Nowhere did Apple state the phone was flawless, that aluminum would never scratch, that it would never have a speck of dust under the screen or a bad pixel... Even though all electronics do (even the precious 4S).
Yes and no. Just the advertisng pictures are a warrant the casing is not scratched out of the box.
I think one has to parse the fragility and likelihood of scratches, which is a buying downtic, and an ironic one considering Apple self vaunted build quality narrative; vs the issue of scratches out of the box.
Lets say you were looking at ip5 vs s3. I was so here is what some of my charting was
- worldphone on vZ or sprint: objective ip5 win
- industrial design: subjective iphone 5 win
- build quality rep: subject iPhone 5 win
- resale value at one year: near certain iphone 5 win
- integration with apple ecosystem: win for people on that ecosysterm
- swipe: object s3 win
- scalable ind inexpensive memory: s3 objective win
- readability for a person over 50: slight s3 win
- ubiquity and inexpensive charging options: s3 win
- mkv playback: s3 win
- mapping: s3 win
Now those dont have to be your list, but I would say it probably is mostly representative of a number of people's lists
there is no quesiton that apple emphasizes its industrial design. there is no quesiton that it advertises the look and brand quality of its products as part of the value (its own advertising people have said this is akey emphasis). there is no question that the way the 2 year upgrade subsidies work that for a certain portion of users relative expected resale value at one year is important differentiation from say samsung.
Those values are lessened. That isnt an attack. It is just an objective statement that certain values, that some portion of buyers expect, and expect because apple emphasizes them, are lowered by the scratch susceptibility of the casing.
I bought four expecting to immediately resell two, and did. And the issues with the case didnt tip over two in our family who preferred the iphone. But to say it isnt a rational issue that goes to value is wrong. It is an issue.
ALL phones wear down cosmetically. iPhone users tend to be more upset by this, since the phones looks so "pretty" in the first place.
again I would say the same thing. Apple advertises its relative build quality and leadership in industrial design. You pay a premium for it and it part of their intentional branding. So, respectfully customers think it is so pretty, because it is intentionally marketed as such. That that specifically touted feature is less important to you is fine, but dont say it is meaningless..