iPhone 5s reportedly experiencing twice as many crashes in comparison to other models

Justin Kahn

Posts: 752   +6

iphone apps crashes iphone 5s m7 coprocessor 5c

We all expect applications to crash more frequently when new operating systems debut, and it appears Apple's new iPhone 5s is experiencing its fair share. So much so that reports are claiming it is experiencing crashes more frequently than both the iPhone 5c and iPhone 5.

Crittercism reports that after having looked at hundreds of millions of apps, programs crash at twice the rate on the 5s in comparison to other iPhone 5 models. Applications crash under 1% on the 5c and iPhone 5, whereas we are seeing a 2% crash rate on the 5s, according to the report.

Andrew Levy, the CEO of Crittercism said recently that anytime "there is new hardware or software release, we see issues. Inevitably, over time, those issues get resolved.”

He also said the more frequent crashes are likely due to the 64-bit A7 chip and the M7 coprocessor the iPhone 5s carries. Developers did not have access to the new 5s hardware, like they did with iOS 7 for several months before release. In the case of the new colorful iPhone 5c, it is nearly identical to the iPhone 5 internally, so devs were familiar with what they were getting in to with the lower budget model. When asked for comment, Apple declined to make a public statement on the matter.

Levy is also quick to point out that he feels Apple has transitioned well to the new 64 bit mobile landscape, despite the crash rate. “They’ve pushed out two iOS updates for iOS 7 … Apple is doing a really good job of addressing these issues as they come up," he said. When 64-bit came to the desktop space, developers were forced to re-write code and drivers, unlike the near seamless transition to iOS 7.

Permalink to story.

 
My sister's 5S crashed several times while I was setting up and throughout the updates. It seems fine now though.
 
Apple, along with a few other computer companies, engineer their devices and wares with the explicit intent of it failing at some point in the near future. That's how they make their money; repeated purchases of wares and auxiliaries. Now stuff is becoming so faulty that it's breaking down before it should. I can understand an enterprise wanting to maintain growth, but it should maintain growth by repeatedly putting out good wares and services, not through deceit and predation of it's consumer base.
 
The Guest is right, this is planned obsolescence gone bad.

An since we're on to that... It's funny how we have all this so-called "consumer rights groups" supporting our rights, but the whole world is silently accepting this. Makes you sick. We're frigging hypocrites, posing as treehuggers and all, and, on the other hand, screwing up resources, constantly building useless crap for the narrow-minded and racking up billions for our own selfish needs...

misor: You're not missing out, don't worry :)
 
This doesn't sound like Apple's fault really. They upgrading their processor and the apps aren't quite working yet on it. They could have released it months earlier, but letting the cat out of the bag on their new product is more unlike Apple than just dealing with a couple crashes.

Honestly, if this is all that's wrong with the 5s, then they've done better than the last few. Wasn't it the 4 that was being 'held wrong' and had terrible reception? And the 5 came with a version of maps that was worse than useless because you didn't know it was wrong until you drove to the wrong place.

Apps will be upgraded and it'll work it's way out.
 
Umm are people really complaining about a %2 crash rate?

When Apple has 100% control over the hardware development, system software, and what applications run on it? Yeah I think 2% is unreasonable. But of course, you probably can't understand that considering you don't even understand that the percent symbol follows the numeric value.
 
Umm are people really complaining about a %2 crash rate?
I think that the 'general acceptable rate of failure' is around 1% or less. maybe this higher rate of failure is related to the 64-bit processor that apple used as implied by other people around the 'net. (software-hardware incompatibility?, poorly coded software for the new hardware?)
 
If this was Microsoft, there would be 3 pages of hate.

I don't know man.. I went through several pages of news posts (in forum mode) and couldn't find many comments on anything related to Microsoft. Maybe it is because since the Surface RT they really haven't done anything that requires much discussion, I did find this though:
https://www.techspot.com/community/...-surface-mini-launch-until-early-2014.196645/

Microsoft delaying surface mini with a whopping 4! replies.

Almost anything negative that can be said about Apple or Steve Jobs gets a ton of posts around here; anything good, like the GM seeding of OS X 10.9, gets very little discussion (2 replies).

So I think you are barking up the wrong tree if you think MS gets treated more harshly than Apple around here.
 
Back