Older Android devices might not throttle, but they still might black out

In the wake of Apple's recent revelations regarding reduced performance of iPhones with aged batteries, major Android device makers have gone on the record to make hay of Cupertino's woes. LG and Samsung both provided statements to Phone Arena confirming that they don't reduce performance to compensate for battery aging, and HTC and Motorola both told The Verge that they don't include battery age in the processor power management decisions of their devices.

Although these statements certainly sound positive and user-friendly in light of Apple's revelations—who wants their device to slow down as it ages?—they also carefully skirt the underlying issue that Apple claims it's trying to solve through the power-management behavior it's instituted on its older phones. Apple's statement yesterday specifically notes that the company implemented this change to avoid sudden shutdowns of its devices under "peak workloads," a change that's apparently related to the fact that older batteries are less capable of keeping up with rapid changes in demanded power, on top of not running as long as newer cells do.

If sudden shutdowns are related to battery chemistry, as Apple claims, one would expect that at least some older Android phones would be affected by sudden shutdowns under high transient loads, as well. Although it's hardly a statistically significant sample, a quick search on Google indeed reveals that users of older devices from HTC, Samsung, LG, and Motorola have all been so afflicted. For an example that's closer to home, our own Wayne Manion reports that his Samsung Galaxy Note 4 occasionally shuts down when he takes a picture with the flash on when it's powered by an older battery.

In most of the cases I found, users either discovered that a battery replacement restored the reliability of their devices or were strongly urged to replace their phones' batteries to fix the problem. Those community experiences suggest that at least some Android devices with older batteries are no less immune to the kinds of blackouts that led Apple to curb peak power demands to begin with.

Ultimately, these statements illuminate differing views of what constitutes an optimal user experience on smartphones. Apple clearly believes that sudden shutdowns are unacceptable for iPhone users under any circumstances, even if curbing the conditions that lead to those shutdowns means that its devices will lose some performance as the batteries inside age. Android device makers seem to believe that maintaining peak performance is a higher priority, even if stressing an aged battery leads to occasional unexplained blackouts or instability. Whether a given user will tolerate lower performance or occasional instability is a matter of personal preference, but neither case seems ideal.

I agree with Apple's approach to the user experience (and have been a staunch iPhone fan since I picked up an iPhone 5), but it remains the case that Apple didn't fully explain the performance tradeoffs it made to reduce unexpected shutdowns back when iOS 10.2.1 first rolled around, and it's paying a steep price for that lack of transparency with this controversy. Even so, I don't believe that Apple made the wrong decision when it implemented reductions in peak performance demands on older batteries—having a phone shut down at a critical moment would be far more annoying to me than slower app launches and the like (something I still can't claim to have noticed even as my iPhone 6S Plus gets up there in years). In a world where smartphones are more integrated and less user-serviceable than ever, though, the awareness that a hard-to-replace battery can have tangible impacts on the user experience beyond run times is sure to be a hard pill to swallow for iOS and Android fans alike.

Comments closed
    • Takeshi7
    • 2 years ago

    Here’s an idea: Give the user a simple toggle switch that allows them to decide whether they want their CPU throttled. It’s a lot better than doing it without the users’ consent and then resulting in lawsuits.

    • mcarson09
    • 2 years ago

    It would be ironic if apple moved to user replaceable batteries.

    I have an old Ipod that was made just before they released the ipod touch. An update came out after the touch’s release and it slowed the interface down. This whole idea that Apple slowing down older devices being a “one off” kind of thing it a complete lie and a simple search engine search debunks Apple’s claims. Why do all the slow down reports always start with: After an update….

    • PixelArmy
    • 2 years ago

    The iPhone 5/S/C and various iPads all were supported by iOS 10.2.1. Do those devices have some magical battery that doesn’t degrade? Because they are omitted from the Apple statement saying what was throttled…

    [url<]https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/20/16800058/apple-iphone-slow-fix-battery-life-capacity[/url<] [quote<]Last year we released a feature for iPhone 6, iPhone 6s and iPhone SE to smooth out the instantaneous peaks only when needed to prevent the device from unexpectedly shutting down during these conditions. We’ve now extended that feature to iPhone 7 with iOS 11.2, and plan to add support for other products in the future.[/quote<] IMO, Apple still isn't giving the full story...

