content: Apple is pretty much evil, just like Google, but I'm trying to see the major problem with this. The article is biased against Apple, which is fine in my book, but even with that it doesn't sound like the plaintiffs are making too solid a case here.  But the ulterior motive here is to make the old models so slow that the users are forced to upgrade.  That's exactly what I thought the instant I read the relevant sentences, but then it mentioned that the older phones only did this when getting close to empty, and only on older models, which objectively have increasingly shorter durations the longer they go on. So the real question here is how much does it get slowed down? When does that "feature" kick in? What exactly did Apple claim the users were installing that misled them into installing something they apparently didn't want? I can't tell if Apple did some super fucky thing I'm not readily seeing here, or if this is a semi-frivolous case that has a fairly substantial chance of being upheld and thus is being used to suck money from a corporate giant. I'm not defending Apple in any way, I'm just missing something that makes me want to grab my torch and pitchfork. Not that I own Apple products, nor ever have.