A Message to Our Customers about iPhone Batteries and Performance - <AUTHOR> https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/ <comment><USER2> I think this is a good response, and I think a lot of the outrage over this issue is overblown. At the end of the day there's a fundamental tradeoff that Apple needs to make on behalf of their customers: performance or stability. They chose stability, and I think they have a convincing argument as to why: "It should go without saying that we think sudden, unexpected shutdowns are unacceptable. We don't want any of our users to lose a call, miss taking a picture or have any other part of their iPhone experience interrupted if we can avoid it."

I have two concerns:

1) They still haven't fully eliminated the sudden shutdown behavior. My old 5S would shut down randomly under 20% without warning. Sometimes it would make it all the way to 1-2%, but most of the time it was between 5-15%. You'd think they'd scale performance throttling untilt this wasn't an issue.

2) I think their messaging with respect to battery health and the battery being a consumable is pretty poor. As far as I can tell there's no built-in battery health indicator in iOS. Sure there are those dodgy "Super Battery Health Plus Pro" apps, but it seems like a diagnostic menu in settings would go a long way. Even more puzzling is that techs at the Apple Store have access to some sort of diagnostic that does this already. Last time I went to get another issue fixed the guy said that my battery was at 70% capacity and the voltage was pretty low. Why wait until '2018' to ship a self-serve version of this?

<comment><USER3> The outrage doesn't seem overblown to me. For years I knew that my iphones were becoming obsolete not entirely from the passage of time but instead from upgrading the OS. Apple insisted they were not slowing down devices. Now they claim that they started this in iOS 10.2, without notification.

My experience has been that upgrading the OS results in degraded performance 100% of the time. Whether intentional or not Apple would not acknowledge the issue. The phone shutting down at X% charge has always started after an OS upgrade.

<comment><USER4> What people are missing here is that while Apple now confess that they did slowdown the iPhone 6 and 6s when they released the 7, they are not saying anything about earlier models.

They are however lowering the price to exchange batteries even for older models. Why would they do that if they where not affected? Why don't they say this practice started with the IOS 10 update? They just say they did it in the 10 update. For me it's obvious this is just a PR "puff piece" and looks like a majority here is buying it... So well played Apple.

<comment><USER5> This was a perfect opportunity for Apple to come out and explicitly state they have never slowed phones down _other than in this instance_. That would certainly go a long way to restoring confidence.

Instead they came out with a weasely-worded statement that is designed to _give the impression_ that they only recently starting doing this. But... they don't actually make that claim.

Apple lawyers are very good at what they do. Well played Apple indeed.

<comment><USER6> Give me a break please. From the post:

>First and foremost, we have never — and would never — do anything to intentionally shorten the life of any Apple product, or degrade the user experience to drive customer upgrades. Our goal has always been to create products that our customers love, and making iPhones last as long as possible is an important part of that.

I see 0 weasel words or dodging here. Give me a break hacker news. Thanks.

<comment><USER5> Notice all the qualifiers? Notice that the above statement, while technically truthful does not tell the whole story?

This is not a time for vague promises IMHO, it's time for specific and clear statements. Why not just say you don't slow phones full stop?

<comment><USER6> What qualifiers? They said they haven't and never would do anything to shorten or harm device life. That's as direct as it gets. This isn't a weasel word message, sorry.

<comment><USER7> they would never do it "to drive customer upgrades".

That isn't never do it. That's never do it for a single specific reason. Why add that clause?

I guarantee no word in that statement is wasted on meaningless fluff.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> My wife's 6+ was incredibly slow after the iOS upgrade.

My 6+ drained the battery incredibly quickly. I was told that upgrading the iOS would fix that problem [0]; it didn't. Instead it slowed my phone to the point of being unusable.

If I'd have known replacing the battery would have fixed both of them, I'd have done that. Instead, I stupidly bought two new, very expensive phones. Since we were already locked into the Apple ecosystem (with paid apps and media), we bought iPhones.

This does nothing to compensate or win back the trust of customers like me.

[0] [https://i.imgur.com/OYZr7zd.png](https://i.imgur.com/OYZr7zd.png)

<comment><USER9> > This does nothing to compensate or win back the trust of customers like me.

What is it that you want Apple to do to make you personally feel better?

<comment><USER10> It's a legitimate question. Frankly, the idea of a phone's performance drastically changing over the course of one(1) version upgrade should aggrivate someone more than this. How can it be acceptable for a single release to "slow a phone to a crawl"?

This response makes sense. They screwed up communicating the issue of battery life to the masses that apparently don't know batteries wear out. They're fixing it, they're biting into their revenue with a mea culpa price cut, and they're making the OS more communicative of this nuance of phone performance.

<comment><USER11> People know batteries wear out, but the expected behaviour is the phone lasting less hours between charges, or even unexpected shutdowns, but definitely not degraded CPU performance.

That has never happened before, there was no precedent for that, and no way of knowing it was a battery issue. The only solution for most people was buying a new phone.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> > Apple is reducing the price of an out-of-warranty iPhone battery replacement > by $50 — from $79 to $29...

> Early in 2018, we will issue an iOS software update with new features that > give users more visibility into the health of their iPhone's battery, so > they can see for themselves if its condition is affecting performance.

There we go.

It took too much trouble and too long for it to happen, but Apple is stepping up and doing the right thing.

Actually, the cost of battery replacement is now excellent. If they hadn't screwed this up by not communicating what was going on, I think they could have easily justified $49 - $59.

So I take the drop to $29 as a tangible apology, which I appreciate. (Well, personally, I've already replaced my battery using a $25 kit from Amazon, but obviously that's not viable for the great majority of iPhone owners.)

<comment><USER13> This isn't the first time this has happened to Apple. They use to not sell replacement batteries for the original iPods, and when people called in to complain, they were often told to buy an entire new iPod. This was settled in a lawsuit:

[http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/apples- ip...](http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/apples-ipod-battery- settlement-explained)

Another important note is this battery replacement cost only cover the iPhone6 and up. That's only the 2015 release. That's still lubricious. If we had devices as powerful as today's cellphones that cost $500+ in the early-90s, losing support after 2~3 years would be lubricious.

In 2012 I remember seeing someone with the first generation iPhone EDGE (pre-3G). That's right; the thing was like 6? 7 years old? He really only used it on Wi-Fi. EDGE data was painful, but it was still his primary/only phone for another year.

The throwaway economy saddens me, and this move doesn't really do enough to prevent the continuing pileup of e-waste being shipped on boats to China and Africa.

<comment><USER14> Agreed. It's also a waste of human labor to throw away devices when they could still be made useful with some simple repairs. To go further, it is wasteful to design hardware to be disposable rather than repairable and reusable.

People with jobs I wouldn't want to do work very hard to bring us these devices, and the earth gives up resources to mine, transport, and shape the materials. Throwing things away when they could last 5-10x as long consumes our precious resources and wastes our collective capital.

Finally I'll say that a lack of open software support contributes to this. If I could flash alpine linux on an old iPhone, Nexus, or Samsung, I could find great uses for the old hardware. Such a project is now underway (Alpine linux for Mobile), but mobile devices are still a morass of unpatchable secret binaries with glaring security holes.

I know we can better use our resources than to throw a two or three year old flagship phone in the trash or let it waste away in an old drawer, but it will take us demanding more of manufacturers and calling them out for their waste before they take action on it.

<comment><USER15> > It's also a waste of human labor to throw away devices when they could still > be made useful with some simple repairs.

Are you sure? Assembly line production is highly efficient, that's why warranty service usually means "throw way the old one into the refurbish or recycle pile and give you a new one", not "fix your old one"

<comment><USER16> > Assembly line production is highly efficient

The highlevel production may be, but rare-earth mining is incredibly dirty (and some of them, if not sourced from fair trade, directly fund warring groups), and IC manufacturing isn't exactly environment friendly too, lots of nasty chemicals used there.

<comment><USER17> There's quite a bit of work into recycling those, and Apple has already has the means of recovering much of it - pity people don't generally return their used phones to them, though. Your replacement battery is unlikely to be recycled better than when it's done in an automated manner on a fairly large scale.

Of course Apple can get away cheap because of that "people don't even try to recycle" thing. Forcing the industry to do the same thing that happened with bottles (everyone has to accept bottles over certain capacity they sell, and _pay for them_ — though right-wing governments are shuttering those programs) would work wonders, and likely be far better than the romanticised "repairability."

<comment><USER18> > far better than the romanticised "repairability"

I decide on my own what I want, which is to fix the damn thing if it's fixable and not spend 1000$ on a new one. And to fix it is "far better" than to recycle it, or to have it artificially slowed without explanation and deceived into buying a new one.

Apple is not the company I once admired. Time passes, MS is slightly more ok and Apple is bad. Weird. I wouldn't have guessed in the early 2000's.

<comment><USER17> "And to fix it is "far better" than to recycle it"

Because what, because you say so? I mean, I can say it's far better to dress my phone up in a green skirt and hang it outside my window as a Christmas decoration then. About just as relevant.

"Time passes, MS is slightly more ok and Apple is bad."

You seem to have missed the lesson from the Apple thing: companies ain't your friends.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> > A chemically aged battery also becomes less capable of delivering peak > energy loads, especially in a low state of charge, which may result in a > device unexpectedly shutting itself down in some situations.

I think the people in the Silicon Valley need to take a step back and understand that people in the rest of the world don't change phone every year. If a phone become unusable because of its battery (according to them) during the expected lifetime of the device then batteries need to be easily replacable.

<comment><USER20> Easy replacement of batteries is a problem only if you don't have an Apple store or Apple authorized service center nearby (which could be the case for many people across many countries). The batteries have been replaceable for a fee by Apple or an Apple authorized service provider.