      • tipoo
      • 2 years ago

      I think they didn’t have the newer power IC that allowed soft updates and this sort of management.

    • ET3D
    • 2 years ago

    Indeed, updating my Galaxy Tab S 8.4 from Android 4.4 to 6 caused it to start resetting uncontrollably. It did have this problem when battery was low even with 4.4, but with 6 this happens when the battery is at 70%+. Quite annoying. At least I can play The Quest after updating to Android 6.

    I have a new tablet on the way. Once it arrives I’ll reset the Tab S and hope that it helps.

      • mcarson09
      • 2 years ago

      So why did you update to 6 instead of 5? There’s security updates for even 4.4. You can easily reset your device back to 4.4 give xda-developers.com a shot and going back to 4.4 or running AOSP 6.0 would probably fix your issues.

    • Ifalna
    • 2 years ago

    Both approaches are utterly idiotic.

    Display battery age and statistics to the consumer (similar to SMART for HDDs), make batteries easily changeable.

    There problem solved and environmentally friendly.
    But noo, we do need them sheep to buy a new smartphone every 2 years.

    • Michaelzehr
    • 2 years ago

    It’s a little hypocritical (though not unsurprising) for Samsung to respond like that. I have an s8 and I’m disappointed in how it aggressively shuts things off and sleeps apps to save battery. Even with the battery saving options disabled, I frequently will pick up my phone, turn the screen on, and immediately get several notifications, some of which are 15-30 minutes old. The s8 is sleeping apps whose main purpose is to give me notifications. If that’s not degraded performance, I don’t know what to call it. (yes, I’ve checked settings, put things on the do-not-sleep list. Even if I find a way to prevent this in the future, the default is for it to degrade performance to save battery. It even defaults to a lower screen resolution than the best. Some of this was true when the phone was new, but I haven’t rechecked everything since the most recent updates.)

      • derFunkenstein
      • 2 years ago

      A friend of mine has an Asus Zenfone V (Verizon variant) and has the same complaint. I’ve been fortunate that my Pixel 2 doesn’t do that.

      • djayjp
      • 2 years ago

      I have an S6. It’s all in the settings. There are, however confusingly, two different settings lists for apps’ power saving. One is the first screen after tapping “battery”, the other is then found after tapping “battery usage”, then selecting the menu/settings ellipsis, then hitting “optimize battery usage”. Be sure to de-select your messaging apps etc.

    • cygnus1
    • 2 years ago

    Maybe this will spark Apple to be courageous yet again, and start making bigger phones with bigger batteries. That’s the best solution, honestly. This is happening for some in less than a year. That means they’ve gone well past 500 charge cycles, and worn their poor little battery out.

    The small, thin batteries cause a perfect storm for this kind of crap. By being so small, Apple has to run them on deep discharge cycles, which causes extra wear, leading to only 500 charge cycle rating. But the battery only gets you thru about half a day of heavy use, so you can pretty easily run over that 500 charge cycle life in a year or so.

    Apple really should be targeting to have their next iPhone be able to last a full day, somewhere between 12 or 18 hours, and still have 50% charge remaining. If they could manage that, I know I’d be pretty happy. Even if the phone was twice as thick.

    • tipoo
    • 2 years ago

    Yeah…I think Apple made the right engineering choice to smooth out power draw on degraded batteries, the main issue was that the notification came much much after the throttling begun, since there were ‘tiers’ of throttling.

    Especially for the 6S that went out with a bad battery batch and had an exchange program, should have had a user notification to come in for a free swap, if they can give us all U2 albums unasked for…

    The other thing, why is the iPhone their last 500 charge cycle product when even the Watch can get 1000? Twice the cycles would mean twice the time before it has to throttle for lowering battery voltages.

    [url<]https://www.apple.com/ca/batteries/service-and-recycling/[/url<]

      • mcarson09
      • 2 years ago

      Android manufacturers do it better. Apple is just trying to make excuses for trying to force people to upgrade. Most people know when their batteries act up the can either replace the battery or get a new phone.

    • firewired
    • 2 years ago

    Part of the challenge here is actually about performance itself, and not necessarily about battery capacity, life, or degradation over time.

    We expect – and should – that OS’es and GUI’s get better over time. Better means different things to different people, but to me it means that newer Software should improve performance and battery life compared to older Software using the same hardware.

