No, but it means you could sue the auto manufacturer for not supplying you with wheels
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Must Compensate Brazilian Customer Over $1,000 for Selling iPhone Without a Charger, Judge Rules
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My new MBP's box wasn't wrapped in plastic, neither were the accessories I bought then.
Will likely be buying Watch and iPad in near future — and will to buy USB-C chargers for them. That’s a nuisance; plus, for a long time, Apple buried the need for a charger in fine print or put it on a separate accessory page without clearly specifying that buying a new USB-C one was REQUIRED.
Having extra chargers is gravy — we have them parked in different rooms, by the couch, by the bed, in the dining room, etc. Incredibly convenient. And, they don't end up in the landfill, either.
Apple is all hat and no cattle on its claim that removing them helps the environment.
I'd be more sympathetic if they had offered a $30 price reduction or CREDIT on all its devices. That would have been a much better approach! Especially if the credit could have been applied immediately with the order either for a charger or a lower price. Those who don't want a charger could save $30. Those who do, get one.
Would like to how much revenue the chargers have brought in over the past 5 years… probably not a biggie, but it is another revenue stream or trickle! ?
Having extra chargers is gravy — we have them parked in different rooms, by the couch, by the bed, in the dining room, etc. Incredibly convenient. And, they don't end up in the landfill, either.
Apple is all hat and no cattle on its claim that removing them helps the environment.
I'd be more sympathetic if they had offered a $30 price reduction or CREDIT on all its devices. That would have been a much better approach! Especially if the credit could have been applied immediately with the order either for a charger or a lower price. Those who don't want a charger could save $30. Those who do, get one.
Would like to how much revenue the chargers have brought in over the past 5 years… probably not a biggie, but it is another revenue stream or trickle! ?
The price of new tech in new phones is more expensive than old tech in new phones.Apple would be within their rights to raise the price. It’s true apple saves money over hundreds of millions of iPhones by eliminating manufacturing and packing costs, reduced greenhouse gases etc. New iPhones cost more to manufacture.
Cool!
If Apple donated the profits they made from unbundling the chargers and upselling people on boxed chargers to environmental causes and organizations, I’d believe them,
Of course they won’t, so it’s just a sad excuse for a money grab…
If Apple donated the profits they made from unbundling the chargers and upselling people on boxed chargers to environmental causes and organizations, I’d believe them,
Of course they won’t, so it’s just a sad excuse for a money grab…
Well you need to be able to charge it up for it to function!
If this was really an 'environmental' decision, Apple would have made the handset available with and without the charger at different price points, allowing those with chargers already to purchase it for a slightly cheaper price, but they didn't. Apple's environmental credentials are poor at best. Purposely making many of their items unrepairable/upgradable to shorten their life span, so it's completely hypocritical to then claim that requiring a charger for your phone is bad for the environment. All it really means is those that need one have to pay extra for it and Apple are always happy to sell you one!
Why would you need a USB-C charger if you already have a ton of USB-A chargers? All you need is a USB-A to Lightning cable, which are as common as mud, and you're done.
The connector that matters for an iPhone is the Lightning connector, it's not actually using the USB-C protocols, all the charger is doing is providing power to the power pins of the Lightning connector. It isn't running the USB-C PD protocols, so you don't actually need a USB-C charger, any dumb charger that can provide the Lightning connector will do the job.
What you fail to understand, this is unfortunate to the world at large. This is a big thing that can have some impact. It’s to bad some of the posts are petty minded and demonstrates some can’t see the first from the trees.
The entire point is to manufacture one physical sku. Having some percentage of iPhones with chargers in the box defeats the purpose. Now what apple will do in Brazil is yet to be seen.
Apple’s environment credentials are pretty good.
No they manufacture their devices to look good, hold up under abuse and keep ticking.
.
No it’s not.
That’s the point. Apple did its research. Of course people could vote with their $$$ and send apple a message.
That’s how laws work. They are made but rarely rationally repealed so here we are.
And what about time and money spent for this judicial process??? 1000$ its, frankly, nothing...
It would be about 228 dollars USD, but the article uses the American dollar sign.
Good. Hit them so it hurts. I’m a fan and shareholder, but Apple is really only caring about profits nowadays. Now, force them to let their users like to use their devices without silly restrictions that they enforce as they please via their appstore.
A new charger is not at all required. It is required only if you intend to use the included USB-C to Lightning cable. All current iPhones charge just fine using a USB-A to lightning cable and USB-A power adaptor - both of which you would have if you owned any prior iPhone.
Watching You Tube videos show the new M1 MB Pro machine boxes are wrapped in plastic still. Apple still use plastic to wrap the computer boxes. They still have a long long way to go before they can claim any high stance in the use of plastics.
And it adds credence to the idea they don't include a charger in the boxes of new iPhones for the environment as hypocritical.
„Apple claims the move is for environmental reasons, claiming the decision is equivalent to removing nearly 450,000 cars from the road per year.“
And releasing a new iPhone only every other year would be equivalent to removing nearly how many cars from the road every year??
And releasing a new iPhone only every other year would be equivalent to removing nearly how many cars from the road every year??
Note that you had to qualify that with “if you have owned any prior iPhone” which for any new user will not have. (children and teenagers getting their first phone, android switchers)
Also people who sell or give away their old phone with the required charger and cable that came with it so the new owner can use it without buying more stuff.
Yeah, a big $6.5B impact because the costs were NOT passed to customers like you keep lying about.
Freedom is about people being able to make choices and not be under control. That includes the freedom to not have powerful corporations exploit their power against the consumer