<comment><USER21> We have very different ideas of "easy". My phone died last night after a day of heavy use, so I pulled the battery out and swapped it with the spare one in its wall charger ($14 for both, shipped) and I was back at 100%.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm really infuriated about this. Since mid-2016, my iPhone 6 Plus started to act "weird". It'd shut down sporadically, would reach 40% and then suddenly deplete, and started to get slow. But the problems were not consistent. I went to the Apple Store, and the phone passed all their diagnosis checks, even the battery.

A few months later, after my AppleCare+ expired, the problems intensified. And I spent most of 2017 with a very slow and unreliable phone. I honestly thought it was iOS 10. Had I known it was the battery, I'd have paid to replace it. Or I'd have forced them to upgrade it for me for free when I had AppleCare+.

I upgraded to an iPhone X, thinking the 6 Plus had reached its EOL, but now I think I've been lied to!

<comment><USER23> Your issue isn't this "scandal" though. This is about preventing sporadic shutdowns by throttling, so if your phone was shutting down it was an undiagnosed bad battery, which is a legit complaint.

<comment><USER24> Yes it is. The "fix" was introduced to avoid these crashes by throttling instead of browning out. It's in the article.

<comment><USER23> The fix, the throttling, is the controversial part, NOT the sporadic shutdowns. It's absurd, because throttling is much better than brownouts, but that's what the lawsuits are about.

<comment><USER24> I don't get it. You are acting as if the brownouts are typical behavior of a year-old battery in a phone?

The real scandal is the shoddy design and engineering that led to brownouts that necessitated either a massive recall or this throttling.

<comment><USER23> That might be the "real scandal" but it isn't "this scandal". It doesn't matter what I think about brownouts because that isn't the topic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Just going to throw this one out there.

I swapped from an Nexus 5 to an iPhone 6+. I bought the iPhone 1.5yrs second hand to get a significant amount off its price. It is dented significantly on the back, but still serves me like a new phone apart from a noticed slow-down.

On the other hand, the Nexus randomly started shutting off and the battery only lasted half a day after charging every day for the following 2 years.

The phones are now effectively the same age and Apples fix has prolonged the apparent age of my phone, I guess (thanks).

But I think people are being harsher because Apple products have longer expected life but use the same battery technology. This isn't really fair, is it?

Ftn. I have designed and manufactured 3 battery assemblies for electric vehicles in a racing context.

<comment><USER26> Your sample size is too small. You may have gotten a lemon phone. I don't know what point you are trying to make based on your personal experience with 1 nexus phone. I have personally never experienced what you are talking about.

<comment><USER25> My point was both phones experience similar degradation after similar periods of time, but the iPhone 6 is more usable as a result of the performance scaling, so (IMO) I don't think their original motif was malicious [ftn 1]. I'm actually very happy they're bothering to do it even though they surely realised the potential to become a PR nightmare.

[1] I could probably at this point even sell my phone again for like 200 bucks and someone would buy it, which could even be hurting them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Reducing the battery replacement by $50 is a great move. While I think this is a completely manufactured scandal, this will definitely take away the last argument people have against them.

I'm sure some people will still hate them for something, though.

<comment><USER28> I don't think it's a _completely_ manufactured scandal, although most of the reporting was deceptive (as is, I'm starting to suspect, most reporting, full stop).

I think the non-manufactured part of the scandal is having your phone throttle itself w/o _telling_ you it's doing that is pretty annoying.

You're left wondering, is my phone running slower or is my mind playing tricks on me?

I think Apple's response here is great.

<comment><USER29> > (as is, I'm starting to suspect, most reporting, full stop).

Don't hate on all journalism (or anything, really) just because of some bad apples. Even if it were true (which it isn't), it takes away all motivation for people in that industry to do the right thing. Why bother spending time on well-researched reporting, if all you get back is "fake news" or "all journalists are corrupt and produce clickbait"-hate on Twitter?

More specifically, here's a Q&A, and a previous article, discounting Apple conspiracy theories by The New York Times:

"Is Apple Slowing Down Old iPhones? Questions and Answers": [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/21/technology/iphone- battery...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/21/technology/iphone-battery- problem-slow.html?mtrref=www.google.com)

"A New Phone Comes Out. Yours Slows Down. A Conspiracy? No.": [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/15/technology/personaltech/n...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/15/technology/personaltech/new- iphones-slow-tech-myth.html)

<comment><USER9> > Don't hate on all journalism (or anything, really) just because of some bad > apples

Unfortunately, since these days anyone with a smartphone can call themselves a "journalist," it's become like the lawyer situation — the 90% bad ones give the 10% good ones a bad name.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> To be fair that is a pretty decent response. The reality is batteries _do_ degrade over time and they have to manage that. They should have been transparent about what they were doing and I'm not sure giving the user control over it is all that sensible.

Are there any battery experts who can chime in with their opinion on this?

<comment><USER31> I'm not a battery expert, but it needs to be pointed out that other smartphone manufacturers do not have this problem. It was Apple specific - it's not as if every device with a lithium battery shuts off at 40%. So it still feels like they're doing it to mitigate a fault with the device, and should've been more transparent about that in the first place.

<comment><USER32> > op: [request for a battery expert to chime in with professional opinion]

> response: [non-battery expert with subjective opinion]

sums up why I hate HN comments sometimes.

<comment><USER33> To be fair: the OP didn't merely ask, he also gave a subjective opinion on the matter; and it looks like the response was to that, and not related to the battery expertise bit.

But hey; in an online forum things get off topic... kind of like this ;-)!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> One thing that Apple hasn't addressed is if the Geekbench results [1] over- represents or exaggerates the the throttling effect. Since Geekbench pushes the iPhone to its limits for the duration of the benchmark, iOS needs to throttle performance to prevent shutdown while being tested. This results in lower-than-expected test scores every time. But how much does this map to real-life, visible performance drop?

Edit: Another question I have is how do other devices handle battery degradation? Do Android phones just let devices shutdown unexpectedly or is there also performance throttling? Or is the problem non-existent on non-Apple devices somehow?

[1] [https://www.geekbench.com/blog/2017/12/iphone-performance- an...](https://www.geekbench.com/blog/2017/12/iphone-performance-and-battery- age/)

<comment><USER35> The problem isn't very prevalent in Android devices, because they have more "voltage headroom". The chipsets are not pushed to the limits / the red line, so battery degradation won't result in performance drops or sudden shutdowns.

Sudden shutdowns do still occur for some devices, but it is nowhere as iPhone devices pre-throttling. It's also something that didn't affect previous iPhones before the 6, because those devices did not have a very thin redline.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> I still think Apple should sue some publications for defamation for the manifestly bad reporting about this story [1]. Here's John Siracusa about it [2].

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15995018](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15995018)

[2] [https://overcast.fm/+CdQP59ws/56:00](https://overcast.fm/+CdQP59ws/56:00)

<comment><USER37> I had to turn off that episode after Casey opened the segment by condescendingly dismissing any concerns about the behaviour. Quite rude and annoying.

Marco doesn't see the value in tracking podcast listeners, but I'd think he'd benefit to know what causes people to stop when listening to their show.

<comment><USER38> > opened the segment by condescendingly dismissing any concerns about the > behaviour.

Really? I thought that was perfectly fair. Apple made it so people's phones don't randomly shut off all the time if the battery is old and people are complaining about it because it fits into a different false narrative.

I honestly do think this whole thing is very overblown. I'm glad they're fixing iOS to inform users it's going on (that was certainly an issue) and dropping the price of battery replacements is a great move.

But I don't think this is the giant scandal that the tech press is trying to make it. I thought Casey's assessment was quite fair.

<comment><USER11> Apple hid the cause (an ageing battery), and purposely slowed down peoples phones without warning.

If your phone randomly shuts downs, or it last less time between charges, you know it must be a battery issue. You go to Apple or whatever, and fix it paying no more than 79$ (maybe even free if it still has warranty!)

If you hide it and degrade performance, people don't know its a battery issue, leaving them to suffer a slow phone, or spending 700+$ on a new phone.

No matter the good intentions, and the "good solution" they implemented, they fucked up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> From the statement...

        "All rechargeable batteries are consumable components"

If they are "consumable", why aren't they user replaceable. As far as I'm concerned any company that seals consumable parts inside a device isn't acting the interest of their users.

<comment><USER40> They can be replaced for $29.

<comment><USER41> Or you can replace them yourself. Its not that hard.

<comment><USER42> Doesn't that void your warranty tough?

<comment><USER43> That's no different than replacing parts on a car. You can pay Toyota to replace your brakes, or do it yourself. If you choose the later, then they fail, it's not Toyota's fault.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> The elephant in the room is, of course, Apple's obsession with thinness which makes it near impossible these days to get a usable laptop because PC makers totally copied Apple alas. It also gave us nonreplaceable batteries and any successful lawsuit that comes out of it is totally justified.

No one asked for this. Lighter, somewhat, yes but thin to the point where batteries are barely functional? Samsung's colossal Note failure is just another symptom of this. I had a Panasonic CF-Y5, a 14" 1.5kg laptop _ten years ago_ and somehow it managed to be that light without this thinness craziness.

<comment><USER45> Is it also why we have these awful keyboards on the new mbp ?

I feel them absolutely awful to type on (I have never complained about a keyboard before but I just can't stand this one), although it is subjective, some people are fine with it.

What is unquestionably bad though is that you need to replace the whole keyboard if one key has an issue (and apparently it happens a lot). I know several people for which Apple had to reset the whole laptop after a keyboard issue, but I can't make sense of it.

<comment><USER46> > I feel them absolutely awful to type on (I have never complained about a > keyboard before but I just can't stand this one), although it is subjective, > some people are fine with it.

I don't know why some people hate these keyboards. I don't really have a strong opinion about them. They feel slightly different and noisier but I get identical typing speed results compared to the previous one.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Lots of people saying that Apple only had two options - make old handsets slower, or have them randomly shutdown.

