or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple sued over use of moisture indicators to deny free repairs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple sued over use of moisture indicators to deny free repairs - Page 5

post #161 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by easy288 View Post

Deny warranty repairs = bigger profits.

I would like someone to test this indicator in a bathroom after a long hot shower.

I test this every day, still white as a ghost. Still, if you live close to the Ocean (which I do not) there is not telling what salt air might do to those things, sure wreaks havoc on cars.

By the way, Apple isn't the only one using these sensors & they are found on nearly all mobile phones on the market now. Take the battery plate of your phone & more than likely you will see one, though some have a red marking on them & they are looking to see if that has dissolved to pink. Apple might own the patent or something on the specific ones they use but the concept is now used widely in the market since water damage can be very hard to detect.
post #162 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

None of my 5 iPods have ever been in/under water. All of them have their moisture sensors triggered red.

So? How do you know that they weren't exposed to water? There are other ways for a device to be exposed to water besides submersion. The things that many people around here have admitted to would be sufficient.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

No one need figure out whether it is fair or not or even that the parties were thought to have agreed to it. A jury of reasonable people only need be convinced that the terms of the warranty are bad faith terms. When presented with the information above, that walking from outside a building into a building constitutes breach, the jury will find that the legal language constitutes bad faith and find for the plaintiff.

Nonsense. Until you find a way to make affordable electronics that are water resistant, it is reasonable to exclude water damage from warranty repairs.

The fact that ALL cell phone companies exclude water damage is a pretty good indication that Apple is simply following industry practice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It is within Apple's control as they can sell a phone where the interior is not accessible by outside air that would contain the condensation or they can design the phones to be tolerant of such changes.

OK, genius. Please tell us how to make an electronic device that's immune to water damage without jacking up the price a LOT. Furthermore, when you consider all the holes in the iPhone case, it probably isn't practical at all in a consumer device. In spite of its iPad advertising, Apple isn't magic.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #163 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Nonsense. Until you find a way to make affordable electronics that are water resistant, it is reasonable to exclude water damage from warranty repairs.

The fact that ALL cell phone companies exclude water damage is a pretty good indication that Apple is simply following industry practice.

An industry practice can be a damaging one and the industry is moving into new areas and thus must engage in new considerations. The reality is, the boilerplate language they are using for this might not be acceptable. How many other consumer devices are considered to be and advertised as truly mobile?

Also Apple helped shift the industry and not all the directions have been good from that. My earlier cell phones were simply phones. The screens from some of them don't have any dust particles under them even to this day despite being six years old and carried around by an eight year old. (My 8 year old has my hold Kyocera KX414 as his electronic leash as we deem it.) I wish I could say the same for my iPhone. I'm also not just hammering Apple here. I read reports about the Nexus one screen cracking due to flex from merely being in a pocket. That isn't acceptable or good faith in my book either. A cell phone is meant to be carried around and if the very acts associated with doing so damage it, it isn't good faith. The industy is trying to get people to move from pure phones with voice plans to mini-computers with data plans and higher associated costs all around. These are new areas and new considerations. Prior precident doesn't apply.

As for being affordable, I can buy a water resistant watch for $13 so it isn't as if it is expensive or impossible.

Quote:
OK, genius. Please tell us how to make an electronic device that's immune to water damage without jacking up the price a LOT. Furthermore, when you consider all the holes in the iPhone case, it probably isn't practical at all in a consumer device. In spite of its iPad advertising, Apple isn't magic.

If it isn't practical then don't advertise the device as mobile. As I noted plenty of devices have no issues working outdoors. They don't need to be built to military specifications, they can just be built better than having dust enter the screen through the volume rocker.(As happens often on the iPhone including mine) The recent Blackberry phones really have tried to address this. Most of them have done away with the chrome buttons and chrome accents and replaced them with a rubberized strip that covers the buttons and protects better. Little rubber gaskets or seals are not at all hard to design or implement.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #164 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Netcrawler View Post

If this suit actually makes it to court, it probably won't succeed, as it's based on at least one fundamental error if not more. If either liquid contact indicator is red, the device will be opened up to see if the internal sensors have been tripped and whatever is found inside will dictate how the process will proceed from there. If the external indicator(s) are not red, than the device doesn't have to be opened up; as another poster stated, nobody's time is wasted.

