Separate names with a comma.
You are viewing our forums as a GUEST. Please join us so you can post and view all the pictures.
Registration is easy, fast and FREE!
Discussion in 'Wireless News' started by charlyee, Dec 30, 2015.
But planned obsolescence is part of the free enterprise system. Its the American Way. Take a look at the way American auto makers produce cars. Heck, even bread molds. It just natural, I tell you. (Where's my soap box?!)
I don't think they would've gotten such a response have they chosen to drop iPhone 4s support. And it would still be a planned obsolescence, no?
Smartphones normally get 18 months of support, 24 months if you're lucky.
The 4S came out in October of 2011. It's over 4 years old.
I think people are upset that Apple claimed 4s is compatible with iOS 9 but in reality it doesn't work as well as it does with the newer models.
Apple does usually promise backward compatibility for two generations but this the first time, that I am aware of, there is a lawsuit.
A device that is 4 years old is a stretch and Apple would have been better off not claiming iOS 9 compatibility.
Just my 2 cents
Practically 'unavoidable obsolescence' is the story for the future.
I think there was another lawsuit like this a couple of years ago but it was thrown out of court.
I don't see the lawsuit going very far, given how old the 4S is.
Seems like a money grab to me.
I agree that ' compatibility ' might be a stretch for a 4S under iOS 9. Sometimes this only means waiting a second or two instead of milliseconds for apps to open or perform a function. Perhaps a ridiculous notion given the power that lies underneath, but I personally can understand that frustration.
Have we forgotten that since the beginning of desktop only period of home computers, it was a given that newer OS's generally slowed things down, or caused incompatibilities?
I do agree that a solution would be for Apple to allow downward iOS on devIces. However I also understand the inherent problems there.
People will complain that that apps don't work ( a good reason for upgrading hardware and software on any device), and then there is the service part of having generations of devices with many iOS 's. Too many combinations to handle in a 'it just works' industry.
If they win $5 million, I bet they go out and buy a new 6S
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Personally, I think the solution would be for Apple to shorten the period in which they offer the full OS upgrades to something more reasonable. As @viewfly has pointed out, it's almost inevitable that a new OS will run slower than its predecessor on the old hardware, and after a few generations it may become unbearable. I think Google's model is a lot saner, with only two years of full OS updates and then only security patches afterwards. Four years is a tad too much IMHO.
2 years would only add to the claims of the lawsuit of planned obsolescence. Maybe 3?
However,Apple will do what is best experience for the majority of its customers in the end ( which translates to profits). Since all these type is lawsuits have not made it and this one represents about 100 people, I expect nothing will happen.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
As long as Apple keeps security patches coming past 2 years I don't think it'll be a problem. Your phone will be functioning as well or better as when you got it. From what I understand in this lawsuit the problem is that the user's phones became practically unusable after the upgrade.
That being said, judging by the lack of owners of iPhone 5 complaining about iOS 9 killing their phones, 3 years sounds like a fairly safe number at this point.