    If that does happen then a battery’s degradation over time should have a lesser impact on the user-experience, battery life, and uptime than what people have had to actually deal with.

    If that does not happen, then the Software programmers have buggered up badly. We say the same things about Hardware all the time, just read any review of new hardware that does not reasonably improve from the previous generation, or skip the article and read the comments.

    In other words, I expect Software to improve as Hardware improves. Anything less is poorly designed and poorly implemented.

      • DancinJack
      • 2 years ago

      You are making it entirely too simple. Your opinion on this is poorly designed.

      • cygnus1
      • 2 years ago

      Unfortunately software does not evolve on static hardware capabilities. Software is improving all the time, just not in the way you’re assuming. It improves with new features that make use of newer, better performing hardware. Sure, occasionally some code will get optimized in newer versions, but it’s usually a bug fix or when something was glaringly wrong/innefficient in the original code to begin with.

      Generally the only way to speed up the code is to have it do less, and that’s usually pretty hard to do. Once software that works is written, future versions are more likely to get slower because they do more because new hardware lets them do that with similar performance.

      • Ifalna
      • 2 years ago

      People also want their hard/software to do MORE as time goes on.
      While software might get more efficient, the added functions often negate that effect.

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 2 years ago

    Interesting. Given that this is a very real problem, you’d think these companies would make battery swapping easier, but this IS a very convenient way to make people’s experiences so miserable they WANT to upgrade…

    • derFunkenstein
    • 2 years ago

    [quote<] Even so, I don't believe that Apple made the wrong decision when it implemented reductions in peak performance demands on older batteries[/quote<] No, of course this is the right decision. The decision to not disclose their reasoning is the problem and it's something of which tech companies of all stripes are guilty: non-disclosure. Kudos to the sites that did talk about this before Apple dropped battery replacement fees, because those sites held Apple's feet to the fire. Sites like MacRumors and 9to5Mac have been talking about this for three weeks. Consistent public pressure is the only thing that's going to get a technology company to do the right thing. These companies (Apple is not alone) view us as nothing more than revenues, and the only way to get them to own up is when the tech press covers a story and holds them accountable.

    • Rza79
    • 2 years ago

    My old BB Z10 had a user replaceable battery. It’s 9mm thick. Really lasted me a long time thanks to a second battery pack I could carry along.
    But yeah what am I thinking. Manufacturers need to prioritize profits first. Sorry.

    • windwalker
    • 2 years ago

    [quote=”Jeff Kampman”<]Android device makers seem to believe that maintaining peak performance is a higher priority, even if stressing an aged battery leads to occasional unexplained blackouts or instability.[/quote<] That's an unjustifiably charitable interpretation. All history points towards the alternative explanation: they couldn't be bothered to do anything about it.

    • watzupken
    • 2 years ago

    To be honest, while it made sense after thinking about it, I feel that Apple could have made this known to people before rolling this out. Or it would be better if they allow an option in the setting so for people to determine if they prefer stability or processing power.
    In light of this, Apple can’t really market their SOC as the fastest now because clearly it will be a steep drop in performance after a year or 2. Also, I feel Apple could have been too aggressive with the throttling as shown in some test where the peak clockspeed got reduce by more than 50%. For light users like myself, it is no biggie. For a gamer, this will surely have a huge impact on performance. But surely their insistence on forcing an aggressive throttled SOC will make me think thrice before I buy their phones and likely iPads as well.

    • Kretschmer
    • 2 years ago

    A lot of this problem would be solved if batteries were over-provisioned. My Galaxy S8 is gorgeous, but I would be more than happy with a phone that was 50% thicker if it meant longer battery life, longer MTBF, or a user-servicable battery.

      • tacitust
      • 2 years ago

      Yeah, but Samsung and others spend millions on market research and focus groups assessing what sells, and it ain’t 50% thicker phones, even if you do get a better battery.

        • mcarson09
        • 2 years ago

        That boils down to: People are stupid. You can actually buy extended battery cases for the iphone and samsung devices. If there wasn’t a market for them they wouldn’t exist.

          • shank15217
          • 2 years ago

          That won’t solve the peak power issue, an extended external battery charges the internal battery which could still shutdown due to peak power, Android needs to address this issue.

