While that may be true, ramifications of this pointless lawsuit/court ruling are just going to make Apple products more expensive, without any improvement in quality.
Last edited:
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.
Dutch Court Orders Apple to Replace Customer's Broken iPhone With New, Not Refurbished, Model
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While that may be true, ramifications of this pointless lawsuit/court ruling are just going to make Apple products more expensive, without any improvement in quality.
You keep saying Nanny state. Are you okay?
A dishwasher isn't a personal device like a watch, phone, computer. But oh you get a brand new replacement part to fit in your existing washer. That's what happens. So Apple should put a new replacement part in your broken phone ideally? I agree. They should.
Just calling it what it is. Don't like the sound of that, then tell your country not to act like a nanny.
I was just making a point, because some members make it sound like a repaired device is the worse thing ever. Here in the US, all they're obligated to do is repair it. I suppose Europeans should quit complaining why they pay more.
So, what i'm hearing is that Apple should refurbish their new iPhones and charge more for them because they are "experienced".
Little do you realise - they shouldn’t be. These ‘exhaustive tests’ that nobody actually knows about, that should be what happens to new product. If it doesn’t then it speaks more about poor quality control than it does a good refurb program.
Exactly. The purpose of warranty is to make the consumer whole as at the time the defect manifested itself. That phone rattling around in your pocket, with coins and keys and all the other stuff in your pocket ain't new anymore. These so-called "consumer protections" are basically just a way to manifest anti-corporatist feelings.
Or maybe a way to rebalance the scales? You know, all those corporations that deliberately release sub standard products, ones that have defects that they know about before they even hit the shelves. These so-called "consumer protections" are basically just a way to manifest anti-consumer feelings.
As a someone who put in a good 5 1/2 years at a fruit stand "Remanufactured" devices especially iPhones have the best quality testing/assurance out of any other device. You need to realize that "new" phones get batched tested, If one single phone passes then the line will let the entire batch go for sale without getting checked. Remanufactured iphones are built from perfectly functioning parts of previously "new" phones, that someone got swapped out at the bar. You're still getting a brand new screen/battery/unibody enclosure. These devices are individually tested for quality, and are more likely to give you less headaches than a "new" device.
My most reliable Macs, the Pro and mini, were both purchased used. My least reliable Macs were new and failed within less than 2 years. There's not nearly enough data to support it, but it makes sense. If it's been working fine for 2 years, it'll probably work fine for 10 years. And if it's refurbished, they're more careful to make sure it isn't screwed up out of the box.
Because every refurb phone I have ever received was MUCH better than the new phone it replaced. Others have reported the same. Refurbished phones typically use new batteries, outer case and glass. Internals are tested and re-used.
Whilst I'm sure refurbished phones are of "as new" quality, there is something about the fact I could pay £700 for a brand new phone today, and after 30 days, experience a fault that leads to me receiving a replacement handset that is actually six months old that just feels wrong.
Yes its perception, but when you buy a premium product, you should expect a premium service.
Yes its perception, but when you buy a premium product, you should expect a premium service.
a new device will come sealed in a box with all accessories. Also a refurbished device can have blemishes, you are no guaranteed one that is "perfect"
Don't get me wrong, I buy refurbished from apple, I think the quality is great, but legally apple know what they are selling me and I know what I am buying.
People who explain that refurbished is better than new .... Meh...heck buy a used car, on the same premise it will have had more inspections and checks than a car than is brand new.
From my experiece , refurbished "replacement" iPhones are excellent quality, passing for new , that a user could not tell the difference. Legally they are refurbished though...and some need to look at the dictionary definition what that means, hence this law case....
Sigh. At least we then can make assumptions of what we are getting for our money. In a total "non-nanny state", you would pay less for the phone, but if it stopped functioning after an unreasonable amount of time, you'd just be "out of luck"? Or I suppose you could drum up the vigilante and march to the company and take matters into your own hand?
