The Apple Thread

[limpid]

6 hours ago, bickster said:

Have you ever tried to book an appointment for a £25 battery replacement? Give it a go and tell me how you get on. I gave up, never a convenient slot, always 2 different weekdays at say 3pm or 11am, you know when no-one with a job can actually get to an Apple Shop

Why are you paying to fix a defective device? If the part isn't consumer replaceable it is part of the item as sold and should pass the "reasonable person" test for product lifetime. If the rest of the phone is fine and the battery isn't then that's a clear product defect. Especially where there are a lot of examples.

I don't understand how people have been so completely conned by phone manufacturers about this.

[blandy]

7 minutes ago, limpid said:

Why are you paying to fix a defective device? If the part isn't consumer replaceable it is part of the item as sold and should pass the "reasonable person" test for product lifetime. If the rest of the phone is fine and the battery isn't then that's a clear product defect. Especially where there are a lot of examples.

I don't understand how people have been so completely conned by phone manufacturers about this.

I think it's to do with the technology. The battery life of a Li ion battery is limited to what it is. As with removable (consumer replaceable) batteries, it's reasonable to charge for replacements. While it's tricky for a "normal" consumer to do, it is possible and some people do. The alternative of getting shiny thing plc. to do it for you, for a fee after 4 or 5 years is deemed "reasonable" and, realistically, it is, IMO. It's not a "product defect". I guess it's deemed a design feature that people accept and want, even. #backInmydayitwasallclockwork

[limpid]

1 minute ago, blandy said:

I think it's to do with the technology. The battery life of a Li ion battery is limited to what it is. As with removable (consumer replaceable) batteries, it's reasonable to charge for replacements. While it's tricky for a "normal" consumer to do, it is possible and some people do. The alternative of getting shiny thing plc. to do it for you, for a fee after 4 or 5 years is deemed "reasonable" and, realistically, it is, IMO. It's not a "product defect". I guess it's deemed a design feature that people accept and want, even. #backInmydayitwasallclockwork

You are describing a design choice by the manufacturer. If they are saying that the lifetime of the device is limited to the lifetime of the built in battery then that would probably be a defence. But they are offering to "fix" the designed obsolescence for a fee which completely erodes that defence.

But they'll continue to do this while people let them by paying.

Aided and abetted by the phone shops which still advise that you let the battery run flat before charging it again - the worst possible advice for longevity of lithium ion cells.

But we're getting off topic.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, limpid said:

If they are saying that the lifetime of the device is limited to the lifetime of the built in battery then that would probably be a defence. But they are offering to "fix" the designed obsolescence for a fee which completely erodes that defence.

That's completely wrong (IMO). Apple or whoever makes these phones - batteries have a relatively short life of a few years. The phone itself should last much longer. Have a 9 year old mac and a 15 year old iPod that still work (the mac on the original battery still - though it's obviously much larger than a phone battery ). Replacing batteries, whether easily accessed or more difficultly accessed is not a "design flaw, or choice - it's a consequence of portable tech. Batteries do not become obsolete, they "wear out" and like with aa clutch plate on a car, need to be replaced. Most people get a dealer or garage to do that for them. Some get the tolls and do it themselves. Batteries are consumables.

The design aspect of building them in, internally is about more than just user accessibility.

To get back to Bicks problem, apple stores making it difficult to get an appointment, perhaps prioritising other customer needs is something to validly criticise. Claiming battery replacement is designed in obsolescence and a Defect is not.

[limpid]

3 minutes ago, blandy said:

That's completely wrong (IMO). Apple or whoever makes these phones - batteries have a relatively short life of a few years. The phone itself should last much longer. Have a 9 year old mac and a 15 year old iPod that still work (the mac on the original battery still - though it's obviously much larger than a phone battery ). Replacing batteries, whether easily accessed or more difficultly accessed is not a "design flaw, or choice - it's a consequence of portable tech. Batteries do not become obsolete, they "wear out" and like with aa clutch plate on a car, need to be replaced. Most people get a dealer or garage to do that for them. Some get the tolls and do it themselves. Batteries are consumables.

You're entitled to your opinion  I think that making the battery not user serviceable is a design flaw for a component that wears out by design. It would be like designing a clutch where the plate can only be fixed by returning it to the manufacturer (or someone paying them to act on their behalf). I've got 10 year old laptops with lithium ion batteries which have barely lost any capacity - but I accept that I use those in very different ways.