    • sparkman
    • 2 years ago

    Hating on the top dog is always in style among certain folks.

    Apple seems to be handling the battery situation well, as far as I can tell.

      • TheEmrys
      • 2 years ago

      I have hated Apple’s choices long before they were the top dog in anything.

    • albundy
    • 2 years ago

    yeah, i dont see it that way. a battery that no longer holds a half day’s charge is more than obvious and so is a performance hit. all i see is a scheme to sell a new $1000 iphone, year after year. thats why iphones never had removable batteries. crapple pushed this agenda since day one, when many android phones did have removable batteries. but then android brands saw that consumers were blinded to that profit model, and jumped on the me too bandwagon.
    can crapple be any more of a lowlife? lowering performance just so they can sell another iphone to their suckered loyal customers is vomit inducing. many people might think that their apps/movies/music are causing the slowdown. i cant wait for the next fiasco and the class action lawsuits that follow.

    • brucethemoose
    • 2 years ago

    My family was a victim of this problem with the Nexus 5X/6P fiasco. The 6P in particular got to the point where doing anything on the phone would just crash it, and the 2 refurbs we got behaved the same… An Apple like approach would’ve been a godsend.

    And this is all a symptom of another bad trend: thinness chasing. If manufacturers could stand to make phones a few mm thicker, they could put in bigger batteries that aren’t running at (or in Samsung’s case, over) the ragged edge of their capability, and therefore don’t degrade as quickly and drive us into these kind if problems.

      • djayjp
      • 2 years ago

      Sounds like a software issue (Android’s BSOD of sorts)

        • Laykun
        • 2 years ago

        The Nexus 6P had battery drain problems that ended up causing bootloops.

    • dragosmp
    • 2 years ago

    Having changed my Nexus 4’s battery just last month, I have 2 cents to add.

    First, Apple’s problem isn’t just that the battery degrades; it is also the voltage regulators can’t handle the increase in battery internal resistance and aditional Vdroop. For example, the SoC needs a minimum V_DC of 3.6V, while the worn battery can’t provide it at full current draw. I’d say there are two solutions: either cap the power, what Apple did, or improve the voltage regulators to accept lowe DC-in voltage from the battery.

    Second, why doesn’t Android have this? I suspect due to the diversity of the ecosystem the Qualcomm/MTK/Samsung SoCs have built in better tolarance to Vdroop. How will Qualcomm know exactly what battery spec will be used by LG/Samsung/HTC, etc; sure there are guidelines, but by definition they don’t encompass just one type of battery, so the SoC must be more compliant.

    Third – my Nexus’ story. As the phone aged, almost 5yo now, the battery capacity dropped and while discharging it was getting hotter. It never rebooted due to Vdroop, or any other reason, but the battery IR was obviously higher due to the higher temps under normal use. When I changed the batery, it was bulged. Not the phone, just the battery. Still, the SoC never complained about high Vdroop.

    I’d posit that Apple dropped the ball on Ipone’s voltage regulators and they took this heavy handed approach to limit current/Vdroop as it was the only thing to do. Since Apple designs their SoC, they’ll include the lessons into future designs. They’ll add a bigger DClink cap in A12 or something, and all will be good.

    • Inkling
    • 2 years ago

    In the past couple months my 20-month-old Moto X Pure running Android 7.0 started shutting down if the battery is below 30% and it’s under a heavy workload, like quick switching between several high-demand apps. I didn’t think much of it the first couple times, but it’s happened enough now that’s it’s getting annoying.

      • djayjp
      • 2 years ago

      Apple’s “fix”, however, occurs regardless of battery’s state of charge (whether fully charged or say 5%; yes, I know this is relative to the battery age).

    • Lianna
    • 2 years ago

    More information. That’s the first thing missing in both camps. We don’t know that our battery is dying, we don’t know when to act.

    My father’s Galaxy Note 4 went into a boot-loop this summer, but a quick Google search was enough to suspect battery and about $10 (or was it $15 ?) and an hour later we swapped battery for a new one. Fixed. The only thing missing was a warning about dying battery, it would have saved us about half an hour, part of that because someone at phone shop told my father that the phone needs professional (read: costly) diagnostics in their shop (and for obvious reasons it wasn’t even in Apple Store).

