iphone 7 Water resist.... I am verry verry disapointed

[Applejuiced]

It's not really bad Apple or anything like that. Simply the same points being made with the same rebuttals and the same rebuttals to those same rebuttals.
[doublepost=1480993587][/doublepost]
Some (much) more than others, especially when the same long threads about the same thing just happened a few times fairly recently.

Ultimately, if the previous threads showed is anything it's that essentially the only memorable thing that will end up happening is that another thread about the same thing will surface in the (most likely near) future with the same points being made again growing that thread into a similarly long one.

Pretty much
I tend not to think of it in a way as by buying this iphone 7 Im being ripped off or they are misrepresenting something to me.
I never was promised any liquid damage warranty and I will continue to use my iphone 7 plus as all my previous phones. Keeping far away from water and making sure it never gets wet.
If it does and survives that's great and good to have available, I will definitely not push it to find out exactly how much liquid resistant it is.
[doublepost=1480994955][/doublepost]

IP67

The first digit 6 means = Dust Tight No ingress of dust; complete protection against contact.

The second digit 7 means = "Ingress of water in harmful quantity shall not be possible when the enclosure is immersed in water under defined conditions of pressure and time (up to 1 m of submersion)."

"immersed" = plunged or sunk in or as if in a liquid.

Sounds like it should withstand a dunk in a bucket of water to me.

If you buy what the original poster said earlier in this thread then it should easily take a small quick dunk in a bucket.
But who knows what really happened.
You can see plenty of videos on youtube where they dump the iphone 7 and other smartphones doing a comparison in a lake for much longer than a few seconds and way deeper than a buckets height and pull it back up and the iphone 7 works fine.
I found the video I was talking about above
Iphone 7 and Galaxy S7 dunked below 35 feet of water.
Iphone 7 survives, Galaxy that has a higher water resistance rating fails.

 

[lordofthereef]

It's not really bad Apple or anything like that. Simply the same points being made with the same rebuttals and the same rebuttals to those same rebuttals.
[doublepost=1480993587][/doublepost]
Some (much) more than others, especially when the same long threads about the same thing just happened a few times fairly recently.

Ultimately, if the previous threads showed is anything it's that essentially the only memorable thing that will end up happening is that another thread about the same thing will surface in the (most likely near) future with the same points being made again growing that thread into a similarly long one.

Yeah, maybe. In my defense this is the first of these threads I've come across.

If it helps, I'm fully aware that only about .0001% of anything meaningful ever happens in these forums. The rest is people talking amongst themselves. I enjoy it regardless.

 

[C DM]

Yeah, maybe. In my defense this is the first of these threads I've come across.

If it helps, I'm fully aware that only about .0001% of anything meaningful ever happens in these forums. The rest is people talking amongst themselves. I enjoy it regardless.

It wasn't aimed at you or anyone in particular. Just commenting on it all (as I've done earlier in the same thread and other previous ones about the same thing). This particular discussion seems to be just repeating on a much more frequent basis in long threads that start anew every few weeks basically with just a handful of the same things repeated.

 

[macfacts]

...
The rating is very accurate, tested and certified. ...
No one can ever know if it's a production fault or customer abuse. ...

Apple should water test each phone before selling it.

 

[mrex]

Yes, the OP said his kid dropped the phone in a bucket.

The question is, should Apple take his word for it? Should Apple take everyone's word for it?

It really doesnt matter what happened because they said that the warranty doesnt cover dropping the phone to water. That is enough to show that they dont stand behind their ads.

if i were the op, i would say that the phone got wet when a white, brown haired guy felt into the pool.

 

[Europa13]

Apple should water test each phone before selling it.

That's absurd. It's not even marketed as waterproof. I don't think you considered the time or cost involved in something of that scope. And even if it were waterproof, it would be a lot more cost effective to just replace the damaged devices.

It really doesnt matter what happened because they said that the warranty doesnt cover dropping the phone to water. That is enough to show that they dont stand behind their ads.

if i were the op, i would say that the phone got wet when a white, brown haired guy felt into the pool.

There's an ad that shows it being dropped/submerged in water? The ones I've seen have all just shown them getting splashed with water. Big difference.

