Personally, I don’t, but I was trying to convey a neutral stance. That said, I didn’t like their approach of secrecy and, at least seemingly and anecdotally, doing it when receiving updates rather than over time based on some metric such as battery cycle count. I find this possibly related to their anti-repair practices.
> seemingly and anecdotally, doing it when receiving updates rather than over time based on some metric such as battery cycle count.
You have absolutely no evidence to support this statement.
> That said, I didn’t like their approach of secrecy
Apple is under no obligation to disclose every practice or behavior, especially one which is completely innocuous and benefits the customer with zero downside. The alternative to slowing down the processor to account for increased internal resistance is "the phone crashes", which is exactly what iPhone 6S models did until Apple released the fix in an iOS 10 update.
Several generations of iPhones have been clearly specifically designed to make the battery and screen easy to replace (Apple even uses pull-tab-releaseable adhesives for the battery), and doesn't place the lightning connector on the main board unlike damn near every Android phone; it's an easily replaced module.
The "slowdown" was specifically to increase the amount of time before the phone's battery would have to be replaced. Other manufacturers have done the same.
How strange that this anti-repair anti-consumer company's OS releases support their phones far longer than any other phone manufacturer...
> You have absolutely no evidence to support this statement.
Correct. That’s why I said “seemingly” and “anecdotally”.
> Apple is under no obligation to disclose every practice or behavior, especially one which is completely innocuous and benefits the customer with zero downside.
I didn’t say they did, I just said I didn’t like it.
