About the security content of iOS 12.4.9

[dead]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by hokumguru on Thursday November 05, 2020 @03:51PM (#25001821)

Wasn't the purpose of that throttling to extend the life of older phones? Throttling the CPU let them stay within the limits of the worn out battery and let the device continue to be used without crashing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by Y-bar on Thursday November 05, 2020 @03:55PM (#25001865)

It was to extend the battery life, which was a workaround for the flawed battery design (contra CPU power draw). I bought an iPhone SE in the first month available and it started throttling by month 10, I'm not a battery designer, but I did not buy a device marketed as 2x the speed of 5S only for it to silently drop to 0.8x the speed of the 5S less than a year later.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by jeron on Thursday November 05, 2020 @04:17PM (#25002069)

In which they had a whole year of really cheap, highly subsidized battery replacements to correct their error. I think Apple should be forgiven for this

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by Y-bar on Thursday November 05, 2020 @04:31PM (#25002214)

I was unable to benefit from the battery replacement due to a chip in the screen they discovered after I got a CS code to do it: https://i.imgur.com/Gr1bPTU.jpg

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by tdonovic on Thursday November 05, 2020 @05:19PM (#25002710)

What is a CS code?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by Y-bar on Thursday November 05, 2020 @05:39PM (#25002872)

Effectively a coupon code issued by a customer support representative.

Apple did not actually offer the replacement program within ~600km of my home, but I managed to convince them that an Apple Authorised Service provider in my town at least do it. They agreed and gave me a CS Code valid for the the battery replacement to be done.

But it was ultimately denied because of a tiny chip in the glass on the screen.

I really liked every other aspect of this phone though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by reaperducer on Thursday November 05, 2020 @04:00PM (#25001921)

the flawed battery design

I'm going to play the odds and guess that you're not a battery designer.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by mikestew on Thursday November 05, 2020 @07:04PM (#25003481)

I wish they gave those odds in Vegas: OP said right there in their comment that they're not a battery designer. Now, granted, perhaps OP should have not run their fingers on the keyboard about topics they know little to nothing about...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by wnevets on Thursday November 05, 2020 @03:55PM (#25001861)

That may have been their public explanation after being caught throttling the hardware.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by thebruce87m on Saturday November 07, 2020 @07:19PM (#25021318)

You just need to look at the evidence:

* Only handsets with degraded batteries were throttled

* Replacing the battery returned the handset to full speed

* The only thing that changed after the fine was that you now have an option to stop the throttling and have unexpected reboots instead.

* All iPhones since then, including brand new iPhone 12s will throttle when the battery degrades.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by supernova87a on Thursday November 05, 2020 @08:04PM (#25003845)

This is just great, and you see why it's so hard to be a product manufacturer.

Not only does the person not understand why it was done, and that it produced a phone that would be functional for longer lifetime than if it hadn't been implement, but he also continues spreading unhelpful information to others.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by wnevets on Friday November 06, 2020 @01:19AM (#25005403)

>but he also continues spreading unhelpful information to others.

They were forced to pay over 500 Million Dollars for doing it

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by thebruce87m on Friday November 06, 2020 @12:22PM (#25009269)

They were forced to pay that for not saying that they were doing it.

The feature still exists today. The brand new iPhone 12 will do the same thing on a degraded battery.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by supernova87a on Friday November 06, 2020 @06:08AM (#25006749)

That doesn't mean the penalty made sense.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by ponker on Thursday November 05, 2020 @06:49PM (#25003393)

I turned off this feature when they shipped the option and promptly turned it back on. I use Apple because they make reasonable decisions instead of requiring endless configuration, and they made the right decision here. The lawsuit feels like pure power politics... Apple can handle the cost, I don’t feel bad for them or anything, but I see it as a pure money grab rather than any culpability for Apple.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by wnevets on Friday November 06, 2020 @01:19AM (#25005409)

>I turned off this feature when they shipped the option and promptly turned it back on.

They didn't add that option until AFTER being caught

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by ponker on Friday November 06, 2020 @04:39AM (#25006373)

I disagree with the framing suggested by the word “caught.” After they were sued, they shipped this option, I tried it, it sucks.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:About the security content of iOS 12.4.9 by wnevets on Friday November 06, 2020 @11:35AM (#25008872)

having to pay out over 500 Million Dollars says otherwise.

[ Parent | on HN ]