 

[daflake]

Okay, let's assume that the phone passed all test with flying colors. Even then, Apple still does not have to warranty the phone for water damage, it is their choice. All they are saying is that compared to their older models, this one might survive a dunk in the water. Does this mean you should test that? Well, that is up to you and if you fry your phone, Apple is not going to cover it.

Why is this concept so hard for people?

 

[mrex]

There's an ad that shows it being dropped/submerged in water? The ones I've seen have all just shown them getting splashed with water. Big difference.

Yeah, as we all know the guy just magically stays on that position... (This is from the keynote right after they showed "ip67 cert".)

Listen and see tourself what Phil says during 7:15 - 7:35

 

[daflake]

Yeah, as we all know the guy just magically stays on that position...

Again, even if Apple says that it is water resistant, they are not obliged to warranty the item for water damage. The device could be rated for 10M and the company can still say that they don't recommend use in water and will not warranty the item. So what are the points of these discussions?

 

[mrex]

^ watch the vid...
1. Using standards like ip67 to proove that it can handle water
2. Showing a guy falling to the pool and telling ".. it is safe from water.."

What would you think that people who then buy the phone think? They think that it doesnt matter if the phone get wet or kids are using their phone near the pool and accidentally the phone is in the water. It should be ok.

Then you call to apple and say that the phone dropped to the water. Apple says back to you, sorry but no water damages is covered.

When you accidentally fall to the pool like the guy in the keynote and you dont get your phone repaired because of water damages, dont you think sonething is wrong then? Does it really matter if the phone drops to the bucket or to the pool?

 

[daflake]

^ watch the vid...
1. Using standards like ip67 to proove that it can handle water
2. Showing a guy falling to the pool and telling ".. it is safe from water.."

What would you think that people who then buy the phone think? They think that it doesnt matter if the phone get wet or kids are using their phone near the pool and accidentally the phone is in the water. It should be ok.

Then you call to apple and say that the phone dropped to the water. Apple says back to you, sorry but no water damages is covered.

When you accidentally fall to the pool like the guy in the keynote and you dont get your phone repaired because of water damages, dont you think sonething is wrong then? Does it really matter if the phone drops to the bucket or to the pool?

I have watched the vid. Again, it means there might be a potential that YOUR mistake will turn out okay. However, Apple still does not have to honor it as a warranty item even if it has the rating. So the advice they still give? Avoid liquid damage if possible or you will be buying a new phone.

Why do you think that Apple or Samsung (as they do the same thing) are responsible for replacing a phone that you dunked in water? You made the mistake, not them....

 

[deano1972]

I have watched the vid. Again, it means there might be a potential that YOUR mistake will turn out okay. However, Apple still does not have to honor it as a warranty item even if it has the rating. So the advice they still give? Avoid liquid damage if possible or you will be buying a new phone.

Why do you think that Apple or Samsung (as they do the same thing) are responsible for replacing a phone that you dunked in water? You made the mistake, not them....

I agree that it's impossible to honour it as a warranty item for reasons already mentioned on this thread, but the advertisements they are using to help them sell the phones (example guy falling in the pool) are arguably a little misleading in my opinion.

 

[daflake]

^ watch the vid...
1. Using standards like ip67 to proove that it can handle water
2. Showing a guy falling to the pool and telling ".. it is safe from water.."

What would you think that people who then buy the phone think? They think that it doesnt matter if the phone get wet or kids are using their phone near the pool and accidentally the phone is in the water. It should be ok.

Then you call to apple and say that the phone dropped to the water. Apple says back to you, sorry but no water damages is covered.

When you accidentally fall to the pool like the guy in the keynote and you dont get your phone repaired because of water damages, dont you think sonething is wrong then? Does it really matter if the phone drops to the bucket or to the pool?

I have watched the vid. Again, it means there might be a potential that YOUR mistake will turn out okay. However, Apple still does not have to honor it as a warranty item even if it has the rating. So the advice they still give? Avoid liquid damage if possible or you will be buying a new phone.

Why do you think that Apple or Samsung (as they do the same thing) are responsible for replacing a phone that you dunked in water? You made the mistake, not them....
[doublepost=1481020092][/doublepost]

I agree that it's impossible to honour it as a warranty item for reasons already mentioned on this thread, but the advertisements they are using to help them sell the phones (example guy falling in the pool) are arguably a little misleading in my opinion.

