obviousness you haven't been to a nexus 4 forum
That's correct, I've not been to a nexus 4 forum, because I have not owned a nexus, yet.
obviousness you haven't been to a nexus 4 forum
Major scratches and functional defects are one thing, but we're talking about literally "scuffs" so tiny that no one notices unless they are specifically looking for them (and sometimes it requires the right light, angle, and in some cases a magnifying glass... I'm serious... read the "scuffgate" thread).
I don't think there are many talking of these "unnoticeable" scuffs, needing right light, angle or magnifying glass. I (and I think most of "us" defending the right to a scuff free iPhone 5 out of the box) am talking about "real" scratches, scuffs and flaking, say like 1 mm, where the naked aluminium clearly show. Many hard core Apple fans here are defending them also, saying that "it's just a phone" and buyers should expect and accept these scuffs, since the phone will probably sooner or later get them anyway.
I just wonder, if you for some reason regret your iPhone 5 purchase and want to sell it as used. If that was the case, wouldn't it be easier to sell and sell for more money if it was in mint/flawless condition instead of if it was scratched/scuffed? Looking to myself as the buyer I would at least give more money for a mint iPhone 5 than a scuffed.
If that is the case, that a mint iPhone 5 has a higher resale value than a scuffed one, why would we pay $900 both for a mint and a scuffed one directly from the store?
If they had lowered the price on scuffed phones, say like $700 instead of $900 (or something like that) I would think it was fair. However, I don't think it's fair to pay full price for a scuffed phone compared to a flawless phone, when the scuffed one is not as valuable as the flawless one.
If I wanted a scuffed phone, I would have waited and bought a used phone. Which would be fully functional, just like a new phone, but maybe showing some scuffing and certainly a clearly lower price than for a new one.
Please show me pictures of out of the box damage of more than 1mm. You might find one or two, but the VAST majority of the "scuffs" are tiny and almost unnoticeable unless you look very closely.
You can be one of the people that thinks any amount of damage is unnaceptable.
You are crazy to think that, because on ANY mass produced item there will usually be some MINOR imperfections (read that again if you need to: MINOR... not 1MM or larger, not a scratch across the screen, not multiple dead pixels... but MINOR imperfections).
Your resale value logic is also flawed:
Apple gives you THIRTY DAYS (in some cases 15 through carriers) to return the phone for a FULL refund (that means 100% of "resale" value if it has "damage" out of the box). IF you keep it longer than that, that's your problem. And again, this supposes you agree that only "real" damage is what we're talking about, and NOT teeny tiny specks from machining on the chamfered edge (which I believe are 99% of the "scuffs").
If you keep the phone for a year, by nature of it being aluminum it WILL show some wear. Especially if you USE it. The wear will be FAR more apparent than any specks, so resale value is NOT affected by anything that Apple did to you at the time of purchase.
And please spare me the "I have a PERFECT 4S after a year and a half". No you don't. You might think it is, but on close inspeciton, it's not. Even if you had it in a case and babied it. It just happens over time.
And let say it was... resale value MAY be affected by $20-30 bucks, if that (proven out by sites like Gazelle, eBay, and Amazon with condition differences of Mint and Near Mint). Ironically that's less than you probably spent on the case to KEEP it "Mint" for a year, and you WON'T be getting the "resale" for the case when you sell that.
Sorry, but resale is NOT a valid concern for "scuffgate". Either return it if it has legitimate damage, or keep it if it doesn't (and don't worry one bit about tiny specks that no one except your buddy who returned 17 5's can see if he holds it the right way and looks close).
However, I still believe it's stupid for anyone to pay the same premium price for a non premium product that another guy pay for a flawless/mint unit and expect them to be satisfied and pleased with the purchase as it's the most normal thing and then tell them to suck it up and accept that they got unlucky this time but that it would look that way in a short while anyway.
How much damage is acceptable to you then? Any of those pictures you linked? Please share with us...
Is it a 1MM "scuff"? Less? More? Why?
I expect and believe everyone should expect near perfection from the (at least here in Sweden) by far most expensive phone on the market (for example about $250 more than the SIII), which Apple also claim is "jewel-like", "unprecedented level of precision" and "a truly incredible fit and finish". At least out of the boxYou sure seem to be requiring perfection while claiming that you don't.
Ok, if you say so.And you are correct in that I am correct. Resale value fluctuates 10% or so on a phone that is "Mint" vs. one that is "Near Mint" come resale time. My 4S wasn't beat to hell, but it was used. It wasn't scratched up, but it had some screen scratches. I got $30 less than my buddies who never left a case. I save that much on NOT buying screen protectors, cases, and fancy pouches. If you abuse it it's one thing, but normal use will not cause a resale disaster. The resale sites prove this.
And sorry again, but the resale value being affected by "scuffgate" argument is 100% invalid anyway. The "scuffgate" simply doesn't hurt you in any of the ways the OCD folks want to believe it does (besides the horror of having a minor imperfection on their mass produced device). Any major problem can be returned with no harm, and if you keep it you are very likely to do more damage to it anyway.
No, I never said I wanted to get away with anything. Now you're reading things into what I said. What I was expressing was what I believe anyone should have the right to expect and accept from a premium product like the iPhone 5. I also thought I had my position as clear, but obviously not.You came after me by exclaiming how you wish you could get away with what I find acceptable on consumer products. I have made my position 100% clear.
Now what do YOU find ok for a $700 product, produced by the millions, to have wrong with it cosmetically? Anything?
Major scratches and functional defects are one thing, but we're talking about literally "scuffs" so tiny that no one notices unless they are specifically looking for them (and sometimes it requires the right light, angle, and in some cases a magnifying glass... I'm serious... read the "scuffgate" thread).
I NEVER stated that you should accept anything with serious damage or functional issues, but I do 100% believe that there HAS to be a line where the "damage" is reasonably acceptable due to how tiny it is and how it in NO way effects the usage of the device.
If you really believe that anything (regardless of price) that is mass produced is "flawless", you clearly aren't using the same standard that the OCD crowd is applying to the iP5.
You can't be serious? For two days and it says 90%?? How is that even possible?
Have you been using your iPhone throughout that day or leaving it idol ??
Major scratches and functional defects are one thing, but we're talking about literally "scuffs" so tiny that no one notices unless they are specifically looking for them (and sometimes it requires the right light, angle, and in some cases a magnifying glass... I'm serious... read the "scuffgate" thread).
I NEVER stated that you should accept anything with serious damage or functional issues, but I do 100% believe that there HAS to be a line where the "damage" is reasonably acceptable due to how tiny it is and how it in NO way effects the usage of the device.
If you really believe that anything (regardless of price) that is mass produced is "flawless", you clearly aren't using the same standard that the OCD crowd is applying to the iP5.