Might be a reflection of the culture those commenters are from, but it's disingenuous to assert.

Other options existed -- notably to advise the user, as part of the update, via mail-out, etc, that this choice had been made from them, and (optionally) what they could do about it.

<comment><USER48> What are they gonna do about it, "Yes I do want my phone to shut down immediately instead of continuing to be able use it"?

<comment><USER49> This is not realistic. The actual options are

a) slow the phone down

b) make the battery percentage accurate so that people will know when the battery is empty

I have used Samsung phones for a long time (since Galaxy S4), and I've never had a phone turn off on me when the battery percentage was anything other than 0%. Are we supposed to believe that the maker of the "world's most advanced smartphone" (their words) cannot figure out how to prevent random shutdowns without slowing down the whole phone?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> The Nexus 6P recently had a big consumer backlash and refund process bc phones would shut off randomly below 20% charge once they got older. I would guess the same thing is happening here. I would have much rather had reduced performance than a phone unusable under 20%. Luckily I got a free upgrade to the Pixel to fix it.

<comment><USER51> Yeah, I have owned various Android and iPhones over the years and this was a pretty common issue especially with an older phone in either a hot or cold climate.

<comment><USER52> I second that. My 2 year old Moto G was near unusable at the end. When it reached 15% charge it would just die.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> That's well and good, but this letter avoids the elephant in the room. Apple has gone way too far in sacrificing functionality for style.

I'll accept a seam in the phone, and a slightly thicker phone, if I could replace the battery myself. (That might also avoid the camera bump.)

The latest MBP really shit the bed with that poorly conceived touchbar, and the horribly inferior keyboard.

And in general, for many years now, Apple laptops have gotten far less serviceable in the name of sleekness.

Then there is the issue of software quality. That is a different issue, although perhaps the decline reflects corporate priorities, (sleek hardware is more important than anything). ITunes and Photos are just terrible. Bloated, confusing, inconsistent even within themselves, and certainly across releases. I dread having any contact with Apple's cloud -- it just never acts the way that I want it to, and I tread very carefully to avoid propagating deletes to places I don't want them to go. I _don 't want_ files to move seamlessly from one place to another, and to be downloaded on demand. It chews up my phone's monthly data allotment, and it doesn't work at all when I have no connection. Sharing is a disaster. I don't share anything because it is unclear who gets access to what.

Another aspect of software quality is a noticeable uptick in bugs. That iOS 11 texting bug (couldn't type "I" correctly) was a huge embarrassment, and it took an astoundingly long time to fix. And I heard many reports of crashes with iOS 11. My iPhone 6 is staying on iOS 10. Then there was the MacOS login- as-root-with-no-password bug.

I am seriously thinking about my non-Apple computer future. I have a mid-2015 MBP -- the last good one, as far as I'm concerned. I'm hoping that when I need an upgrade there will be some nice hardware compatible with Linux (fingers crossed for Razer). I'm stuck on the iPhone (because I trust Google not at all), so I'll need to figure out how to get that to coexist with Linux.

<comment><USER54> Inferior keyboard? I LOVE the new keyboard. And Touch Bar works great.

<comment><USER55> Unfortunately, Apple doesn't seem willing to support the Touch Bar.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> > First and foremost, we have never — and would never — do anything to > intentionally shorten the life of any Apple product, or degrade the user > experience to drive customer upgrades.

Didn't they degrade the user experience by slowing down the cpu? I definitely wasn't enjoying my slow iPhone

<comment><USER57> It's choosing the lesser of two evils. The two options are to have the phone run slower, or have the phone shut down unexpectedly with shorter battery life.

Personally, I agree with Apple's call on this one.

<comment><USER58> That's a false dichotomy; Apple has many options other than slowing down the phone and having it randomly restart.

For example, they could have altered the calibration of the battery indicator so 0% charge corresponds to the charge level where random restarts/throttling starts to occur.

<comment><USER38> Depending on how bad the battery is that me end up giving someone 30 to 60 minutes of battery life.

That seems almost useless. Certainly worse than having a slower phone that has hours of battery life.

<comment><USER59> But it could prompt them to see an Apple Care Rep and get a new battery, which would fix the ultimate issue according to them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> What theyre doing to fix it:

"Apple is reducing the price of an out-of-warranty iPhone battery replacement by $50 — from $79 to $29 — for anyone with an iPhone 6 or later whose battery needs to be replaced, starting in late January and available worldwide through December 2018. Details will be provided soon on apple.com.

Early in 2018, we will issue an iOS software update with new features that give users more visibility into the health of their iPhone's battery, so they can see for themselves if its condition is affecting performance."

<comment><USER61> This basically means they're giving you the battery for free. Takes 30-45 minutes of semi-skilled labor to replace it, loaded cost of the employee for even 30 minutes has got to be pretty close to the $29 they're charging.

Wonder if this means we'll see 12-24 month phones popping up on eBay with battery health reports, or receipts showing the owner(s) had them changed out just prior to sale.

<comment><USER62> They wouldn't have to give anything for free if, like for many other phones, the owner could replace the battery in 1 minute flat with no special tools...

<comment><USER45> I would love HN to force people to explain why they are downvoting something.

Batteries fail after a while, it has been a constant for a very long time.

What has changed is that in many recent phones it is a pain to replace it yourself.

<comment><USER62> My guess is that the downvote was a sort of "offtopic" one: "yeah, we can't change the battery ourselves, c'est la vie, it's Apple, get over it, let's discuss the issue at hand".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> I wonder how big a hole this is going to dig in Apple's balance sheet. I have known many people who bought new iPhone because old one was getting too slow, not because they wanted even more _thinner_ phone. This is especially true with families where cost of replacing iPhone is so prohibitive that no one wants to do it unless it's absolutely needed. Now that this issue hasn't got so much media attention I would think iPhone upgrades will hit major breaks.

</comment><comment><USER64> This is a great response imho. It doesn't fully tackle the issues I'm having with the approach Apple is taking, but at least Apple acknowledges its customers in a human way. This is almost un-Apple.

<comment><USER65> How many times have Apple written "We apologize" in press releases this year?

I think I read one during the whole disk encryption fiasco a few months ago..

Edit: no, that was the username: root, password: (blank) fiasco. And literally less than a month ago.

</comment></comment><comment><USER66> I believe this is a poor response because,

* In the first paragraph, they only apologized after limiting the limiting the scope to "some" customers who "feel" slighted. Like an irrational person on the defensive, giving a non-apology apology.

* They didn't address issues like: the CPU throttling is 24/7, whether the device is running off A/C or not. (!) Completely unnecessary and also — inconsistent with the battery-voltage argument.

* Affected users like me have been stuck with a barely functioning phone for a year. Since it stayed nearly unusable even when plugged in, I assumed it was simply due to Apple bloatware affecting older devices.

</comment><comment><USER67> I think part of what's missed here is the fact that Apple's products aren't just the physical things we hold in our hand.

A lot of folks would buy  stuff because they _TRUST_ Apple to provide a stable and reliable product.

It seems like with each release, quality and stability decrease, and customers' trust is further eroded.

I wonder if Apple management even considers issues from that perspective?

<comment> et-al > _A lot of folks would buy  stuff because they TRUST Apple to provide a > stable and reliable product._

Just wanted to emphasise this.

I put my parents on iPhones because I wanted to minimise them calling me for technical support. I taught them to update the phone's OS for security reasons, but iOS 11 came out and was dogshit for six weeks until 11.1.2 came out and my mom (a layperson) exclaimed "A[?]'m never updating again!".

Tim & Craig need to stop making their customers beta testers. That's why we paid the premium.

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is that Apple uses some of the smallest cells in the industry.

iPhone 8, 8+: 1821, 2675 mAh

Galaxy s8, s8+: 3000, 3500 mAh

That's a huge difference.

Apple gets away with this because the iPhone is more energy efficient than comparable Android phones, but that's only on average -- peak energy consumption is still comparable.

And when cells age, nominally larger cells retain the ability to drive peak workloads without browning out (even if they drain really fast), while Apple's tiny cells eventually just can't do it anymore.

</comment><comment><USER69> > Early in 2018, we will issue an iOS software update with new features that > give users more visibility into the health of their iPhone's battery, so > they can see for themselves if its condition is affecting performance.

So depending on the implementation of the feature iPhone users would be able to see how fast the battery degrades due to its low capacity. Apple could do what every other manufacturer did—provide phones with higher capacity batteries to start from for phones not to burn the battery with too many recharging cycles in the first year. The thing is Apple deliberately supplies small batteries for them to require many recharges and degrade fast. Androids now have on average 3000 mAh batteries. I got 5300 mAh. Small iPhones—1800 mAh.

</comment><comment><USER70> Apple is in this situation because they've very invested in having the fastest mobile processor on paper. So you get a high performing part when your phone is new, and all the reviews and benchmarks are done with the high performing part, but after a while the battery can't handle it, so they're forced into these shenanigans.

<comment><USER38> It's not like android phones are purposefully running with multi year old chips to avoid this issue. The high-end found they are all rush to have the newest chips as well.

I'll ignore the "on paper" comment. It was totally unnecessary.

<comment><USER71> His point was that Apple's latest chips promise something like 2x the performance of the best Qualcomm or Samsung chip.

If that gain is indeed real, or mostly real, then the difference may be explained by the fact that Apple makes some compromises that other chip makers don't - such as increasing the boost performance of the chip more than the battery and the heat management can handle.

As for the "on paper" claim, I think it's justified, because largely we only know the Apple chips are "so much faster" from synthetic benchmarks. But in real world tests it doesn't seem to make much of a difference.

<comment><USER38> It's the "on paper" that I took issue with. From what I've seen from developers (which is admittedly limited) the chips Apple has do seem to be incredibly fast. Between that and the benchmarks I have no reason to think Apple chips are artificially optimized to look good on benchmarks and aren't noticeably better on normal tasks.