    Apple had four things working against them, three by design: smaller capacity (‘slimmer’) battery, higher instantenous power draw of their CPU/GPU, non-user-replaceable battery; and one political: “it just works” doctrine; more like ‘[customers] don’t ask, [we] don’t tell’.

    One thing on the technical side of things bugs me (independent of the platform): is it that hard to measure current level of battery wear, at least estimating the inner resistance? That would slow down the phone (and/or show ‘battery dying’ warnings) just for people that really need it, not everyone with older phones. The second option is much easier, but sounds dangerously close to extortion.

      • End User
      • 2 years ago

      In early 2018, Apple 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.

        • terranup16
        • 2 years ago

        “Great”, because Apple couldn’t have done this when it implemented the “feature” in the first place? Bull. There may be a pissed off engineer what wanted to bake notifications in or alert the public as to what the “fix” meant, and there may have been another department or manager who overrode that. But why isn’t Apple getting chewed out for that kind of crap? They clearly understood what they were doing and clearly choose to keep the public as boind as possible.

      • tipoo
      • 2 years ago

      On the last point, do we know which method they’re using? A “dumb” cycle based slowdown, or a more granular one based on actual battery wear?

      If it’s slowing down perfectly healthy phones that sucks.

        • DancinJack
        • 2 years ago

        From what I have read, they’re reading battery health. Not necessarily every clock cycle or anything, but at least at some point. I don’t believe they’re slowing down phones with healthy batteries.

    • videobits
    • 2 years ago

    Hey phone designers:

    There’s an easy fix for this that doesn’t involve any shady software fixes. Simply design the phones with an easy to replace battery pack.
    For an extra bonus you might event consider making the same battery work in multiple phones.

    You know this would be the right thing to do if you truly cared about what was best for the end user and the environment as phones wouldn’t need to be replaced as often.

    Thanks,
    Phone User/Buyer

      • RdVi
      • 2 years ago

      I agree, but to also play devils advocate: Unfortunately giving consumers control over replacing the battery also means more batteries ending up in landfill. People are less likely to throw out an entire phone, but when it’s “just a battery” that they paid $10-$50 to replace, most don’t stop and think.

      So I wouldn’t bet too heavily on it being best for the environment. Perhaps with better education and recycling awareness.

        • Kaleid
        • 2 years ago

        This could be fixed by there being a reward for turning in a battery that is not being used anymore. An additional fee on the price of the new battery could be obtained back by returning the older battery.

          • derFunkenstein
          • 2 years ago

          Kinda like a core charge on a car battery. Might help. Might just result in people not caring, if the fee is too small

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 2 years ago

            You could make it illegal to sell the batteries without first receiving the old one, if you really wanted to solve the problem

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            That hurts the companies selling the batteries the most (edit: because that makes them responsible for collecting and recycling the batteries, I mean). It also makes it impossible to acquire spares (which I know we’re not really in the era of having spares batteries anymore, but it does artificially limit one of the benefits of removable batteries)

        • mcarson09
        • 2 years ago

        They would end up an a landfill anyways. People just throw their old non working crap in the trash. Just hump a tree elsewhere.

      • windwalker
      • 2 years ago

      Hey phone buyers:

      There’s an easy fix for this that doesn’t involve unattainable expectations. Simply buy many millions of thick heavy brick phones with large replaceable batteries.
      For an extra bonus you might even consider buying models that are also highly profitable for the manufacturer.

      You know this would be the right thing to do if you truly cared about what was best for yourselves and the environment as phones wouldn’t need to be replaced as often.

      Thanks,
      Phone Designer/Engineer

        • bthylafh
        • 2 years ago

        Drivel. Where am I going to find such a phone? I can’t buy one without you phone designers and manufacturers offering them for sale.

        Make me a good midrange phone that’s about like a modernized Nexus 5 or 5X but with a larger easily-replaced battery (and an SD Card slot) and we’ll talk.

          • blastdoor
          • 2 years ago

          They once existed. Most users said “no thanks — we want thin” . Now they don’t exist.

          • windwalker
          • 2 years ago

          There are [url=https://www.gsmarena.com/results.php3?sOSes=2&sOSversions=2700,2710,2800&idCardslot=1&idBatRemovable=1<]plenty[/url<] of them.

            • bthylafh
            • 2 years ago

            Neat.

