

[nospam]

In article <p5lre5$u8v$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, ultred ragnusen

<ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

> >> Yes it was secret.
> >
> > it wasn't.
>
> It was a secret.

only to you.

it also doesn't matter whether it was or not. anything other than open
source software with full schematics of the hardware will have
significant amount of functionality that's a trade secret, including
iphones, android phones, macs, windows pcs, digital cameras, tvs and
much more.

[nospam]

In article <siufC.26894$9z2....@fx43.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > I've read *many* reports of people claiming otherwise: that after
> > replacing their dying battery, the device functions as new. Your
> > anecdotal sample of one means nothing.
>
> Twisting the story again. Yep, replacing the battery gives you a phone
> that doesn't shutdown, until months later when the problem starts AGAIN.

only if you replace it with a defective battery.

in the vast, vast majority of cases, the battery will last several
*years* before it's even slightly an issue.

[JF Mezei]

On 2018-02-09 19:49, Jolly Roger wrote:

> The sweat incident happened.
> The salt water incident happened.

what sweat incident? The first problem I had with phone was the salt
water accident in decembet 2017.

Cold shutdowns happened in April 2016 (phone purchased Oct 2015), and
then in October 2016. Apple replaced battery in December 2016. Next
shutdown happened in October 2017.

The trip to Florida with salt water incident was in December 2017.

> The incident where you took the phone apart and replaced
> internal parts without first disconnecting the battery happened.

Guess what, my phone with new battery had performed fine since that
operation. I don't expect cold weathet shutdown until next October 2018.
(There were 3 operations: one to clean phone and change screen. One to
change battery, and one to replace camera (old one had dirty lens on the
inside due to salt water infiltration).

The reason for this is that iFixit Canada shipped initial parts except
for the adhesive strips which I had to wait for IFixit USA to ship. And
after cleaning external camera lens, found the image quality was still
sub par so ordered new camera.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-10, Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <080220182122396912%nos...@nospam.invalid> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <xs7fC.10306$BX2....@fx22.iad>, JF Mezei
>> <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
>>> Since I experienced the cold sudden shutdown many times, I can garantee
>>> to you that while the screen goes off suddently, it does not go fully
>>> "black" and you can see there is still some activity on the phone for a
>>> number of seconds as it shuts down. (the circle of bars thing).
>
>> cold shutdown is *not* the same issue as an aging battery being pushed
>> too hard.
>
> He's been conflating these for over a year. When it's pointed out to him
> he ignores it and keeps doing it.

Right out of the troll handbook.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-10, ultred ragnusen <ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:
> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Yet, for the last 2years, Apple has produced models knowing
>>> batteries lose ability to supply sugfficient power within 1 year.
>>
>> You keep saying that, but is not clear at all that it is a problem
>> with the batteries or something else, despite a battery change fixing
>> the issue. It's highly unlikely that there is something wrong with 2
>> year old batteries that would cause unexpected shutdowns. It's more
>> complex than that.
>
> Apple secretly throttled the iPhones to hide their accidental design
> flaw

Those of us who can read know Apple announced the feature in the iOS
10.2.1 release notes. Then a bunch of terminally ignorant dumb asses who
clearly didn't bother to read screamed bloody murder that it was a huge
secret cover-up. And even more gullible idiots believed them. Meanwhile
the fact is Apple only throttles *spikes* in performance which means
most users in most situations don't even notice a difference since most
apps don't cause performance spikes on a regular basis. Apple throttles
those performance spikes for good reason: to ensure the device doesn't
draw more current than the failing battery can produce, which prevents
spontaneous *shutdowns*. I know I'm not alone when I say I would *much*
rather my phone temporarily throttle performance spikes than
spontaneously shut down at an inconvenient moment - say in the middle
of a fucking 911 emergency call for instance. No, contrary to the
utterly idiotic conspiracy theory being pushed by Apple haters and
gullible idiots, Apple's motivation, as always, is simply to provide the
best user experience possible - nothing at all nefarious.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-10, ultred ragnusen <ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>>> A battery change does not fix the issue.
>>
>> I've read *many* reports of people claiming otherwise: that after
>> replacing their dying battery, the device functions as new. Your
>> anecdotal sample of one means nothing.
>
> Since the fatal

Nope, phones with dying batteries still work fine. In fact, due to the
throttling feature, they work *better* because they have extended
runtime compared to devices without the throttle that spontaneously
shutdown once the battery drains to a certain level (anywhere from 30%
down), as anyone who owns an iOS device that ran pre-10.2.1 versions of
iOS knows from direct experience.

