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

[Andrewtst]

No point OP yelling here. It is water resistance and it mentioned clearly not cover for water damage.

Told you Sony & Samsung also not cover water damage.

And nothing is misleading by Apple, Sony or Samsung as all clearly mentioned it is only water resistance not water proof and all clearly mentioned not cover for water damage.

 

[mpavilion]

How does the warranty work on something like a diving watch (with regard to water damage)?

 

[C DM]

No point OP yelling here. It is water resistance and it mentioned clearly not cover for water damage.

Told you Sony & Samsung also not cover water damage.

And nothing is misleading by Apple, Sony or Samsung as all clearly mentioned it is only water resistance not water proof and all clearly mentioned not cover for water damage.

Then why do they get the benefit advertising pouring liquids on devices and getting them wet in other ways?

 

[mrochester]

Then why do they get the benefit advertising pouring liquids on devices and getting them wet in other ways?

Because they are IP67 certified?

 

[C DM]

Because they are IP67 certified?

So then if that certification doesn't hold up they should be held to it, right?

 

[mrochester]

So then if that certification doesn't hold up they should be held to it, right?

Absolutely, but the burden of proof lies with the consumer to show that the IP67 certification failed. That's going to be tricky for a consumer to do.

 

[C DM]

Absolutely, but the burden of proof lies with the consumer to show that the IP67 certification failed. That's going to be tricky for a consumer to do.

Seems like Apple isn't allowing for any of that simply saying liquid damage isn't covered.

 

[Ds6778]

Lol a rating doesn't mean fool proof.

 

[C DM]

Lol a rating doesn't mean fool proof.

Seems like it doesn't mean anything at all if nothing related to any liquid damage is covered.

 

[mrochester]

Seems like it doesn't mean anything at all if nothing related to any liquid damage is covered.

Well IP67 means something. You can easily find the definition of IP67 online.

 

[C DM]

Well IP67 means something. You can easily find the definition of IP67 online.

Yes, all of that has been covered multiple times in this thread and others exactly like it linked earlier.

 

[mrochester]

Yes, all of that has been covered multiple times in this thread and others exactly like it linked earlier.

Ok so what's the problem? If you use your iPhone in conditions as identified in the IP67 specification, you won't have any problems. If you use your phone in conditions outside of the IP67 specification, then you may have problems. And at that point, you are no longer covered by warranty.

 

[C DM]

Ok so what's the problem? If you use your iPhone in conditions as identified in the IP67 specification, you won't have any problems. If you use your phone in conditions outside of the IP67 specification, then you may have problems. And at that point, you are no longer covered by warranty.

And if you use them under those conditions (or those explicitly advertised in Apple's commercials) and it fails Apple will still not do anything about it. Pretty straightforward.

 

[mrochester]

And if you use them under those conditions (or those explicitly advertised in Apple's commercials) and it fails Apple will still not do anything about it. Pretty straightforward.

I think it's very unlikely to fail in those conditions though. At which point you'd have a case against Apple to replace the device free of charge.

 

[Ds6778]

Seems like it doesn't mean anything at all if nothing related to any liquid damage is covered.

Apples website says they don't cover water damage so.... where did you read that it did?

 

[mrex]

Apples website says they don't cover water damage so.... where did you read that it did?

Are you saying that they can advertize their product being ip67 but no need to stand behind it because they said that they dont cover water damages? Showing a guy falling to the pool with the phone and expecting someone to imagine that the phone gets only few water drops rather than sinking to the pool with the guy?


This is a cable with ip67:

I quess if that is made by apple, it would be ok to be electrocuted.

 

[mrochester]

Are you saying that they can advertize their product being ip67 but no need to stand behind it because they said that they dont cover water damages? Showing a guy falling to the pool with the phone and expecting someone to imagine that the phone gets only few water drops rather than sinking to the pool with the guy?


This is a cable with ip67:

I quess if that is made by apple, it would be ok to be electrocuted.

We seem to be chasing around in circles here. Water damage is excluded because if your phone is water damaged, it means you've probably also damaged it in some other way that's caused the IP67 certification to fail. That wouldn't be covered by Apple's warranty, hence water damage is not covered.

 

[Ds6778]

Are you saying that they can advertize their product being ip67 but no need to stand behind it because they said that they dont cover water damages? Showing a guy falling to the pool with the phone and expecting someone to imagine that the phone gets only few water drops rather than sinking to the pool with the guy?


