We now know Apple are slowing down batteries to “prolong lifespan” and “prevent sudden shutdown” – but, is this acceptable?

When Apple admitted that their updated software is slowing down older models, many were outraged. The frequency of new models being released is far too much for some; especially when the cost of a new model can easily set you back a lot of money and equate to more than £100 a month.

For a phone!

So, is Apple’s explanation that they introduced the feature for the iPhone 6 and later models to protect problems occurring with batteries acceptable?

For years now there have been rumours that older models were suffering what felt like intentional slowdown. When Apple finally admitted that such a feature had been introduced in 2016, many Apple customers were mad.

It was confirmed that iPhones with older batteries slowed down when cold or when charge was low. It was explained that a battery in poor condition could cause an iPhone to suddenly shutdown and damage internal components. As such, the change is designed to protect older models.

Is it acceptable?

It comes down to whether people believe in Apple’s explanation, and believe that it is genuine, or whether people suspect that it’s nothing more than “planned obsolescence“; i.e. a way of getting people to upgrade to a newer model.

I mean, let’s face it: when you have an Apple, you’re likely going to stay with them. I know I have. And if you’re finding your phone slow when it’s time to upgrade, and there are like-for-like options available for newer models, it’s easy to end up upgrading and spending the same amount of money paying off a new phone instead of sitting on the old one and only paying for usage.

Apple insist that the feature is genuinely there to protect the phone and its components, and they do offer new batteries at a cost of around £80.00, which is probably far cheaper than purchasing a newer model. The fact that it appears to have taken Apple a fair amount of time to confirm the fact that their phones slow down has made many suspicious.

Unless there is any evidence to prove that this is needless and / or blatant “planned obsolescence“, you may just have to deal with it.