XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.sys.mac.advocacy   
   From: nospam@nospam.invalid   
      
   In article ,   
   badgolferman  wrote:   
      
   > >>So secretly reducing the capability of the phone without warning   
   > >>customers is the sensible thing to do? Maybe Arlen is right about   
   > >>you after all.   
   > >>   
   > >   
   > >As opposed to the alternative‹just shutting down without warning?   
   >   
   > That is not the only alternative.   
      
   what other alternatives do you think there are?   
      
   when an aging battery can't source sufficient current for high demand   
   loads, the voltage drops below what's needed to operate the device,   
   resulting in a sudden and unexpected shutdown. this is not unique to   
   iphones. it's something that affects all batteries.   
      
   the only alternative is to limit high demand loads so that the battery   
   is not pushed beyond its limits where shutdowns can happen.   
      
   as has been said many times before, only the peaks are limited. normal   
   everyday actions (messaging, browsing, email, etc.) are unaffected.   
      
   > Warning users that their batteries   
   > are dying and will cause problems is a better choice.   
      
   warning users doesn't change the fact that their phone is at risk for   
   unexpectedly shutting down under load unless peak demands are limited,   
   and they do get a warning after the first shutdown, at which point peak   
   limiting is active.   
      
   > Give the   
   > consumer the choice of what to do with their purchased device rather   
   > than trick them into buying new ones.   
      
   nobody is being tricked into buying new phones.   
      
   in fact, it's the very *opposite* of that.   
      
   limiting peak demands *extends* the useful life of people's existing   
   phone so that they *don't* need to buy a new one.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)