<comment><USER70> > I have no reason to think Apple chips are artificially optimized to look > good on benchmarks

I never stated that. My point was that they wanted their processors to benchmark above everyone else's, and this quest for the highest performance numbers in synthetic benchmarks (aka on paper) has lead them to a bad place.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER72> This smells like a direct response to latest lawsuit from France [0].

[0] - [https://www.thelocal.fr/20171228/french-lawsuit-launched- aga...](https://www.thelocal.fr/20171228/french-lawsuit-launched-against- apple-for-alleged-crime-of-slowing-down-iphones)

<comment><USER38> I kind of doubt it. This is been going on for what, a week or two? I'm guessing they've been working on this response that entire time, not just in the last 24 to 48 hours.

</comment></comment><comment><USER73> They've either been grossly overcharging consumers for these battery replacements for years, and are now just listing a "normal" price, or they're taking a loss on it for PR purposes and folding the price decrease into other products.

I don't see how either of those builds customer trust.

<comment><USER74> Apple's prime business trait is making big margins on everything relating to hardware. The fact that battery replacements were not historically being done "at cost" should surprise precisely no one.

<comment><USER73> I'm not surprised at their behavior, I'm surprised that so many in this thread think this is a good response to these complaints.

Plenty of their customers will have already bought new phones thinking their current ones are just broken, and their response is to stop adding a 100% margin to this one product category temporarily.

If I was a regular customer of a company that overcharged me by that much, I'd expect to have correspondingly awesome customer support that would make me whole when they screwed up. I.e. in this case refund the new phone I bought because mine was slow.

But I suppose I should stop being surprised at the low expectations people have for Apple.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER75> > Early in 2018, we will issue an iOS software update with new features that > give users more visibility into the health of their iPhone's battery, so > they can see for themselves if its condition is affecting performance.

Thank you! I've always thought phones should provide info about battery health.

</comment><comment><USER76> Trying to raise awareness to the fact that Apple's battery letter is _only_ available on the american store. We in Brazil already experience absurd prices (a battery replacements costs R$ 449,00, equivalent to US$ 136,41), but I doubt will see equivalent reductions...

<comment><USER77> The article does mention price reductions "starting in late January and available worldwide through December 2018."

<comment><USER78> > available worldwide through December 2018

Which is quite frankly ridiculous. Nothing really justifies waiting a year for this.

Apple already has everything it needs to replace batteries worldwide right now (either with third party official repair companies or their own), and the cost of doing so will not likely change from here to December 2018.

<comment><USER77> The offer is "starting in late January" and goes "through [to] December 2018" and it's "available worldwide."

<comment><USER78> Ohh right.

D'oh.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER79> "making iPhones last as long as possible is an important part of that." ... Then I suggest that you do something unheard of and really stretch Johnny Ives to come up with the unthinkable, nearly impossible, design task....an easily replaceable battery.

<comment><USER55> Yeah. People talk about how nice the phones are, but honestly, I feel like Apple takes the easy way out in this regard. It's easier to make what they do when you don't have to worry about letting users services the device. The flip side is, when everything is so tightly tied together, the quality has to be that much greater. They should be held to a much higher standard because they have no one to blame but themselves.

In this case, this is completely on them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER80> > To address our customers' concerns, to recognize their loyalty and to regain > the trust of anyone who may have doubted Apple's intentions, we've decided > to take the following steps:

> Apple is reducing the price of an out-of-warranty iPhone battery replacement > by $50 — from $79 to $29 — for anyone with an iPhone 6 or later whose > battery needs to be replaced, starting in late January and available > worldwide through December 2018. Details will be provided soon on apple.com.

> Early in 2018, we will issue an iOS software update with new features that > give users more visibility into the health of their iPhone's battery, so > they can see for themselves if its condition is affecting performance.

> As always, our team is working on ways to make the user experience even > better, including improving how we manage performance and avoid unexpected > shutdowns as batteries age.

I cannot think of a better move from Apple than these three options. Bring awareness to the user by displaying battery performance and if updating the battery would resolve their power issues, you have a (now even cheaper) method of fixing it. As I understand it, the only way to tell if one needs to update their battery is by downloading some third party app (that costs money) and then praying that it helps in some way.

Also wanted to point out that by going deeper into the issue with this article shows (at least to me) some sense of transparency and should be really encouraged. While I disagree that they needed a scandal to bring clarity and it should've been brought up a while back, it's still great they did it nonetheless. This has been a conspiracy for some time, glad to see Apple has shed some light on it.

</comment><comment><USER81> I have an iPhone 6 Plus running iOS 10.3.x.

I wish they would put a new 10.3 version with the new battery code out. I have every intention of not using iOS 11 due to feature changes that don't work well for me (like the control center wifi/Bluetooth silliness).

Won't happen, though - this is Apple.

I am afraid of ever breaking this phone because it is my understanding a restore from backup forces an update to the latest code.

<comment><USER6> Are you sure that iOS 11 is as bad as you say? I use it on a 7 and have no problems. maybe you just like to hate Apple, Silicon Valley, or change?

<comment><USER81> I am certain. I like the way iOS 10 works and don't want to learn different ways of doing things, and be unable to turn off (really turn off) WiFi/Bluetooth quickly. (I'm a pilot, these things are important.)

I like the way macOS 10.12 works (I prefer 10.8, but whatever). At least Apple provides security and patch updates to 10.12 and I can stay on it for several years until they put out another version I either need to upgrade to (for third party reasons) or want to.

Apple does not allow me to stay on iOS 10. I have no option to upgrade to 10.3.4 - they won't put out a 10.3.4 even. No, the only option is 11.

If 10 is working for me, why am I forced to move to 11?

This is very anti-consumer of Apple.

<comment><USER6> This is indirectly pro consumer of Apple. This means they can engineer for the current gen. Everyone on all platforms should only be served the latest and greatest!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER82> I'm glad they did this, but it still doesn't handle the FUD about Apple generally slowing down old hardware in the name of planned obsolescence, which people have been tinfoil-hatting about since forever.

The fact is that new OS and software is designed to run on the latest hardware and checked on older hardware to see if it will work at all.

The conspiracy theorists think that Apple has been doing this with their phones since they started making them, and for their computers for decades.

It's horseshit, of course, and I wish the statement had been stronger.

The tinfoil garbage is about like if people complained that game companies were intentionally slowing things down for older graphics cards. No. That's just the natural progression as technology advances.

This is a case where Apple is slowing things down, but doing so to improve the user experience, not make it worse.

You have almost all of reddit and several other idiot websites that have been complaining for years about perceived slow-downs now feeling vindicated over this. And it's complete garbage.

I wish people could separate issues effectively, but that doesn't seem to be in the cards.

</comment><comment><USER83> It's very interesting to see the cognitive dissonance of all these posts complaining about how Apple has lost their trust etc. yet still wanting to cling onto the brand. There wouldn't be this pseudo-Stockholm syndrome if people just became more rational and voted with their wallet. Go buy a phone that you mostly own instead of buying the right to use and iPhone from Apple.

</comment><comment><USER84> This whole battery scandal is ridiculous. It's literally the _opposite_ of planned obsolescence, they're prolonging the usable life of these phones by underclocking them enough to stay functional for a full day, when otherwise they'd be shutting off randomly. I wish I could underclock even with a fresh battery in order to have solid 2-day battery life.

<comment><USER85> No, the consumer doesn't have enough information in this case. They are more than likely going to buy a new phone rather than a new battery.

<comment><USER38> Under the old software, where the phone would randomly turn off on you, what do you think they would've done? Probably the same thing. Buy a new phone.

<comment><USER86> I think the argument is that one would notice that the battery drains very quickly, and starts shutting off at a certain percent. Then they could know the battery is a problem, and pay $79 to get that replaced, instead of upgrading.

<comment><USER15> That's not how it works. The phone crashes when the CPU load spikes higher than the degraded battery can support.

<comment><USER38> I think this Siri there is that if the battery is only capable of supporting full voltage when it's charged to 80% or more, then you consider that top 20% the full range of the battery and when the battery gets to 80% actual charge you tell the user it's at zero.

I'll admit that I'm not sure how possible that is. If this technique would let you pretend that the battery only had half its capacity left without slowing down the phone then that maybe one thing. If even a slight battery degradation meant you have to pretend the phone only had 1/20th of its original battery left then obviously that's pointless.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER87> For years individuals and the tech press have reported about the forced obsolescence of Apple devices, with many detractors claiming otherwise. It would appear that instead of "eating crow" they've decided to double down and are now parroting how this is "manufactured" or "overhyped".

Let's be clear: Apple knew that they were pushing the hardware of older devices so hard as to lead to premature expiration. Instead of being forthcoming about this, or reducing the unreasonable load they were placing on older hardware, they used software to throttle the older devices causing many consumers to buy a new (often iPhone) device as a response.

This is especially greedy and deceptive and Apple has earned every last bit of negative coverage (and then some).

</comment><comment><USER3> It wasn't until I upgraded to ios 11 that my iphone 6 began shutting down at 30% battery. This coincided with the phone being completely unusable. I could not launch apps, using the message application was nearly enough to make me quit apple.

</comment><comment><USER88> I'm curious about how much slimness people would be willing to give up for easy, cheap battery replacements for phones.

One could design a phone the thickness of the original iPhone that would be able to take AAA batteries.

8 AAA Eneloops have about the same energy as the batteries in iPhone 6s or iPhone 8, and just shy of an iPhone 7.

If one would accept a phone about 40% thicker than the original iPhone, 3 or 4 AA Eneloops would do it.

I was comfortable with the thickness of my original iPhone, so I would be willing to consider an AAA powered phone. I'd probably even be OK with AA--it would still be thinner than my wallet, which I have no problem with.

