Your example doesn't make any sense. You don't know whether the replacement part was refurbished or new, and refurbished does not automatically indicate lower quality. In fact I've never seen a refurbished Apple product that was in any way sub standard.
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's $95 Million Settlement Over Refurbished Replacement Devices Not Being 'Equivalent to New' Moves Forward
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, having bought several refurbs in the past I know from experience that they really are equivalent to new. I've often recommended to friends that they buy refurbs—if the model they want is available—since it's really just a good way of getting a discount on a new machine.
My example is not a direct example of a whole, refurbished device, but an example of a replacement part. I can imagine them doing similar with replacement devices, but that's just my guess. I thought it made sense, that's why I spoke about my experience.
You don't have any idea where the replacement part came from. It could be entirely new for all you know.
If my screen came from the same manufacturing place than my original screen, it wouldn't have had lower quality.
Same thing applies to batteries. I had that MacBook Pro for almost 10 years. I had to replace the battery at some point. Well, the replacement battery showed signs of quick degradation few months after replacing it, with normal usage. I went there to speak to Geniuses, and they said that the battery was above the 80% of the manufacturing capacity. Thus, the battery was ok. I had to keep that battery, and use less the MacBook. And deal with lower battery life.
You can deny all this without knowing me, but this are my experiences and I think this is a proper place to share them. I love Apple Products, but I am critical with them with those aspects where they haven't met my standards.
If we as customers don't speak out when this happens, then we'll have to deal with lower and lower quality control on their hardware.
In my experience, I'd rather have a refurbished device because then I'd be more certain that my device would have no issues. Refurbished devices can have new components and are verified to function, rather than getting a "new" device that's been in stock a while and might have the same issues that led to my return.
If my device is out of its return window, I'm perfectly fine getting a refurb (if it can't be repaired) as long as it works and doesn't have cosmetic blemishes. Does this lawsuit mean that Apple has to replace every device with a newly built one or was it that some people received damaged refurbs?
If it's the former, then this is ridiculous and wasteful. If its the latter than yeah, who wants to turn in their 16 day old iPhone to get a messed up one back.
If it's the former, then this is ridiculous and wasteful. If its the latter than yeah, who wants to turn in their 16 day old iPhone to get a messed up one back.
Agreed, it it were most other companies, I would be disappointed and leery of a refurbished unit. However, Apple has a great track record on refurbished items. Sure, I know of two instances of relatives having faulty items (eMac and iPad). However, they were failures/defects I have seen people complain about on new devices. Basically, the failure rate does not appear any were than straight from factory and the cosmetic condition is typically indistinguishable from new to a naked eye.
Indeed, model/config availability is the biggest problem.
I was thinking the same, it is not as if people are regularly bringing in spotlessly new devices. Even after a few weeks there is often at least a tiny bit of wear or dust/dirt/grime buildup. I know people have increased their overall belief of entitlement, but sheesh.
Last edited:
Being right and winning in court aren’t the same thing. You can be right, still lose, and be liable for legal fees AND the settlement. This is why so many seemingly frivolous suits are settled.
Never underestimate the ability of a jury to get things terribly wrong.
I think the first thing the Apple lawyers should do is make the bringers of the suit objectively prove that Apple's refurbished devices are "not equivalent to new in performance and reliability". My impression is that you'd have an extremely hard time picking out the new vs refurb ones if half a dozen of each were laid out on a table for the various parties to pick up and try out.
I have gotten a few replacement devices, probably refurbished so I’m likely eligable. I will not be submitting a claim. To do so would be party to this greed fest. I read the t&c and understand that I might get refurbished replacements. The devices I got worked just fine. No harm no foul. I will not be a part of this unethical action.
Over the years, for myself and my wife, I've purchased three of the old white plastic MacBooks, two 2012 Mac minis, a 2019 MacBook Air, and a 2019 iMac -- all refurbished. I also purchased a new 2000 G4 PowerMac, 2004 iBook, 2008 MacBook Pro, and 2015 MacBook Pro. The refurbs looked every bit as new as the new ones. The PowerMac died after 10 years of use, including many upgrades, so it had a good, long life. The 2008 MBP experienced the well-known NVIDIA card failure, and Apple repaired it. Every other Mac on the list is still working fine, or was until I sold it, gave it away, or put it in the closet because it had outlived its usefulness.