When a product fails within a certain ("unreasonably short") time after buying it, Dutch law states that the customer is entitled to a free repair. I'm sure even in your non-nanny state, this is the case. According to the article, Apple said "the phone can't be repaired". In that case, Dutch law says "OK - then you must supply a new phone to the customer." Apple then said "we won't - we'll give her a used one." She then said "well that's not OK with me, I'd like to annull the original purchase agreement and get a refund." That's what happened. She didn't "sue for damages" or "emotional distress" (which seems to be quite common in a certain non-nanny state).
You could argue that the law could have said "in case the product can't be repaired, the seller must provide a similar product, or a similarly used product" - but this opens up a can of worms. You'll get one with a scratch on the screen and they could say "well yours had a scratch on the back - that's similar" etc.
Apple could argue "refurbised is as good as new", but when you buy a new phone, you would not settle for a refurbished one (at the same price) either. The law both exists to protect customers, but also to provide an incentive for corporations to "do the right thing" in the first place. When you buy something, you should be able to have the reasonable expectation that it'll work as advertized. You don't want a way for corporations to "weasel out" by sending out used old crap until the customer gets tired and shuts up.
Bad logic. Apple and other electronics manufacturers can always sell the refurbished pieces to the market instead of shoving them down a customer's throat. 'But few are interested in refurbished pieces so the market is small' I can hear you retort. But that precisely is my point. Few buy refurbished even when cheaper; many prefer new pieces. That's why the lady bought a new and not a refurbished in the first place! Why punish her by giving her a piece she specifically opted not to buy in the first place?
[doublepost=1468391611][/doublepost]
These are Apple fanboys whose reflex reaction is to defend Apple and think later.
Apple gives back refurbished pieces because it's hard to push them even while cheaper than brand new. Having nowhere to take them, they force them on their customers. Not cool
[doublepost=1468391784][/doublepost]
Which begs the question; since refurbs are eternally and infinitesimally better than new pieces, why can't Apple sell them at a premium above brand new pieces?
And another one. Since refurbs are better, shouldn't Apple be offering clients the option of replacing a damaged device with either a brand new or refurbished?
[doublepost=1468392078][/doublepost]
Fair enough. Would you pay for a refurbished a premium above the price of a brand new because refurbs are better or are more likely to be better than brand new pieces?
Would I pay extra for a refurb, no.
Would I pay extra for a NIB unit that has been tested as thoroughly as a refurb, probably.
But I don't see how this is relevant because there is a warranty in place. Now if you could never get a replacement unit, then yes, I would definitely pay more, knowing that the probably of something going wrong is smaller.
Why wouldn't you pay more for a refurb yet you are strongly convicted it's better than a new piece?
Out of luck? I'm pretty sure there's no law in the US requiring manufacturers to provide warranty, yet all major products sold in the US typically have at least a one-year warranty. That's pretty much non-nanny so you're exaggerating.
You'd like to believe that you'd have it much worse if you do it the US way, but we get remanufactured iPhones that are just as good as new. You get brand new iPhones instead and guess what, it'll cost you more money in the end.
There's no free lunch and all costs are passed to the customer, and that's you.
There is no evidence and no perception.
They are the same.
I think they are just new iphone they call "refurbished".
Did you continue reading my post? I went on to explain why. If there is a warranty that offers replacements, why would you pay more? Again, if there was no warranty, then yes, I would pay more to make sure the device is thoroughly inspected.
The article says the phone was purchased in December and stopped working in August, so since this was in the EU, it would have been up to the customer to rely on the one year manufacturer's warranty (refurbished phone, replacement unless it's obviously your fault) or the seller's legal obligations (which may have been Apple; around two years and up to the customer to prove the defect was present at the time of sale).
Anyway, Apple sells phones for cost + profit. If they are forced to give brand new phones out under seller's warranty, that increases the cost and will increase the price. Alternatively, since you can buy a phone and return it without any reason, which turns it into a refurbished phone, if Apple can't use these phones for warranty replacements then they might stop offering you the chance to return the phone if bought in a shop.
Yeah, the reality distortion field is strong amongst some.
Let em dream every unit is throughly tested by a celestial virgin with perfect eyesight and 0% tolerance for defects / faults .