It looks to me like a scam designed to increase footfall in stores for the upselling opportunities. "It's going to cost this much to fix your battery, but instead we can sell you the new shiny we've made you wait in front of for an hour."

[blandy]

2 hours ago, limpid said:

It's going to cost this much to fix your battery, but instead we can sell you the new shiny we've made you wait in front of for an hour."

Definitely.  That’s a major part of it. That’s my point about the issue being not the limitations of battery life, but of getting the chance to get a battery replacement. Batteries are consumables, but it should be easier to get them replaced. It’s not the design or engineering at fault, but customer service..

[limpid]

10 hours ago, blandy said:

Definitely.  That’s a major part of it. That’s my point about the issue being not the limitations of battery life, but of getting the chance to get a battery replacement. Batteries are consumables, but it should be easier to get them replaced. It’s not the design or engineering at fault, but customer service..

For me the problem is that the industry has made it so that most people now think mobile phones will only last a few years and that the "reasonable person" test will start to reflect that.

Many people thing they are out of warranty when the manufacturers warrant expires. It's crazy.

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, limpid said:

For me the problem is that the industry has made it so that most people now think mobile phones will only last a few years and that the "reasonable person" test will start to reflect that.

Many people thing they are out of warranty when the manufacturers warrant expires. It's crazy.

Do you think it's a bit chicken and egg or are the manufacturers solely to blame?

I'd guess most people get phones these days on a 1 or 2 year cycle. Probably 2 years more than 1.

So are manufacturers, rightly or wrongly, making phones and their batteries to suit that cycle? If most customers are only going to keep a phone for two years then why make all the phones with batteries that will last 6?

All open questions, I'm on your side that it's bad that effectively the products aren't fit for purpose. I just wonder if it's a calculated risk that they take because they know it'll suit most people's usage.

Edited September 28, 2018 by Stevo985

[limpid]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

Do you think it's a bit chicken and egg or are the manufacturers solely to blame?

I'd guess most people get phones these days on a 1 or 2 year cycle. Probably 2 years more than 1.

So are manufacturers, rightly or wrongly, making phones and their batteries to suit that cycle? If most customers are only going to keep a phone for two years then why make all the phones with batteries that will last 6?

All open questions, I'm on your side that it's bad that effectively the products aren't fit for purpose. I just wonder if it's a calculated risk that they take because they know it'll suit most people's usage.

I think the entire market is controlled by the manufacturers and the consumers are being treated like sheep.

The first mobiles were on three or more year contracts. They were primarily sold to businesses and that was a normal lease period. The Unfair Contract Terms Act was introduced in to sort out (amongst other things) contract terms which weren't suitable for mobile phone consumers. Contracts fell to a default of a year. As the manufacturers (and consumers) drove prices up, the standard contract changed to two years.

I'm curious to know what you think people do with their phones after two years. Many get passed down the family. People do expect them to last more than two years, but they accept what they are told about manufacturer warranties, rather than using their rights to go after retailers.

At the end of the day we get what we've accepted. Once people only expect the phone to only last two years, then the manufacturers will cut more corners to ensure that they don't last past two years - even if that means an occasional warranty claim.

I'm not really sure if that's an answer to you or just more stiff 

[blandy]

PAYG isn't a contract (well it is for a month at a time... but ykwim). Plenty people buy their phones outright and then go with whatever service provider they want, and often change between them. This doesn't counter your point about the way people get tied into say, Vodaphone and a 1 or 2 year "pay a ton a month and get a new phone every year or so..." contract, but IMO those deals are not wise ones to follow.

The warranty thing - the phone itself, yeah, sure, after the manufacturers warranty has expired, if it fails then there's still a "reasonable" period in law where you can get redress. With the battery this "reasonable" period is not as long as for the rest of the phone (which might be up to 6 years) Batteries can reasonably be expected to last a shorter time and perhaps much shorter if heavily used. maybe 1000 charge cycles is "reasonable" which would be approx 2 to 3 years of heavy-ish use.

You're right that many folk will think "3 years I've had this, the battery isn't lasting as long, there's a new Android or Apple phone with shiny features...I'll get an upgrade".

I wonder if they're all doing as much as they can to improve battery technology which might ultimately mean they'd sell fewer phones, as you rightly imply.

[NurembergVillan]

Just taken receipt of a couple of new 15" Macbook Pros.  Currently using a 2014 13" version so I'm excited to see how much more powerful it is.