But isn't this the fundamental issue all along? That there were instances where Apple has used the red indicator as the SOLE basis for denying warranty coverage, without conducting further examination of the phone? The first line of the article states:

A San Francisco resident has filed a lawsuit against Apple alleging that the company unfairly declines warranty coverage for its products solely on the basis of triggered moisture sensors, which the suit alleges are unreliable evidence of abuse.
post #165 of 177
Read the fine print of the contract you signed, stating that you read the contract, understood it and agree to the terms.

The phone plan part keeps working, you can remove the SIM place it in another phone and continue to use the services it provides.

If a phone requires being sent away for assessment because a sensor has come into contact with water the phone company is under no obligation to supply you a replacement to use in the meantime.

Bear in mind that Apple is one of the only phone companies that offer an on the spot replacement, almost all the other manufacturers require a handset be sent in for assessment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I would prefer a system where people do not suffer monetary damages via false allegations related to indicators that do not indicate what they are declared to indicate. That problem is for Apple and others to solve. They are the ones who want to weed out who is returning items with false claims. They have no right to cause damages to others out of fear a fractional percentage might be trying to have their warrantied honored in an instance where they have invalidated it. The default presumption within the warranty period should be that equipment failed. If they want to invalidate the warranty, it is the manufacturer who should have the extra burden, not the consumer. The consumer is the party committing to a device costing hundred of dollars and and a two year contract often costing a couple thousand.

The phones are under contract when they are within their warranty period. You replace the phone and then if some one is truly found negligent, you can charge it to the bill they are still contracted to pay monthly. How hard is that? You can do exactly what Apple does with items like batteries, they send out the replacement while they have a card number for charges and then you get charged if you don't return the phone being warrantied or if the phone has provable liquid damage, aka not indicators that turn pink when sitting in your pocket, walking from indoors to outdoors repeatedly, or goodness knows what.

Again, you noted these can easily be tripped and that all manufacturers engage in this behavior. It sounds exactly like a problem calling out for a solution beyond a class action lawsuit but even if that is the only remedy, it makes good sense to offer products that actually perform for the term of the contracts offered otherwise it is proof of bad faith on the part of one of the parties.

I mean think about it. Does it sound like good faith for a business to be signing parties to two year contracts for cell service using a cell device only guaranteed to work for one year? When the phone fails, or fails to have the warranty honored due to little pink stickers, the suggested recourse by most companies is to offer another phone and a contract extension. It automatically suggests a situation whereby you can never get out of contract unless you "luck" into a circumstance where your phone doesn't fail.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #166 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Read the fine print of the contract you signed, stating that you read the contract, understood it and agree to the terms.

That doesn't matter if the court determines that the terms are written in a manner that a "reasonable person" wouldn't understand or that a "reasonable person" wouldn't be able to effectively follow. These types of things are done by courts all the time. It's almost like you believe a bad faith contract can be entered into because you consented. You've failed to even understand or deal with the very concept of bad faith which explains all of these points.

So let me help you a bit....

bad faith
1) n. intentional dishonest act by not fulfilling legal or contractual obligations, misleading another, entering into an agreement without the intention or means to fulfill it, or violating basic standards of honesty in dealing with others. Most states recognize what is called "implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing" which is breached by acts of bad faith, for which a lawsuit may be brought (filed) for the breach (just as one might sue for breach of contract). The question of bad faith may be raised as a defense to a suit on a contract. 2) adj. when there is bad faith then a transaction is called a "bad faith" contract or "bad faith" offer.


