"About a year ago in iOS 10.2.1, we delivered a software update that improves power management during peak workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus, and iPhone SE. With the update, iOS dynamically manages the maximum performance of some system components when needed to prevent a shutdown. While these changes may go unnoticed, in some cases users may experience longer launch times for apps and other reductions in performance."
https://www.apple.com/iphone-battery-and-performance/
Unexpected shutdowns vs. longer app launch times and other reductions in performance. a compromise.
That's a ... highly rose-colored ... definition of what the issue was.
And if it was such a good, but misunderstood feature, why wasn't it touted as such in the first place, but denied initially, and then only acknowledged apologetically with the removal of such?
Quote the whole phrase: a "well-designed compromise". What's well-designed about secret behavior that angers users?
But it's hard to trust that statement anyway. I'd be more likely to trust them if they'd reported that on their own, instead of hiding it for a year then issuing a PR statement when users proved it was happening.
And if that statement wasn't contradicted by their behavior in shutting down phones after the screen was replaced.
"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."
...
They forgot to mention the "unless the user tries to repair it" exception.
Unexpected shutdowns vs. longer app launch times and other reductions in performance. a compromise.