How is it misleading? They said that if you do this, there is a potential the phone will survive. They never said it will survive or you money back. If they stated it was water proof, then maybe you guys would have an argument, but that is not the case.

All you have to do is read their page and you will get the answer you are looking for:

iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus are splash, water, and dust resistant and were tested under controlled laboratory conditions with a rating of IP67 under IEC standard 60529. Splash, water, and dust resistance are not permanent conditions and resistance might decrease as a result of normal wear. Do not attempt to charge a wet iPhone; refer to the user guide for cleaning and drying instructions. Liquid damage not covered under warranty.

The last line says it all. It is a feature to help protect you from your mistake, not for them to take ownership of your mistake.

 

[mrochester]

I'd strongly recommended you never ever buy a product based on what you see in advertising. Advertising by its very nature portrays the most positive image possible and may not reflect the actual real world.

 

[Europa13]

Does it really matter if the phone drops to the bucket or to the pool?

Absolutely. Lower depths/higher water pressure and longer submersions are more likely to cause damage.

 

[deano1972]

I have watched the vid. Again, it means there might be a potential that YOUR mistake will turn out okay. However, Apple still does not have to honor it as a warranty item even if it has the rating. So the advice they still give? Avoid liquid damage if possible or you will be buying a new phone.

Why do you think that Apple or Samsung (as they do the same thing) are responsible for replacing a phone that you dunked in water? You made the mistake, not them....
[doublepost=1481020092][/doublepost]


How is it misleading? They said that if you do this, there is a potential the phone will survive. They never said it will survive or you money back. If they stated it was water proof, then maybe you guys would have an argument, but that is not the case.

All you have to do is read their page and you will get the answer you are looking for:

iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus are splash, water, and dust resistant and were tested under controlled laboratory conditions with a rating of IP67 under IEC standard 60529. Splash, water, and dust resistance are not permanent conditions and resistance might decrease as a result of normal wear. Do not attempt to charge a wet iPhone; refer to the user guide for cleaning and drying instructions. Liquid damage not covered under warranty.

The last line says it all. It is a feature to help protect you from your mistake, not for them to take ownership of your mistake.

Exactly, which is why an image of someone falling in a pool is misleading

Ok maybe it's not misleading to you or I because we are smart enough to read up on the details, but there's plenty of dumb people out there who will see that image on an advert and it will stick in their mind and they will think their phone should be fine if they dive in a pool. I'm sure apples marketing people know this too.. which is why my personal opinion stands .. it's a little misleading (on purpose) some of the iPhone 7 advertising

 

[BeeGood]

I wasn't meaning to imply it's in the same category. I was just saying that Touch disease coupled with their stance on water damage is starting to cause a sour taste in my mouth. Perhaps all good things come to an end, but it's always sad to see that happen.

I think there is some misleading advertisement out there. To me it doesn't matter how every other company treats their warranties. Apple was always above and beyond. This is what I mean about Apple falling in line and being just another tech company doing like everyone else does. Used to be my number one reason for going Apple was customer service and warranty claims.

I can understand the frustration. I guess we've just had different experiences with Apple. Almost every interaction that I've had with them has been a very good one, and their return policy is great (14 days, no restocking fee, and they pay for shipping). From what I've heard about dealing with other companies (Samsung, LG, Sony, etc) I still think Apple customer care is a cut above the rest. Maybe with the exception of Google. It's still early but I think they'll eventually rival Apple in terms of customer care.
[doublepost=1481036257][/doublepost]

It really doesnt matter what happened because they said that the warranty doesnt cover dropping the phone to water. That is enough to show that they dont stand behind their ads.

if i were the op, i would say that the phone got wet when a white, brown haired guy felt into the pool.

You're not answering the question. How do you expect Apple to stand behind their ads?

 

[mrex]

How is it misleading? They said that if you do this, there is a potential the phone will survive.

Where do they say that there is a potential to survive?

They never said it will survive or you money back.

Phil says in the keynote: "in our test it is ip67 protection standard ... what that does mean for all of us? ... (you) dont have to worry about ... your iphone will be safe from water..." ... and on the background the guy dropped to the pool.

So please turn that something that apple didnt say and it was just a clever marketing without misleading consumers.

To me it looks nothing more than misleading.

