Timeline for How can I update just one built-in app at a time, if possible?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 1, 2023 at 14:08 | comment | added | wizzwizz4 | @benwiggy We're all assuming that a publicly-traded for-profit corporation works to increase profit (incentives). Apple gave you a notification that your iCloud storage is running out, and you should buy more – but not that your iPhone battery was running out, and you should get it replaced; you don't usually have to pay $640 000 000 for actions that are completely above-board. In the wake of the controversy (which, apparently, involved faulty batteries, too!), user replacement cost was around $30 (normally, it was $80; right now, it's around $100), but you're right, that's not the point. | |
| Mar 1, 2023 at 13:57 | comment | added | benwiggy | @wizzwizz4 Nor reason to assume the opposite. Some models have had greater support lifetime than others; that suggests it's not an arbitrary limit. User-serviceable batteries is a separate issue: it would increase the cost of manufacture, and they will change the battery for your for a small sum. | |
| Mar 1, 2023 at 13:41 | comment | added | wizzwizz4 | @benwiggy 'Evil' is such an ugly word: I prefer 'efficient'. If they really cared about older phones lasting longer, they'd make the batteries user-serviceable. They don't: to the extent they care, it's as a means to an end. Apple benefits from older phones being able to run apps for longer, to reduce fragmentation of the iOS ecosystem. They also benefit from being able to sell shiny, new, fast phones, and from the perception that "old" devices "get slow". Deliberately slowing down older phones in software achieves multiple aims: there's no reason to assume it was an altruistic move. | |
| Mar 1, 2023 at 7:54 | comment | added | benwiggy | @wizzwizz4 So, if Apple benefits from older phone lasting longer, and they respond to incentives, it's reasonable to assume that they're NOT deliberately slowing down phones as part of some evil plan. | |
| Feb 28, 2023 at 23:19 | comment | added | wizzwizz4 | @MikeScott Yes, that's Apple's claimed reason. It might even be true. But Apple benefits from newer phones being faster as well as from older phones lasting longer. Apple, as a company, is pretty good at responding to incentives; it's reasonable to assume they're doing exactly that. | |
| Feb 28, 2023 at 19:34 | comment | added | Mike Scott | @wizzwizz4 But they slowed down old phones to make them work more reliably with worn batteries so that their owners could keep using them for longer, which is the opposite of what’s being claimed. | |
| Feb 28, 2023 at 17:25 | comment | added | candied_orange | Stuff like this also happens naturally. As a code base gets older it gets bigger. As it gets bigger it's tested on faster and faster computers. Soon it performs slower on it's original hardware. No one conspired to do this. You'd have to make the dev team work on vintage hardware to prevent it. Even then they'd still be adding stuff that slows it down. This just gives them a chance to notice and maybe care. | |
| Feb 28, 2023 at 16:41 | comment | added | wizzwizz4 | I've never heard of Apple slowing down old Macs, but they definitely used to slow down old phones. | |
| Feb 28, 2023 at 10:06 | history | edited | benwiggy | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 3 characters in body
|
| Feb 28, 2023 at 9:58 | history | edited | benwiggy | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 369 characters in body
|
| Feb 28, 2023 at 8:08 | history | edited | benwiggy | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 272 characters in body
|
| Feb 28, 2023 at 8:00 | history | edited | benwiggy | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 114 characters in body
|
| Feb 28, 2023 at 7:45 | history | answered | benwiggy | CC BY-SA 4.0 |