Your Honor, plaintiff and all plaintiffs are entering into an agreement for a device that is advertised as mobile, but according to warranty terms related to condensation, end up causing said plaintiffs to forfeit said warranty rights for acts as innocuous as walking from indoors to outdoors.

The judge and jury will rule on that point using the standards of reasonableness and any reasonable person will conclude that the claim that you lose your warranty due to walking outdoors carrying cell phone is not a good faith agreement, even if you consented to it. They will declare it bad faith and thus you cannot enter into a bad faith agreement even if you desire to do so. Bad faith agreements by their very nature are illegal. Selling a mobile device where walking indoors to outdoors can invalidate the warranty is bad faith. I have no doubt that a judge or jury would rule in favor of that. Likewise one section of a legal agreement can even be in conflict with another section of an agreement. Apple warranties their products for "normal use" and any judge and jury would find that walking in and out of a building is indeed normal use.

Quote:
The phone plan part keeps working, you can remove the SIM place it in another phone and continue to use the services it provides.

If a phone requires being sent away for assessment because a sensor has come into contact with water the phone company is under no obligation to supply you a replacement to use in the meantime.

Bear in mind that Apple is one of the only phone companies that offer an on the spot replacement, almost all the other manufacturers require a handset be sent in for assessment.

I have no idea what you are talking about with regard to handsets being sent in. Out of all the handsets I have owned over the years, only one has been a pure lemon and that is the Env2 by LG. It has been complete crap and we went through five of them. We were never required to go without a phone. It was a straight exchange all five times.

When a company declares your warranty invalid, they have declared that you have breached a legal agreement between two parties. To do this, they had better damn well have more than suspicion on their side.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #167 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It is within Apple's control as they can sell a phone where the interior is not accessible by outside air that would contain the condensation or they can design the phones to be tolerant of such changes. You make the point exactly. If it is a known variable that no consumers could be expected to avoid and consumers are suffering damages due to it, then it is a bad faith agreement. It would be no different than Apple declaring that breathing on the phone while speaking into it invalidates your warranty. If no consumer can honor the terms, then the terms are made in bad faith. It is why the legal definition of bad faith exists.

As for having the highest customer satisfaction ratings, that is besides the point. Damages are damages and likewise if the rest of the industry is acting in worse faith, it doesn't excuse bad faith.

You say that it is not bad faith, but note that a regular person using the phone in a regular manner is very likely to invalidate the warranty. That is the very definition of bad faith. If you are sold a mobile phone and cannot use it in a mobile manner, walking from indoors to outdoors, then it was sold in bad faith.

Actually, people use products all the time in manors in which they were never intended to be use in and also use it in a way which the product was never spec to operate normally and complain about it. The courts have found for the manufacture most all the time specially if they are documented.

Apple and no cell phone manufacturer ever said your phone will work under all conditions, actually they all clearly call out the operating spec of the product and one of those condition is non-condensing humidity. Reason is wet electronics do not work they usually short out as such you need to take the appropriate steps to make sure that does not happen.

To your point if Apple claimed it can be used an any environment without restriction then everyone has a case. If you want a phone that can operating in wet environment buy a Motorola Tundra. I can tell you that phone cost far more than a iphone but it will survive getting wet, but it was designed to do so.

You live in a nice world if you think these product work under all conditions. They do not, in a prior career I spend many years testing and certifying product to demonstrate the conditions which are in the warranty. I have work with contract and legal teams on these provisions and they hold up specially when you have test data to back it up and I can tell you there is no bad faith on Apple part since they do test and no where does it saw that mobile means it works under all environmental conditions.

The only thing I would said is the sensor should not trip under high humidity condition especially if the phone is not physically wet. But no one has presented test data that this does happen. I have seen where these sensor will change colors when exposed to high humidity conditions for long periods of time.