All you have to do is read their page and you will get the answer you are looking for:

Wrong. When you buy an item after seeing an ad you dont need to go their website to read more. The item should work as advertized.

with a rating of IP67 under IEC standard 60529.

If appke is goibg to use standards, their items should work on that way - they cant bend standards. Ip67 items can be put under the water.

It is a feature to help protect you from your mistake, not for them to take ownership of your mistake.

How does it protect from water if they decline to repair anything cause by water? So what protection does this "feature" give to you?

 

[zaaach48]

Your son destroyed your iPhone and your mad at Apple.

Wow!

a million times this

 

[I7guy]

Where do they say that there is a potential to survive?



Phil says in the keynote: "in our test it is ip67 protection standard ... what that does mean for all of us? ... (you) dont have to worry about ... your iphone will be safe from water..." ... and on the background the guy dropped to the pool.

So please turn that something that apple didnt say and it was just a clever marketing without misleading consumers.

To me it looks nothing more than misleading.



Wrong. When you buy an item after seeing an ad you dont need to go their website to read more. The item should work as advertized.



If appke is goibg to use standards, their items should work on that way - they cant bend standards. Ip67 items can be put under the water.



How does it protect from water if they decline to repair anything cause by water? So what protection does this "feature" give to you?

Samsung will not repair the galaxy s7 if it's water damaged, unless you buy their insurance. You did know that, right?

 

[daflake]

Where do they say that there is a potential to survive?

It doesn't it is called reading between the lines. Sorry that you can't read and comprehend what is posted on the website.

 

[geoff5093]

I have watched the vid. Again, it means there might be a potential that YOUR mistake will turn out okay. However, Apple still does not have to honor it as a warranty item even if it has the rating. So the advice they still give? Avoid liquid damage if possible or you will be buying a new phone.

Why do you think that Apple or Samsung (as they do the same thing) are responsible for replacing a phone that you dunked in water? You made the mistake, not them....

The only reason they don't warranty it is because there's no way to tell if the person submerged their phone in water deeper than 1M or longer than 30 minutes, so they'd be liable to replace any phone even if it was outside of those guidelines if they did cover it.

Having said that, if these phones can't handle being submerged like Apple shows and advertises, then they should not be advertising it at all.

They are making claims and not standing by those claims.

 

[BeeGood]

Phil says in the keynote: "in our test it is ip67 protection standard ... what that does mean for all of us? ... (you) dont have to worry about ... your iphone will be safe from water..." ... and on the background the guy dropped to the pool.

So please turn that something that apple didnt say and it was just a clever marketing without misleading consumers.

To me it looks nothing more than misleading.

Do they say anywhere in the keynote that they are now reversing their policy on water damage and will now replace water damaged iPhones?

There seem to be two sets of people in this thread. Those who believe that guarantees are implied in ads and those who know that they are not. Marketing guarantees nothing in and of itself, and as long as the marketing effort isn't an outright lie, I see nothing wrong with it.

Personally, I would have made the exact same purchase decision had Apple not done a keynote or run a single ad. There is so much independently gathered information to aid you in your decision making nowadays, why on earth would you rely on some advertisement as a guarantee?
[doublepost=1481039444][/doublepost]

The only reason they don't warranty it is because there's no way to tell if the person submerged their phone in water deeper than 1M or longer than 30 minutes, so they'd be liable to replace any phone even if it was outside of those guidelines if they did cover it.

Having said that, if these phones can't handle being submerged like Apple shows and advertises, then they should not be advertising it at all.

They are making claims and not standing by those claims.

What if they showed you video evidence of their lab tests showing that they do handle brief submersion in water?

 

[mrex]

It doesn't it is called reading between the lines. Sorry that you can't read and comprehend what is posted on the website.

Oh, so now we need to read between lines rather than listening what Phil said and showed. some of you are just something special!

Samsung will not repair the galaxy s7 if it's water damaged, unless you buy their insurance. You did know that, right?

Is Samsung giving orders to Tim or why are you talking about Samsung?

 

[mrex]

There seem to be two sets of people in this thread. Those who believe that guarantees are implied in ads and those who know that they are not. Marketing guarantees nothing in and of itself, and as long as the marketing effort isn't an outright lie, I see nothing wrong with it.

Dont know which part of world you live but this part where i am comsumers have rights to trust and believe in ads: text and pics.