Skip to main content

What Is The Point of an OS Upgrade That Cripples Your Phone?

One of the figures that Apple is very keen on trotting out  whenever it gets the opportunity is the one that measures the number of phone users who have upgraded to the latest version of the OS. The pitch usually goes something like this: 99% of iPhones are running the latest version of iOS just seventeen minutes after it was released to the public, meanwhile the latest version of Android is only on three phones despite being available for three months. (I'm paraphrasing here)

However Harvard professor Sendhil Mullainathan has been doing some research using Google Trends that suggests that large numbers of users are immediately disenchanted with their iPhones post-upgrade. The search term 'iPhone slow' goes ballistic on Google immediately after the release of a new version of iOS. This NYTimes article has more details.

So the question is: does Apple deliberately sabotage performance of older devices in the way it codes its upgrades or is this just the result of trying to push older hardware to places it should never be taken?

Either way it doesn't look good for Apple. A failure to properly test upgrades on older devices or a deliberate sabotage that goes beyond built-in obsolescence.

A little bit of honesty wouldn't go amiss here. If an older iPhone isn't up to running your shiny new version of iOS then don't provide it. Sure those ridiculous keynote graphs won't look so good, but a company allegedly so customer focused as Apple shouldn't protecting the customer's investment count for something?

After all, when they find out they can't have the upgrade those users will probably choose to buy a new iPhone anyway, so why dupe them?


Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…