> iPhone design flaw

There is no design flaw. Most iPhones last 3-5 years on the original
battery before needing a replacement. Users of the iPhone 6s often
report 8-12 hour runtime before their phone needs to recharge after two
years into the original battery.

> is baked into the /combination/ of the phone drawing too much power
> too quickly

Spikes in performance happen on *all* smartphones. And when those spikes
occur, they cause spontaneous shutdowns, which is precisely what Apple's
throttling feature prevents, extending runtime.

> out of a too small battery,

Nah. Most iPhone users report battery life that is comparable to
other smartphones.

> the moment the battery chemically ages a bit, the problem returns
> again, and again, and again.

There is zero evidence of that happening to the majority of iPhone
owners. In fact, most iPhone owners report that replacing the dying
battery restores performance to like-new.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-10, ultred ragnusen <ult...@ragnusen.com> wrote:

Nope. And you are lame to repeat such an easily disprovable lie. Most
iPhone owners go 3-5 years before needing to replace the battery.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-10, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2018-02-09 19:20, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> If you'd stop claiming Apple designed iPhone 6s batteries to fail
>> after a year, which is an outright lie, perhaps your mind wouldn't be
>> so boggled.
>
> You obviously have comprehension problems.

Coming from you that means exactly nothing. You can't even get basic
spelling, punctuation, or comprehension correct, as evidenced by your
lengthy track record of posts here.

> I argued Apple designed a phone whose peak power consuption exceeded
> battery capacity as it aged within expected lifetime of phone.

And your lame argument isn't supported by actual facts. Until you
provide more than a fucking anecdote of your sample size of *one*
iPhone, you're considered to be full of shit. Troll on. It's what you
do.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-10, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 2018-02-09 19:21, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> I've read *many* reports of people claiming otherwise: that after
>> replacing their dying battery, the device functions as new. Your
>> anecdotal sample of one means nothing.
>
> Twisting

Projection.

> So if new phone starts to fail after X months, and replacing battery
> causes phone to start to fail after X months

Liar. That's not what is happening for the vast majority of iPhone
owners. Your tiny anecdotal sample size of one doesn't equate to a
fucking epidemic.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-02-10, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 2018-02-09 19:49, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> The sweat incident happened.
>> The salt water incident happened.
>
> what sweat incident?

The one where you admitted that your sweat corroded contacts inside the
phone. Your words:

"n the previous surgery, I had replaced the home button and that
required COMPLETE disassembly to remove the front glass, but it tured
out that the connector between the home button and the dock assembly was
also rusted from sweat."

We know from your own posts that you sweat all over your phones while
cycling around on your silly tours to America and who knows where else

[Where's an image JF Mezei peddling around in his Lance Armstrong
costume when you need one? : D]

> The first problem I had with phone was the salt water accident in
> decembet 2017.

But the sweat is constant. And I'm sure you have lots of other
"accidents" too. You treat your electronics like shit.

> Cold shutdowns happened in April 2016 (phone purchased Oct 2015), and
> then in October 2016. Apple replaced battery in December 2016. Next
> shutdown happened in October 2017.

Sweat and salt water corrosion can do that sort of thing. So can
disassembling and replacing internal parts of your phone while it's
still powered up on the battery.

> The trip to Florida with salt water incident was in December 2017.

But the sweating is constant.

>> The incident where you took the phone apart and replaced internal
>> parts without first disconnecting the battery happened.
>
> Guess what

You got lucky? Yeah, we know. We also know there's a chance you fucked
something up too.