This is a cable with ip67:
[ing]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe.../Cee_Stecker.jpg/1280px-Cee_Stecker.jpg[/ing]

I quess if that is made by apple, it would be ok to be electrocuted.

I'm saying that they clearly state that they don't cover it. The only time these threads pop up is when someone gets their panties in a bunch because Apple won't honor what they never said they would honor in the first place.

 

[C DM]

Apples website says they don't cover water damage so.... where did you read that it did?

And that's what I said.
[doublepost=1480876473][/doublepost]

I'm saying that they clearly state that they don't cover it. The only time these threads pop up is when someone gets their panties in a bunch because Apple won't honor what they never said they would honor in the first place.

And the point with that is that they shouldn't advertise something, especially explicitly advertise it, if they aren't going to stand behind it.

 

[Andrewtst]

Then why do they get the benefit advertising pouring liquids on devices and getting them wet in other ways?

Pouring liquids on devices won't damage the device, it is capable to wet the device but not fully deep inside water for a long period.

No company will cover it as it is not water proof, you can deep inside water for a longer period than suppose hence break the IP67 limits. So water damage won't be cover.

The water resistance is means for short splash of water, even under water for 30 mins also depends on the water pressure. They won't know how customer pressure it, thus nobody will cover the water damage unless the device is water proof then different story.

I use before Sony Xperia Z, Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge and now iPhone 7 Plus, all is capable as it mentioned splash with water or even put inside a no pressure water and not longer than suppose. It won't damage the phone as long you not over the mentioned IP limit.

 

[C DM]

Pouring liquids on devices won't damage the device, it is capable to wet the device but not fully deep inside water for a long period.

No company will cover it as it is not water proof, you can deep inside water for a longer period than suppose hence break the IP67 limits. So water damage won't be cover.

The water resistance is means for short splash of water, even under water for 30 mins also depends on the water pressure. They won't know how customer pressure it, thus nobody will cover the water damage unless the device is water proof then different story.

I use before Sony Xperia Z, Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge and now iPhone 7 Plus, all is capable as it mentioned splash with water or even put inside a no pressure water and not longer than suppose. It won't damage the phone as long you not over the mentioned IP limit.

And if the device is damaged by those things that supposedly won't or shouldn't damage it? What then?

 

[mrochester]

And if the device is damaged by those things that supposedly won't or shouldn't damage it? What then?

Then I guess Apple would replace the device.

 

[Applejuiced]

In the end it is what it is. We were never promised any liquid warranty and shouldn't expect it or demand it after we cause liquid damage.
Many smartphone manufacturers also advertise certain water resistance ratings and show commercials pouring champagne on the phone and dropping it in a fish tank and various other wet conditions.
Not sure if legally consumers could go after all those smartphone manufacturers with a class action lawsuit for liquid damages.
And how they would prove that those devices did not withstand their advertised rating. Its more like their word that the device was only used within those guidelines and failed against the manufacturers word and testing. I think down the road we will eventually see such lawsuits and Im interested to see how it plays out. Those huge companies have great teams of lawyers that cover themselves well with advertisements and terms and conditions so its not going to be an easy thing to get them to start paying for liquid damages.

 

[Andrewtst]

And if the device is damaged by those things that supposedly won't or shouldn't damage it? What then?

They already mentioned it won't cover under warranty on it. If you insist then is your issue not the company.

The company don't own you any as it is clearly mentioned it is not under cover and the company didn't force you to buy it. You can just don't buy it. Story end.

If you already buy then you can try to sue them and if you have a very strong evidence and point they are fault then you can earn a big amount of money, else you yelling here unstoppable also won't change it.

The most important is they already told you they won't cover it and they didn't force you to buy it. The advertisement didn't wrongly show it is water proof but only water resistance and the advertisement never mentioned they will cover the water damage. In summary all manufacturer didn't do single wrong on it by advertising it as water resistance capable.

 

[C DM]

They already mentioned it won't cover under warranty on it. If you insist then is your issue not the company.

The company don't own you any as it is clearly mentioned it is not under cover and the company didn't force you to buy it. You can just don't buy it. Story end.

If you already buy then you can try to sue them and if you have a very strong evidence and point they are fault then you can earn a big amount of money, else you yelling here unstoppable also won't change it.

The most important is they already told you they won't cover it and they didn't force you to buy it. The advertisement didn't wrongly show it is water proof but only water resistance and the advertisement never mentioned they will cover the water damage. In summary all manufacturer didn't do single wrong on it by advertising it as water resistance capable.

Seems like you are talking about something other than what I'm bringing up.