            Some of those can even run LineageOS and can therefore get updates indefinitely:

            LG G4, G5, V20, K10
            Motorola G4 Play

            Of those only the LG K10 is from this year, though.

      • Chrispy_
      • 2 years ago

      I’m not much of an environmentalist, but I cringe when I see how many phones with lithium batteries our company “recycles” a month.

      I’m pretty sure that recycling a phone simply means reclaiming the gold and disposing of the LiPo pouch cell safely. There’s unlikely to be much benefit to the environment whatsoever.

      • cegras
      • 2 years ago

      As soon as you’re willing to pay the price for the extra engineering, they’ll make it.

        • GrimDanfango
        • 2 years ago

        Because spending £700-1000 for a typical flagship phone is clearly cheaping out.

          • cegras
          • 2 years ago

          When Apple retools its manufacturing chain and spends extra engineering making the phone you want, don’t balk at the price and buy it then. Clearly Apple’s current price is supported by the general consumer. Put your money where your mouth is or don’t complain.

      • terranup16
      • 2 years ago

      Can’t upvote enough. They can also feel free to add a few micrometers to the width to enlarge the size of the battery and prolong battery life in more ways than one…

      But yeah, zero sympathy for Apple here. My Lumia Icon even with its Snapdragon 800 never suffered slowdown or sudden reboots for 3 years. I started seeing some bad battery behavior a little after three years in, but Apple is implementing software “fixes” for hardware barely a year old.

      Also not sure why so many tech blogs are praising Apple for this. All it shows is Apple knowingly designed and sold hardware unable to sustain you its performance beyond a year and did nothing to recommend customers try a new battery when it occurred. If we were talking about Samsung SSDs, tech bloggers would be singing a significantly different tune (and did).

      • mcarson09
      • 2 years ago

      Vote with your wallet and stop buying Apple devices.

      • Takeshi7
      • 2 years ago

      This is why I bought the LG V20. I plan to keep it until the end of time or until a better phone with a replaceable battery comes out.

      It really makes me upset LG has gone away from that direction.

        • mcarson09
        • 2 years ago

        They’ll go back to removable batteries. I own a V20 and a V10 and both my parents own V20s after they switched cell providers. Only good thing about the V30 besides the screen is the removal of the useless second screen.

    • djayjp
    • 2 years ago

    What about this, Jeff?:

    [url<]https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/12/20/16803190/iphone-slowdown-is-needed-but-also-a-problem[/url<] "iPhones start slowing down after a year of use, and that’s way too soon" Seems like either an intentional or unintentional manufacturing defect.

      • MOSFET
      • 2 years ago

      Here you go again. Do you think it MAY have something to do with the way the phone, and more specifically its battery, is used and treated?

        • djayjp
        • 2 years ago

        And right when the warranty runs out..interesting…. There’s no excuse for that engineering fail. This isn’t just happening in some bizarre corner case, rather it’s happening on a fairly wide scale. But apparently that’s defensible in your world.

      • cycomiko
      • 2 years ago

      How is a larger battery going to fix this problem? or is it just the verge doing what verge does and blathering garbage to hipsters?

        • EndlessWaves
        • 2 years ago

        Larger capacity batteries can typically deliver higher currents.

        • djayjp
        • 2 years ago

        “If the assumptions above hold true then logically the issue would also be more prevalent in the smaller iPhone as opposed to the iPhone Plus models as the latter’s larger battery capacity would allow for greater discharge rates at a given stable voltage. This explanation might also be one of many factors as to why flagship Android and other devices don’t seem to exhibit this issue, as they come with much larger battery cells.”

        [url<]https://www.anandtech.com/show/12184/apple-confirms-cpu-limitation-in-ageing-devices[/url<]

      • jihadjoe
      • 2 years ago

      iPhone batteries do tend to be significantly smaller capacity than equivalent Android phones. the iPhone 6S only has 1700mAh, while the Galaxy S6 comes with 2550mAh.

      Interestingly, the preceding non-S iPhone 6 had 1800mAh. Seems like whenever Apple’s SoC division comes up with improvements in efficiency, the design department invests those savings right away into making the phone thinner.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 2 years ago

        The 6S is slightly thicker than the 6 before it, but that’s got to do with the 3D touch display hardware. It’d probably be even thicker if the battery hadn’t been shrunken down.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This