<comment><USER49> Just want to note that Samsung has made their phones thicker for the last 2 generations. It has directly resulted in much better battery life compared to their older phones and I don't think it has hurt sales at all. So maybe people don't really want the thinnest as much as apple likes to believe.

</comment></comment><comment><USER89> Personally I ditched my iPhone because the updates were forced and diligently increased the workload put upon the device. To what end? I don't know, the change logs were cryptic, God forbid allowing the end user selection of what aspects they want updated. Ultimately every update left you with a less functional device. They can say they didn't plan this obsolescence intentionally until the cows come home, but it doesn't matter, what matters is Apple was fucking up old devices and in turn pushed consumers into buying new devices. Intentional or no - fuck it, fuck the tax dodging, fuck the app store, fuck the developer-hostile platform, fuck the double-blended mocafrappachino cult following, fuck Apple. It's over priced tech-fashion and the masses are catching on.

</comment><comment><USER90> So how long will getting a replacement battery take? Is this something that can be done in an Apple Store in a few minutes, or is it a matter of leaving/sending the phone away for a few days?

</comment><comment><USER7> >A chemically aged battery also becomes less capable of delivering peak energy loads, especially in a low state of charge, which may result in a device unexpectedly shutting itself down in some situations.

In my years of experience owning smartphones, since the original iPhone, and including a Samsung S4 (decommissioned last month - purchased in 2014). I have never experienced sudden shut off from an aging battery.

Have I been lucky or is this extremely rare?

<comment><USER91> You probably just don't run on an extremely low battery very often.

I have only experienced it when my device was displaying less than a 15% charge. It also helps if you practice good battery management, not leaving your phone plugged in all night/day.

I also have a theory that people are damaging their batteries more if they are a heavy user, while the phone is plugged in. If your phone is charging and you are playing a game my phone seems to get much hotter than at any other time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER92> "Of course, when a chemically aged battery is replaced with a new one, iPhone performance returns to normal when operated in standard conditions."

I find this disturbingly vague. If the slowdown was strictly due to physical battery degradation (and I haven't heard what specific metric(s) they use to _objectively_ measure age/wear), then replacement should _instantly reset performance rationing back to its starting point_.

They only say it "returns to normal when operated in standard conditions" without defining "standard conditions" and without saying how long it takes before they deign to allow you the performance you paid for.

Their official Battery & Power page[1] acknowledges none of this beyond a separate issue affecting only a two-month manufacturing window of September- October 2015.

[1] [https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/battery- power](https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/battery-power)

And weren't there earlier iPhone models that weren't designed with user- replaceable batteries?

<comment><USER38> I assume they're referring to some of the other things they talked about, like how performance maybe temporarily degraded if it's extremely cold outside; not unlike how the phone may have to shut itself down in extremely hot temperatures.

</comment></comment><comment><USER93> On a related note, they have used underclocking so "solve" hardware flaws on other devices too. If anyone remembers the nVidia unleaded solder microfracture-fest of 2008~. It affected more than just Apple, but the difference is that Apple didn't admit to any issue with their hardware, people who experienced the failure and attempted to go through the Apple care hoops ended up with a logic board with the same issue (another time bomb). Apple pushed a firmware update to underclock all affected GPUs and effectively push the issue outside of their measly 1 year warranty.

I learned my lesson: you should only buy Apple hardware if you are happy with it as is, if you can't be certain it will remain that way and something goes wrong you have to accept that you will be ignored and Apple will admit to nothing, at the most they will remotely modify your device at whatever cost to the user to prevent them owning up and making replacements.

</comment><comment><USER94> Apple apologizes for iPhone slowdown drama, will offer $29 battery replacements _for a year_

[https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/28/16827248/apple-iphone- ba...](https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/28/16827248/apple-iphone-battery- replacement-price-slow-down-apology)

</comment><comment><USER95> This seems like a thorough and good response, but look at what it took in order for it to happen! Apple cultivates a perception that they stand by their products, but you really can't count on that.

I've recently had a month-long (and ongoing) to-and-fro of Apple Care repairs to my late 2016 Macbook Pro. I have Apple Care, but it's been more than a month and they're okay with it having taken that long (and being ongoing). The solution to a repair not having fixed a problem is another round of the same tests as last time, followed by a repair that replaces another component. The crash report is easily findable on Google and seems to be a long-standing hardware issue, but Apple Support behave as though it's the first time they've ever encountered it.

</comment><comment><USER96> I want the option to turn this off.

What Apple is saying in this media release is "pay us and we'll fix it".

</comment><comment><USER97> All of Apple's battery problems would disappear if I could replace the battery in my device instead of being forced to chuck the whole thing because the battery will no longer take/keep a charge. Surely someone at Apple can design a device with a replaceable battery?

</comment><comment><USER98> Apple needs to continue signing iOS 10. It is unacceptable that they have increased the software drain on power for normal activities beyond what supported hardware can run, and then when the problem is recognized not allowed downgrading to revert the experience.

</comment><comment><USER99> That's a great response PR-wise, but it doesn't answer the question of why these batteries are degrading to a point where unexpected shutdowns are a concern in a single year. The iPhone 7 is only one year old. That just isn't OK.

<comment><USER100> Design flaw. They use small batteries so there is absolutely no slack.

<comment><USER99> Perhaps. That could explain why other phone manufacturers don't do it.

[https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/12/28/16825288/...](https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/12/28/16825288/htc- motorola-dont-slow-processor-speeds-old-batteries-apple)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER101> My son's few-years old iPad (who knows what model since Apple stopped actually naming them) turned into a lagfest after the iOS 11 update. UI operations are choppy where they used to be smooth. Could it be the battery?

Samsung, under intense criticism from their Note 7 battery scandal, didn't increase battery capacity with their S8. Instead, they opted to take steps to greatly improve battery _life_ (total capacity loss over time). Whilst I still think retaining 95% after a year is wildly optimistic, I'm happy with this change of focus (yes, I bought one).

PS. I noticed that Apple uses lifespan where I use life, and life where I use capacity. Verdict?

</comment><comment><USER102> The whole thing just reveals Apple's bullshit. They oppose right to repair laws and block third party repair by denying them access to parts. The fact that despite all the obstruction and sabotage from apple, you can still get parts is a wonder in itself.

>Of course, when a chemically aged battery is replaced with a new one, iPhone performance returns to normal when operated in standard conditions.

"Ofcource". Wow! How the heck is a user supposed to know this?

>We've always wanted our customers to be able to use their iPhones as long as possible.

More BS. The iPhone is designed to be unrepairable.

</comment><comment><USER103> How could iOS (definitely) detect if a battery is chemically degraded? If they slow down performance based on the "expectation" that device is old and it's battery _must have_ degraded, then it is obviously a slowdown for many unsuspecting users, whose batteries might be in fact absolutely fine. I have SE and never had any shutdowns; fortunately staying on 9.3.3, without any need nor desire to upgrade. I'd be utterly disappointed if next software update started to "manage" performance for me, suspecting old battery.

<comment><USER104> Charging and usage stats are logged so it should be pretty easy for Apple to spot the problem.

</comment></comment><comment><USER105> This is not limit to Apple iOS.

Android has this problem too. If you upgrade your 2 years old phone with the latest Android (if your phone manufacturer did happens to provide update), your phone is not responsive at all. I know, few years ago I updated my Note 1 to Lollipop and it was completely unusable. The good thing is the Note 1 has unlock bootloader and I was able to restore the older software.

Unfortunately, you cannot downgrade iOS. I wish I can as I am on 11.2 and the battery drain is crazy. 10% on idle. FU Apple.

</comment><comment><USER106> My 6S was affected by the faulty batch of batteries, and it was a miserable experience to have my phone shut down unexpectedly at 40% if I was using it outside in ~60F or colder weather.

Apple replaced the battery once they admitted to the faulty batch, and my phone has been great since, but the way they handle battery issues is extremely frustrating. Going to an Apple Store and having them to their standard test, being told everything is fine and there's nothing they can do is not what I expect from them.

</comment><comment><USER107> Finishing sentence says it all: "We are able to do the work we love only because of your faith and support — and we will never forget that or take it for granted."

<comment><USER108> That's exactly opposite of what they're doing, so it's a lie. They've just lost my trust, faith and support, and I've sold all of my Apple stock.

</comment></comment><comment><USER109> Coincidence that they waited till after Christmas to release this?

<comment><USER110> What would the non-coincidence reason be?

<comment><USER109> The news could have slowed upgrades to iPhone 8/X ahead of the holidays if buyers thought adding a battery could speed up their device.

<comment><USER110> But they already admitted such before Christmas: [https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo- way/2017/12/21/572538593...](https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo- way/2017/12/21/572538593/apple-says-it-slows-older-iphones-to-save-their- battery-life)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER111> > _Of course, when a chemically aged battery is replaced with a new one, > iPhone performance returns to normal when operated in standard conditions._

Has Apple ever acknowledged battery replacement that explicitly? It's almost like the iPhone just grew a removable battery door with those words.

(Also, for those curious, I'm impressed to see that this has 466 comments only 3 hours after being posted.)

</comment><comment><USER112> I'm happy with the outcome but I'm not buying their reasoning. It's forced obsolescence and they just got caught this time.

</comment><comment><USER113> I really hope this price drop is also available in Europe. It's currently 99 EUR at Premium Resellers, but it should also be 29 EUR.

</comment><comment><USER114> > First and foremost, we have never — and would never — do anything to > intentionally shorten the life of any Apple product, or degrade the user > experience to drive customer upgrades.

Yeah, intentionally or not, it does happen. In light of the latest Apple 'innovations' I would also look at Grey's law (just look at what a piece of shit ITunes is). There have been numerous class action lawsuits in the past years, which I agree, don't prove anything except for the fact that consumers do notice that their older devices often degrade to not being usable.