The reliability of Apple products is why I don't buy AppleCare, the exception being for the 2004 MBP. That practice has saved me thousands of dollars, so I'll come out ahead even if I do eventually need a repair on a product that would have been covered under AppleCare. But that's a topic for another thread. Anyway, I don't see a problem with getting a refurbished Apple product under warranty or AppleCare. If they were scratched, scuffed, dirty, or had other visible signs of wear and tear, then I'd be unhappy -- but, as others have pointed out, in most cases, the product you bring in for repair is no longer pristine, so a refurbished replacement is going to look newer than what you brought in. Since I've never had a refurbished Mac fail during its useful lifespan, I don't know in what objective way refurbs could be considered inferior to new products.
The reliability of Apple products is why I don't buy AppleCare, the exception being for the 2004 MBP. That practice has saved me thousands of dollars, so I'll come out ahead even if I do eventually need a repair on a product that would have been covered under AppleCare. But that's a topic for another thread. Anyway, I don't see a problem with getting a refurbished Apple product under warranty or AppleCare. If they were scratched, scuffed, dirty, or had other visible signs of wear and tear, then I'd be unhappy -- but, as others have pointed out, in most cases, the product you bring in for repair is no longer pristine, so a refurbished replacement is going to look newer than what you brought in. Since I've never had a refurbished Mac fail during its useful lifespan, I don't know in what objective way refurbs could be considered inferior to new products.
I agree. I sat on a jury once that refused to award the victim any punitive damages because no one was giving them any money. I dread the day that my life or livelihood is being determined by a "jury of my peers".
I will be honest with you: the only Apple products I have had problems with are the ones I DIDN'T purchase refurbished.
I’ve has an iPhone die me and the reFerber was awful the screen didn’t fit properly it had micro scratches on the back maybe I was unlucky but the next one wasn’t much better either and the gap on one side was huge around the screen on the bezel so to be honest I would want new within the warranty period, if I take with my TV which was way more expensive than an iPhone went wrong that gets replaced as new within its warranty period so therefore should my phone or tablet and the adage that reverbs are amazing from Apple isn’t always the case. But I would admit they are better than most.
I’ve seen phones years back refurbished from some of the Cellular providers and they were awful really they looked like they’ve been lying in a box with a bunch of keys they they were scratched and looked used. Apple reverbs look great but you really don’t know what’s on the inside, also if I’m paying for AppleCare throughout the period of the life of the device then I think that’s fair to maybe want a new device if you’re not using AppleCare then maybe you get a referb within the warranty period but if you’re paying the extra I think that’s perfectly okay to want a new device although whether you actually need a new device rather than a referb is another matter altogether
I’ve seen phones years back refurbished from some of the Cellular providers and they were awful really they looked like they’ve been lying in a box with a bunch of keys they they were scratched and looked used. Apple reverbs look great but you really don’t know what’s on the inside, also if I’m paying for AppleCare throughout the period of the life of the device then I think that’s fair to maybe want a new device if you’re not using AppleCare then maybe you get a referb within the warranty period but if you’re paying the extra I think that’s perfectly okay to want a new device although whether you actually need a new device rather than a referb is another matter altogether
I received a refurb iPhone 5 and a refurb iPad mini 2 with AppleCare. I thought it wasn't fair, but what could I do...
When apple replaced my battery under that $29 (or so) replacement program, they ruined my iphone6splus during replacement and came back and gave me a refurb. I protested at the store but to no avail. That refurb phone was the worst and the battery life degraded so quick.
I wish there was a lawsuit for that.
I am glad this lawsuit is taking care of those AppleCare users damages by apple. Giving reform back as replacement is BS on most occasions I would think
I wish there was a lawsuit for that.
I am glad this lawsuit is taking care of those AppleCare users damages by apple. Giving reform back as replacement is BS on most occasions I would think