Too busy to down tools and switch everything over at the moment though, so haven't even opened the box yet!

Speaking of which - TTFN!

[Stevo985]

5 hours ago, limpid said:

I think the entire market is controlled by the manufacturers and the consumers are being treated like sheep.

The first mobiles were on three or more year contracts. They were primarily sold to businesses and that was a normal lease period. The Unfair Contract Terms Act was introduced in to sort out (amongst other things) contract terms which weren't suitable for mobile phone consumers. Contracts fell to a default of a year. As the manufacturers (and consumers) drove prices up, the standard contract changed to two years.

I'm curious to know what you think people do with their phones after two years. Many get passed down the family. People do expect them to last more than two years, but they accept what they are told about manufacturer warranties, rather than using their rights to go after retailers.

At the end of the day we get what we've accepted. Once people only expect the phone to only last two years, then the manufacturers will cut more corners to ensure that they don't last past two years - even if that means an occasional warranty claim.

I'm not really sure if that's an answer to you or just more stiff 

Yeah wasn’t really looking for an answer, just aimless thoughts

You’re right that it’s shaped by the manufacturers I guess. I think people are quite happy to have a new phone every 12 or 24 months. 

So I guess your part about we get what we’ve accepted was what I was getting at. We’ve settled into that cycle and the manufacturers play to it. 

But then we’re in that cycle because of the manufacturers. 

[Stevo985]

Reserved my XS Max to pick up on Friday

 

 

 

Baa

[Genie]

How’s the XS @Stevo985? 

[Stevo985]

14 hours ago, Genie said:

How’s the XS @Stevo985? 

XS Max

its a beautiful phone. Screen is huge but the size of the actual phone is basically exactly the same as my 8 plus

screen is amazing. 

Lack of home Button is already a non issue. Works perfectly fine without it. Face unlock has worked flawlessly so far. Even when I looked at my phone at night it still managed to pick up my face. 

Only weird thing is because of the shape of the phone the screen ratio doesn’t really work. Like to watch something and get it to take up the entire screen you have to zoom it, cutting off the top and bottom. Bit weird. 

I’m also very surprised at how, when you do this, you really don’t notice the notch at all. It’s not really in your field of vision. Surprising. 

Anyway, I love it so far. 

Edited October 6, 2018 by Stevo985

[Stevo985]

Also the speakers seem much better. Not necessarily louder, although they probably are, but a much better stereo effect when you’re watching stuff. 

[Stevo985]

I much preferred the fingerprint authorisation for Apple Pay over the face id.

With finger print you'd just take your phone out of your pocket, thumb on the button already, double click and it would all be done, and you could hold the phone against the contactless thingamajig and done. All one seamless movement.

 

With face ID you have to use the power button on the side to bring up Apple Pay which doesn't seem as natural at all.

We're talking real fine details here. It doesn't really matter, just a small thing I noticed. It's about the only negative I have so far.

[jim]

3 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

I much preferred the fingerprint authorisation for Apple Pay over the face id.

With finger print you'd just take your phone out of your pocket, thumb on the button already, double click and it would all be done, and you could hold the phone against the contactless thingamajig and done. All one seamless movement.

 

With face ID you have to use the power button on the side to bring up Apple Pay which doesn't seem as natural at all.

We're talking real fine details here. It doesn't really matter, just a small thing I noticed. It's about the only negative I have so far.

It gets easier as you get used to it. Nowadays I double click the power button as it's coming out of my pocket, quick glance then hold it to the reader, all very seamless.

[Stevo985]

26 minutes ago, jim said:

It gets easier as you get used to it. Nowadays I double click the power button as it's coming out of my pocket, quick glance then hold it to the reader, all very seamless.

I guess in my head I'm thinking you still need to hold the phone's back against the reader, flat. Which is awkward using the power button but was easy using the fingerprint.

In reality you just need to hold it near so it's probably not as much of an issue as I'm making it

[jim]

2 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

I guess in my head I'm thinking you still need to hold the phone's back against the reader, flat. Which is awkward using the power button but was easy using the fingerprint.

In reality you just need to hold it near so it's probably not as much of an issue as I'm making it

You only double click the power button to bring up your cards, you don't have to touch it after that, once face id has authenticated you, just show it to the reader. You can even do the process whilst waiting in the queue or whilst they are scanning your items then just hold the phone to the reader.