Anecdotally this is how I lost my 2012 MacBook Pro. The hardware was excellent but software upgrades made it almost unusable. Browsing was ok-ish but I ended up using it mainly in 'terminal mode'. I couldn't find a Linux distribution that ran properly on it so one day I decided to go with El Capitan because of it's focus on 'performance' and that it's hardware requirements were compatible - MacBook Pro Mid/Late 2007 or newer. It worked fine but two days later I fried my video card while reading a PDF in Preview. I'm not saying the upgrade fried my computer but I was really frustrated I only got 3 years of use out of a superb (and expensive) piece of hardware.

And yes, after using an Asus for a few (awful) years, I bought another Macbook on which I'm writing this now.

</comment><comment><USER115> Eek, I wish I hadn't capitulated so quickly when iOS 11 came out and my wife complained and complained about performance issues on her 2-year-old iPhone 6 until we just decided to buy an 8 and be done with it. It's not like she would be willing to move off Apple, and we had the money. I doubt my situation is unique. Oh well.

</comment><comment><USER116> In the support article [1], it says:

> Many key areas are not impacted by this power management feature. Some of > these include:

> * Apple Pay

How could Apple Pay ever be affected by power management? Why are they even mentioning this service?

[1]: [https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208387](https://support.apple.com/en- us/HT208387)

</comment><comment><USER117> I think a software approach that should be considered is to dim the screen during throttle events. This has multiple benefits:

\- clear user feedback in the moment of stress on the phone

\- it would _feel_ more like a battery issue, rather than feeling like a bug

\- saves some power that can be used to make the processor throttling less dramatic

</comment><comment><USER118> After the galaxy note 7 disaster and the apple throttlegate I think it is time for us all to admit the fact that we have reached the limits of lithium batteries. We need to compromise the size of our smartphones if we want to continue seeing progress in their performance and features.

Or wait for a miracle from the electrochemists.

</comment><comment><USER119> Not only is my 6 slow as molasses since upgrading to 11, i've seen it display a 30% charge and then shut itself off, claiming no charge in the same breath. Standing in line, infact, waiting to show a ticket barcode to get into a show, no less. Had to explain what happened and luckily they could verify my name.

</comment><comment><USER120> It will be interesting to see how other companies which base their products on Lithium ion batteries deal with similar degradation. For example, How will Tesla handle this scenario? Will they slow down the car when the battery performance is not adequate? Interesting to see how companies make tradeoffs.

<comment><USER121> A car motor reacts gracefully to a battery that doesn't put out as much current as expected. That's unlike a cpu, which crashes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER122> After replacing the battery my iPhone 6s is running fast again... can I return this iPhoneX for a full refund?

</comment><comment><USER123> It's funny, a service center replaced my whole iPhone for free (thought with terrible customer service included) when it started rebooting, being slow and -- get this -- the screen started popping out on one side cause the battery puffed up. This was before this problem was publicized.

</comment><comment><USER124> > "We know that some of you feel Apple has let you down. We apologize."

Really disappointed, but not surprised, with the wording of this post. We're sorry YOU FEEL disappointed. It's like apologizing for making someone feel offended instead of apologizing for offending them outright.

</comment><comment><USER125> They acknowledged they made a mistake and I buy their apology. I'll be getting the battery in my 6 replaced and selling it got an iPhone X now. Kudos Apple but more so to those who sued and all the coverage the sleuthing the Geekbench guy did to get us here.

</comment><comment><USER126> I like the idea of first-party battery replacements, but I have chipped the glass on the side of my iPhone 6S screen from a drop — I wonder if Apple would still charge me the $29 battery replacement fee, or ask me to pony up the full amount.

</comment><comment><USER127> How long has this been happening?

I upgraded from iPhone 4 to the 6S due to the declining performance.

<comment><USER128> I have a 4S from 2010 running on the original battery and it is fine. Of course I have not upgraded the os past 7.

I love the size of the 4S. Please, please, please someone make a phone as small as the 4S. Phones and pants pockets love each other :)

<comment><USER127> Smart not to upgrade

<comment><USER128> It is amazing how this phone just keeps on working doing everything I want it to do. The only thing I wish it had was a better camera, but apart from that it is near perfect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER129> It's only a temporary reduction in price for replacing a battery. Why is it not at least a little cheaper permanently? Especially when they've made them extremely difficult to replace yourself.

</comment><comment><USER130> I do wonder if this will make Apple look at the good old days of phones where you could have a few spare batteries for your phone :)

I know it will never happen because it wouldn't be aesthetically pleasing to Mr Ive, but

</comment><comment><USER131> Iphone 5s restarting like crazy because of the battery gets nothing then...

</comment><comment><USER132> At least now they are finally making it very clear what they were caught doing behind the curtains (from the new support page on battery performance, linked in the press release):

In cases that require more extreme forms of this power management, the user may notice effects such as:

Longer app launch times

Lower frame rates while scrolling

Backlight dimming (which can be overridden in Control Center)

Lower speaker volume by up to -3dB

Gradual frame rate reductions in some apps

During the most extreme cases, the camera flash will be disabled as visible in the camera UI

Apps refreshing in background may require reloading upon launch

Many key areas are not impacted by this power management feature. Some of these include:

Cellular call quality and networking throughput performance

Captured photo and video quality

GPS performance

Location accuracy

Sensors like gyroscope, accelerometer, barometer

Apple Pay

</comment><comment><USER133> Not only did they have the right design decision to lower the chance of my phone shutting down when I may need it the most, they are lowering the battery replacement price!

</comment><comment><USER134> Great now if you can address the hardware planned obsolescence that would be great. Namely the glass screens that constantly shatter (it's 2018...almost)

</comment><comment><USER135> It's not ideal manufacturers can state battery life figures as when the phone is new, rather than at the end of their expected life (2yrs).

</comment><comment><USER136> It's back to android for me; it's great to have a choice here, those pixel 2 xl are looking a whole lot nicer all of a sudden.

<comment><USER20> Just a day ago I commented on a different thread about the Pixel 2 XL and its display flaws. It won't look a whole lot nicer once you get it (pun intended). [1] The Pixel 2 (non-XL) has a good display though. But you may just be trading for random shutdowns instead of CPU throttling after a while (as other Android users have commented here).

[1]: [https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/10/pixel-2-and-2-xl- rev...](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/10/pixel-2-and-2-xl-review-the- best-android-phone-you-can-buy/2/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER137> A message to Apple, you have made products which users cannot exchange the battery themselves in. Further you degrade the performance of iPhones by cpu throtteling as the device ages and charge a fee for exchanging the battery. Thus you hurt the environment and consumers.

One could swap batteries in cell phones previously also in Apple laptops but now batteries and screens are glued to the device.

Please engineer phones which are made to be recycled and are easy to self service.

</comment><comment><USER138> Sure, they don't intentionally sabotage lifetime of their devices but they don't really invest in increasing them either.

</comment><comment><USER139> It's not clear to me why this doesn't also apply to the 5S. The same software is in operation on these, no?

</comment><comment><USER140> I would rather pay 30 dollars for ios 10

</comment><comment><USER141> I need to see the word iPad here. Need to replace a battery in an iPad Air and would love the reduced cost.

<comment><USER142> Because iPads were not affected by this.

<comment><USER141> That we know of yet... :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER143> I sold my iPhone 6 because the performance became unacceptable after just 1 year. Do I still get $50?

</comment><comment><USER144> Well hopefully that settles that. All this mass diaper-crapping needs now is a -gate suffix. And ctrl-F-ing on this page I see we already have one: Throttlegate! For when you want to indicate that this is the leader-of-the- free-world-using-illegal-tactics-to-hang-onto-power-and-then-covering-it-up, of iPhone performance!

<comment><USER145> Searches of both #batterygate and #throttlegate return a lot of results on twitter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER146> "We've been hearing feedback from our customers about the way we handle performance for iPhones"

That's a nice way to describe this:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15988913](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15988913)

</comment><comment><USER147> My iPhone 6 battery health is 91% and it still sucks since the update.

</comment><comment><USER148> Discount battery replacement for my 6 will come in very handy

</comment><comment><USER149> I hope they get sued into the ground :)

</comment><comment><USER150> "we began to receive feedback from some users who were seeing slower performance"

In the case of Apple, "some users" = millions of users

</comment><comment><USER151> iPhone's battery deteriorates to a point of not being able to sustain ideal usage after mere 1-1.5 years. That is a very bad case as per mobile phone standards. $1000 for 18 months averages to about $56 a month after which your phone will start deteriorating to a point of being not usable anymore.

Not acceptable no matter how valid their argument is.

</comment><comment><USER152> Apple is doing what is best for the user and the battery. This was poorly reported on by those without technical backgrounds.

<comment><USER153> No. They did what was best for their bottom-line.

It was common knowledge that lithium batteries chemically degrade over time. It was not common knowledge, even to those with technical backgrounds, that the iPhone compensated by degrading performance. That was only made recently public by user research.

Many consumers have been buying new iPhones after at least 1 year because of this performance degradation. Had Apple been transparent about its performance degradation strategy from the beginning, people would have spent far less money.

This will have a substantial effect on Apple's revenue next year as people buy new batteries instead of new iPhones.

</comment></comment><comment><USER154> man... i literally just got my battery replaced. Wish I saw this an hour earlier

</comment><comment><USER140> So are they wreaking the ux to increase the battery life. Why not just dim the screen?

</comment><comment><USER155> "We're sorry we got caught, here is a piece of chewing gum".

</comment><comment><USER156> Now for the MacBook

</comment><comment><USER157> On the upside, there is now a very easy way to see which "tech journalists" understand the concept of engineering trade offs.

The tech reporters at NY Times, Linus Techtips, etc have never actually created products. They are not technical experts. They're personalities and communicators. And in this case, wacky conspiracy theorists.

