Much is said, not only about Apple but about the whole world of consumer electronics in general, about the issue of scheduled obsolescence that is, there would supposedly be a deliberate attitude of the manufacturers themselves to impair the functioning of their products, causing them to lose quality early. So on the grounds of natural aging, they encourage consumers to spend money on a newer product.
Speaking specifically of Apple, one of the most common things in the internet universe is seeing consumers dissatisfied with the loss of their device performance. Some cases, of course, are more iconic than others just remember the disaster that was iPhone 4 running iOS 7 that gives you an idea of how frustrating to have a device that perfectly met your needs to one day become a stalled cart without many prospects for improvement.
Good if this study of Futuremark producer of famous tests of benchmark As PCMark and 3DMark have something to prove to us, this loss of performance is only seen in the real world, because in numbers not quite as soon as the band plays, it's not.
The folks at the company picked up all models of iPhones from the 5s at the 7th and gathered the processor and graphics chip performance scores month by month from April last year to September 2017. The graphs prove: Unless from the cold and harsh perspective of the numbers, the peak of the devices remains unchanged month after month. ms, system after system. Notice, by the way, the colors of the survey: in gray, we have the benchmarks performed on iOS 9; in blue on iOS 10 and in orange on iOS 11.
Analyzing specifically the iPhone 5s It is the oldest device in the class and, therefore, the one that would theoretically suffer the most from the effects of time and supposed programmed obsolescence, there is an almost negligible loss in CPU measurements, while the GPU remains essentially unchanged over time. In some cases, such as the iPhone 7, the processor does fall somewhat over the months; nothing, however, that represents a significant change in device performance.
I repeat: these, however, are only numbers based on an objective performance measurement test. Empirical experience always presents variables that a laboratory cannot capture, and in this regard, much remains to be improved at both Apple and the world of technology in general.
Of course, no one is asking for a five-year-old to work the same way and at the same speed as one designed yesterday. The desire for companies to start thinking of their creations as long-term investments that (often) are, and accordingly, designing them out of time rather than just making them lighter, thinner. and beautiful (which is also important, don't get me wrong).
Now with you: how are your experiences with iGadgets old? Leave your answers below!