</comment><comment><USER158> Child, please. Apple has taught a generation about planned obsolescence. Observe:

2017 lawsuit claiming Apple broke FaceTime on iOS 6 to force users to upgrade to iOS 7. [1]

2015 lawsuit alleging iOS 9 degraded performance of iPhone 4s to force users to upgrade their device. [2]

2014 article from the New York Times showing how Google searches for "iPhone slow" coincide perfectly with the release of new devices. [3]

2013 Brazilian lawsuit claiming Apple could have implemented 4th gen iPad features on 3rd generation model. [4]

2013 article from the New York Times about performance degradation coinciding with Apple's release of iPhone 5. [5]

2011 article on Apple's "innovation" of a proprietary 5-point screw to thwart hardware upgrades on iPhone 4, Macbook Pro, and Macbook Air. [6]

2009 TC article on UI becoming sluggish, random restarts, device heating up (is this starting to sound familiar?). [7]

2008 Movie rentals not being available on 5th generation iPods which were released just months prior. [8]

I even found an article from 2005 complaining about the high cost of replacing the iPod battery ($250!). [9]

[1] [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-lawsuit-facetime- id...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-lawsuit-facetime- idUSKBN1AG1PJ) [2] [https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2015/12/31/apple- la...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2015/12/31/apple-lawsuit- iphone-4s-ios-9-mobile-operating-system-upgrade/78134096/) [3] [https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/upshot/hold-the-phone- a-b...](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/upshot/hold-the-phone-a-big-data- conundrum.html?_r=1&abt=0002&abg=0) [4] [http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/02/21/brazilian- lawsuit-...](http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/02/21/brazilian-lawsuit- accuses-apple-of-planned-obsolescence-with-fourth-gen-ipad) [5] [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/03/magazine/why-apple- wants-t...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/03/magazine/why-apple-wants-to- bust-your-iphone.html) [6] [https://www.ifixit.com/blog/2011/01/20/apples- diabolical-pla...](https://www.ifixit.com/blog/2011/01/20/apples-diabolical- plan-to-screw-your-iphone) [7] [https://techcrunch.com/2009/06/04/the-short- lifespan-of-the-...](https://techcrunch.com/2009/06/04/the-short-lifespan-of- the-iphone/) [8] [https://www.wired.com/2008/01/ipod- rentals/](https://www.wired.com/2008/01/ipod-rentals/) [9] [https://www.technewsworld.com/story/42328.html](https://www.technewsworld.com/story/42328.html)

</comment><comment><USER159> As usual, the only thing that corporations listen to... is the threat of the dollar.

They didn't give two craps about their policy until this week.

<comment><USER159> Dear downvoter: I dare you to provide logic or a source that rebukes my point.

</comment></comment><comment><USER160> even if they offered a free iPhoneX, the answer would still be "hell no"

</comment><comment><USER161> I don't see the difference between the Volkswagen scandal and this.

Both companies used software to their own benefit to harm other parties.

<comment><USER54> Were you actually "harmed?" Let's not compare increasing pollution to you not being able to play Angry Birds with the same level of gusto.

<comment><USER162> Or, you know, buying a new phone instead of buying a new battery, and all the waste that entails. Do we suddenly not care about the environment now?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER163> This was a Half-Life 3 kind of issue. They kind of got backed into a corner where they could never really talk about what the truth was. Would it have been better to go out and announce: "we're not working on Half Life 3"? Tough to say.

</comment><comment><USER160> Even if the offered a FREE new iPhoneX, the answer would still be a "hell no". Google hacks the Browser, Apple store the phones co-ords, and then they make you upgrade to make it easier to track you, and then their associated product "hi Sarah" crashing and locking out sounds like its trying to contact siri!!!

Free iPhone, Hell no

</comment><comment><USER100> 1\. You're still trying to fix a design flaw with software.

2\. Good move on lowering cost of a replacement, because it sure seemed like you were trying to extend the battery to a point where Apple care ran out. However,some people are reporting throttling at 89% battery capacity as reported by coconut battery. This is absurd! Why? Because you won't replace batteries until at least the 80% mark!

Thanks for the clarity, but you need to stop using tiny batteries.

Edit: Let's be clear. We are here because Apple chose to use small batteries. An 1810maH battery will degrade to a point where the iPhone shuts down faster than a 2200maH battery would have. They didn't design the iPhone for longer than 1 or 2 years with those tiny batteries. Period.

</comment><comment><USER164> All Apple would have had to do is enable a "Battery Saver" mode in some deep nested menu and turned it on by default, and this would have never been an issue in the first place. The fact that they hid it _and_ denied it is going to cost them. It signals a deliberate misleading of consumers, and is a legitimate scandal.

You can't hide the bad intentions in good ones and call it a wash. "Extending the battery life for consumers" isn't a good enough reason to do what they did. A menu option ticked by default would have given the 80% who didn't mind this the same exact experience and the 20% that did the freedom to run their battery to the ground. However, doing so would have forced them to admit that the battery life was going to degrade over time given normal usage.</comment>


SuperPull – A tool for people who work on many machines - <AUTHOR> https://ryanfleck.github.io/SuperPull/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hello HN,

I wrote SuperPull to solve a personal problem of mine:

1\. Does work in multiple repos.

2\. Walks to other computer.

3\. Needs to manually pull and fetch new remotes for each working repository.

Questions:

1\. Is there a better way to solve this problem?

2\. What do you think of the tool? Thanks in advance for any feedback.

</comment><comment><USER2> Cool idea. I might have use for this some time.</comment>


Werewolf - paul-woolcock http://www.eblong.com/zarf/werewolf.html

<comment><AUTHOR> I like Bang! better: [http://www.amazon.com/BANG-La-Pallottola-The- Bullet/dp/B0010...](http://www.amazon.com/BANG-La-Pallottola-The- Bullet/dp/B001037L8K/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1326331428&sr=8-1)

Battlestar Gallactica is also very similar: [http://www.amazon.com/Fantasy- Flight-Games-BSG01-Battlestar/...](http://www.amazon.com/Fantasy-Flight-Games- BSG01-Battlestar/dp/1589944607/ref=sr_1_1?s=toys-and- games&ie=UTF8&qid=1326331464&sr=1-1)

<comment> paul-woolcock Actually, my friends and I play BSG, and the similarities are what drew me to this game. I would play Werewolf over BSG if only because I don't have the unpack/setup/teardown/pack time we have with BSG.

<comment><AUTHOR> If you want little setup, Bang! is pretty good. Setup is like setting up a poker game. Betting on it makes it even more interesting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> My friends and I play The Resistance (<http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/41114/the-resistance>), which is along the same lines, with some traitors secretly mixed into the rest of the group. The difference is, unlike in Werewolf (or Mafia), nobody gets eliminated, so nobody has to sit out for virtually the entire game.

</comment><comment><USER3> I played this game as an intern at Microsoft in the summer of 2006 and subsequently introduced it to many students in the computer engineering department at the University of Florida. It makes for an interesting study in group psych if you can find people who are tolerant of how unfair it can sometimes be.

</comment><comment><USER4> We play a forum version of the game (Mafia): <http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page>

Lotta fun.

</comment><comment><USER5> How did this article manage to reach the front page of Hacker News?

Although the game is good, it is not new.

<comment><USER6> Matt Cutts mentioned it in a blog post earlier - must have piqued the interest of people who had never heard of it.

<comment> paul-woolcock That's pretty much right on. My apologies to the geek gods for not knowing about this game earlier!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This game is great</comment>


Optimizing your Linux server for memory-based NoSQL databases (Part I) - <AUTHOR> http://blog.bugsense.com/post/26442766999/optimizing-your-linux-server-for-memory-based-nosql <comment><USER2> SLUB is already the default choice for an allocator and so is the sparse memory map.

It is worth pointing out that NUMA options won't help at all unless the database is carefully designed to operate on multiple cpus and balance the memory use among them equitably. Such problems are, sadly, non-trivial.

I don't see how any of these options will give any performance enhancements at all.</comment>


Juiced or Not? (Sports Hack Day App) - <AUTHOR> http://juicebowl.herokuapp.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> To add some context, this was one of a bunch of awesome hacks created during Sports Hack Day. You can check out the rest of them here:

[https://www.hackerleague.org/hackathons/sports-hack- day/hack...](https://www.hackerleague.org/hackathons/sports-hack-day/hacks)

<comment><USER2> Interestingly someone named Aaron Schwartz is listed as a dev. Not sure if its legit (when was this held?) but strange nevertheless.

<comment><AUTHOR> Different Aaron. This was held this weekend. Local coverage here:

[http://www.king5.com/news/local/Seattle-sports-geeks- Super-B...](http://www.king5.com/news/local/Seattle-sports-geeks-Super-Bowl- hackathon-189397661.html)

Link to the team's project page:

[https://www.hackerleague.org/hackathons/sports-hack- day/hack...](https://www.hackerleague.org/hackathons/sports-hack- day/hacks/app-juicebowl)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> juiced! #harbowl #hackbowl [http://www.king5.com/news/local/Seattle-sports- geeks-Super-B...](http://www.king5.com/news/local/Seattle-sports-geeks-Super- Bowl-hackathon-189397661.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> hacking sports data was terrific themed hackathon. big props @ crabasa</comment>


Semantic Code Search - <AUTHOR> https://experiments.github.com/semantic-code-search <comment><USER2> Earlier discussion on same topic (different URL):

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18017656](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18017656)

</comment><comment><USER3> Not impressed with the results. Here's what I tried:

"md5 hash": It looks like we don't have great results for that search.

"create a thread": a bunch of things with "create" in their name, but nothing related to threads.

"find largest file: It looks like we don't have great results for that search.

"execute shell command": some Kubernetes stuff?

"matrix determinant": machine learning stuff

"create a pie chart": something to do with creating vertices

</comment><comment><USER4> This is amazing. Not even their own examples work. I tried "blocks until the server has shut down", which they suggested, and it gave me 3 results, none of which were code blocking until the server shut down.

I'm surprised they are showcasing a feature that works this poorly and I'm not looking forward to having github search return results that are even less relevant to my query than they are now.

I can think of 10 features, off the top of my head, to add to github search that would make it unambiguously better, none of them is training a deep learning neural network to find things when I'm not sure what I'm looking for.

How about implementing ctags/cscope? How about when I click on a result opening it in a new window by default? How about highlighting all the matches when I open a file?

And that's not even getting into parts of github that actually matter, like the PR review interface.</comment>


Don't Do Marketing. Become A Thought Leader. - <AUTHOR> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-feld/dont-do-marketing-become-_b_977698.html

<comment><USER2> An excellent summary and wakeup call yo all marketers out there. Marketing isnt just about rolling out in various marketing channels, but to fundamentally spread the purpose in which a startup/project/product was created in the first place. Looks like Simon Sinek's concept of "Start with Why" was the start of genuine marketing :)</comment>


Ask HN: How do you start looking for a new job? - <AUTHOR> Just curious on how people start preparations for making a job change. Will you start reaching out to your contacts for references, or just start scouring the job boards, or will you be always on a lookout for a potential job? <comment><USER2> I won't reach out to my contacts for references when I am thinking about a job change, but I will reach out to them for the proverbial coffee/catch up. At the end of the coffee, after I've spent a lot of time catching up and asking them about how they are doing, I'll mention that I'm looking for a new opportunity and ask if they know anyone that is looking for my skillset. You can't do this unless you are serious.

If you are less serious, then scouring the job boards can be a great way to learn about what skills are in demand, what companies are hiring, and, possibly salaries. (You should do this if you are seriously looking too.) This helps you build context. Also, if you see a great company or an interesting position, this can give you some focus. You can research on linked in, or install an applicable open source project, or write a blog post about tech the company uses or the business they are in.

But I think that @eadz's comment about knowing what you are looking for is spot on. That is the first step to prepare for finding a new job. Don't just say 'I want a tech job', as that won't differentiate you or guide you at all. Instead, say 'I want to be working on a small, local team doing ecommerce websites, preferably on .NET' or 'I want to work on big data processing at scale, in a large company, and am willing to relocate'. That "mission statement" will help you shape your resume, your networking, and your after work job hunting pursuits.

</comment><comment><USER3> For most opportunities, it's about when right skillset meet with right timing. I always keep an eye peeled out for what's available out there but there's really no golden way of getting a job. I've tried many different methods and they all work.

What's most important is to be clear about yourself, what your skillsets are and what you can offer to the company. You should also have a good sense of what you're remotely interested in or looking for even if you're not 100% clear yet. Also, think about what skillsets you would like to grow and whether you want to deepen your skills or broaden your skills - You are the master of your growth/development.

</comment><comment><USER4> While looking for a job, don't forget to perform due diligence on the company's culture. I once accepted a job offer hastily, just to get into the company and discover the culture was 'filthy' (poor working conditions, sexual harassment, e.t.c). Glassdoor[0] does a good job at providing reviews, though I haven't seen a tool that helps you 'vet' a company's culture specifically. I think it's important to factor in company culture as you look for a team to join. Good luck with the job search!

[0][https://www.glassdoor.com/](https://www.glassdoor.com/)

</comment><comment><USER5> For my last job change I didn't reach out for references. (The job before I got because I was collaborating with the people on an informal base and they wanted to hire me - they never saw my CV!) Thus my CV include none and I got invited to much better job interviews than on my previous job hunt. At least in Germany for most interesting IT jobs references/certificates don't seem to be so important. No idea why to be honest.

So as I already arrived at my 5th full-time job, I have all the nice keywords on LinkedIn and headhunters contact me on a regular base. When I look for a job, I basically start answering them again. Also I'm looking on typical job websites, so for me that would be right now indeed.com and possibly berlinstartupjobs.com. I must admit I don't have the tightest network of other developers in the region, so I don't communicate much on LinkedIn besides to headhunters ("job consultants").

Actually im not always on lookout for a new job because I find communication with recruiters too stressful and time consuming. I try to keep every full- time thingy for 2 years, so I don't look like a job hopper. :)

</comment><comment><USER6> 1\. Be clear about exactly what you want to do in your next role

2\. Put your self in the shoes of a hiring manager for that role

3\. Edit your CV to emphasise the skills and experience that makes you a good match.

For tech roles, recruiters are everywhere, and uploading your CV to job sites will get your phone buzzing if you have the right keywords.

For professional roles a vast majority of recruiters use LinkedIn, and the site has a setting for "looking for work" which will boost your profile to hiring managers and recruiters.

I'm currently in the process of moving cities* so going through this process myself, and this approach has worked for me.

*Melbourne here I come!

<comment><AUTHOR> > Edit your CV to emphasise the skills and experience that makes you a good > match

Do you opt for a one page resume/CV or a more longer version for your job search? Just curious because I always find it difficult to pack more subjective/general info on a one page resume.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Fastest way to do it is to reach out to recruiters on LinkedIn with a resume in hand. It helps to have a fully fleshed-out LinkedIn profile for them to reference back to. If you've worked with recruiters in the past, tell them that you're looking again. Good recruiters with a lot of clients can get you into something within a week or two if you're good at interviewing and the client's hiring process is fast (generally, the bigger the client, the slower their hiring process is).

Another way I've done it is by finding jobs on job boards, searching for one of (or the) manager of a team that you're interested in working for and sending them a (short!) message on LinkedIn or email expressing your interest in a job. By short, I mean:

\- Hi, I'm <name>

\- Your group's responsibilities seem interesting and I'd like to join.

\- I'm good at and can help you with <x, y, z>

\- I've done projects like <x, y>

\- Do you have time for a phone call next week to learn more about me?

They will either not respond (most likely), forward you to a recruiter or talk to you directly. I've gotten better responses from LinkedIn than via email, since some managers have admin assistants who read their email and are good at ensuring this spam doesn't get back to them.

This can sometimes even work if you message a member of that team instead of the manager directly, especially if their one of the top contributors on that team. That can even work better since they'll be more likely to talk to you and can help short-circuit your resume to the right people/their manager. It's a little trickier, though.

Another good way of finding jobs if you're in a big enough city is by checking out local tech Meetups and meeting people. This is a slow way of doing it since you don't want to be "that person" that's fishing for a job at an event that "clearly isn't for that" (most of them are), but it's a good way of expanding your network and finding opportunities that you definitely won't get with recruiters (startups, by and large, don't use recruiters; too expensive).

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER8> > will you be always on a lookout for a potential job?

Look instead for people (founders/senior executives) you can help.

You can find them at meetups and conferences. Relevant to your search - how to find hidden jobs > [http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/ask-headhunter- can-...](http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/ask-headhunter-can-find- hidden-jobs/)

<comment><USER9> Have you done this yourself?

<comment><USER5> Also did this once. I was just interested to help them a little so in exchange I could see a new field and possibly get some experience there. Crazy thing was that at some point they were asking me to work for them on a regular base.

The job was really nice for the first 3-6 months after I got hired but it sucked later on. YMMV but I decided afterwards to find for jobs myself and not let the job find me. Making sure I don't work for needy people because they are prone to behave badly at some point.

<comment><USER10> > Making sure I don't work for needy people because they are prone to behave > badly at some point.

Or employers without enough resources. Unless you have known the people for years, you don't want to wind up as the sole developer at a business.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Forgive my piggybacking, but I would also like to ask how anyone approaches the problem of working on their CV. I believe professional experience is the most important factor, but it also depends on what job you are hired to do, which depends on your resume. Therefore, it's a bit of a gordian knot.

So, how does anyone work on their CV?

<comment><USER12> The most important thing is to communicate how you were able to add value to the company. Translate your role into the services and value it added. Think about any big projects or major impacts you had and highlight them. Even if it's fixing some big bug or rewiring something, focus on what the effect was.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I think it's really a good idea to start looking for a job before you need to.

I've actually never looked for a job per-se, instead I've looked for companies that I've found interesting and then figured out how to get a job at those companies. This usually involves networking.

I would start by creating a list of companies that you think wow that would be a cool place to work. Then start figuring out if a job opened up who you need to speak with.

I've never landed a job by submitting a resume to a job board or to the HR department of the hiring company.

In fact, I already had an offer from my last job before HR even saw my resume.

</comment><comment><USER14> It all depends how different you want your experience to be. If you're interested in a diversity of job environments, then mining your current pool may not be the best route. My favorite way to identify interesting companies is to watch presentations from conferences over topics I enjoy. Any company that sends a employee to give a talk usually is intending to also hire. This gives you a very diverse portfolio of companies to apply to, as there are many different companies represented

</comment><comment><USER15> I recently changed jobs and the biggest thing for me was actually connecting with a legit recruiter (Not the people spamming you on LinkedIn). They lined up interview after interview for me before I even had time to check out a job board. I used re:purpose but they are pretty local to my area. Maybe look into recruiters in your area?

</comment><comment><USER16> Personally I was never actively looking, other companies came and recruited me instead and I find this to be much better position to negotiate...

</comment><comment><USER17> I moved from perm to contracting in London by hitting up recruiters on LinkedIn and uploading my CV to JobServe.

Phone didn't stop ringing after uploading my CV.

</comment><comment><USER18> I just start to respond to the recruiters that ping me weekly.</comment>


Ask HN: How many of you visit HN especially to read comments? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> I do that a lot. Especially on Ask HN posts. Have to sift through lot of bad comments to find some nuggets of wisdom

</comment><comment><USER3> Not as much as I used to, honestly.

The comments usually give a faster summary of the article than reading it, but it's rare to get critical technical insights here anymore--sometimes though useful comments pop up in finance/entrepreneurship threads.

</comment><comment><USER4> Everyone.</comment>