Lastly, most all Cell phone companies these days use these sensors since it a common practice to dump a phone in water then try and return it under warranty. The only difference is Apple's can be seen easily and the other manufacturers require the phone to be taken apart or it hidden under the battery.

Most likely Apple will fix this persons phone to make this go away since it will cost more to entertain this lawsuit. They will have a confidentiality agreement and they will not be able to talk about it.
post #168 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rambo Is Listening View Post

Here's some news for you man. Your phone came in contact with liquid and you are too weak to admit to: A) Your own faults B) Your lack of perception C) The fact that your phone is not perfectly within eye sight every second of every day and D) That your anger will get you absolutely nowhere at the genius bar as you try to blame it on someone whom you claim is "Trying to take advantage of you."

You can make claims all you want about people who sell computers, but I guarantee you do not know any more than any genius who has worked there for more than a few months. They take these things apart every day repeatedly. Something your arrogance might try to find a fleeting argument against, but will still fail. Plus, if you are taking your phone apart and tampering with it, why would they replace it for you? If you break a connector yourself, why should Apple pay for that? Hell, you're such a pro at taking it apart, why not fix it yourself? Because you can't do it in a cost effective manner while maintaining factory build quality. Might as well get the genius bar swap for $199.

There are 4 sensors on the phone. One red sensor does not automatically disqualify your device from repair. 2 does. They can open your phone and look inside, if it's still wet or internal sensors are tripped, sorry. Take better care of your stuff. If you get splashed and don't notice 1 sensor, ok. If 2 sensors are set off, your phone was wet and if you didn't notice, then it's your fault and you deserve a $199 price tag. We all know liquid and electronics don't mix. Corrosion grows on parts and breaks them. Your fault. I take long, hot showers with my iPhone on the counter every day and my sensors are white as snow.

So take your phone into an Apple store and be a dick. I hope they are dicks right back to you. Get the police in there too, then you can get arrested, spend the night in jail while your car gets towed from the parking lot and then you'll be out a lot more money than your repair would have cost to begin with and you'll still have a liquid damaged phone.

This talk of "I know it never got wet," is what you get when an arrogant person makes the assumption that their own perception of reality precedes everyone else's ability to discern facts.

Grow up.

Do you work for Apple, or are you just sucking that sweet teet? The man tells you his experience and you have the gall to say, "No. Here's what happened to you. It's your fault," over baseless claims?
post #169 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

But isn't this the fundamental issue all along? That there were instances where Apple has used the red indicator as the SOLE basis for denying warranty coverage, without conducting further examination of the phone? The first line of the article states:

A San Francisco resident has filed a lawsuit against Apple alleging that the company unfairly declines warranty coverage for its products solely on the basis of triggered moisture sensors, which the suit alleges are unreliable evidence of abuse.


Haggar is absolutely right. If your indicators are red, then they send you letter with one of several presupposed reasons checked for which they denied your claim. They do not do any further assessment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A San Francisco resident has filed a lawsuit against Apple alleging that the company unfairly declines warranty coverage for its products solely on the basis of triggered moisture sensors, which the suit alleges are unreliable evidence of abuse.


First I'd simply like to say in response to this news, Finally! It's about time they had a suit filed against them for this disreputable practice. If only the plaintiff and her legal team knew...this would have merit as a class-action lawsuit.

I had my own experience with these LSIs with my iPods. After turning in my fairly new iPod in for service I received a report that it had been "submerged" and therefore could not be covered under the warranty. Because I was polite and thorough, the service representatives I dealt with could not do else but concede the fact that the LSI indicator was unreliable, and I did receive my replacement device. I have, however, read accounts from many whose outcome was not so positive.

The LSI is BS. Apple knows that they are weak. They little white patch is a cheap bit of flaky coloring that erodes over time with changes in humidity and air pressure, which it is easily subjected to by any avid user through repeated removal and insertion of the audio jack in different environments.

I'm ESPECIALLY disappointed by the comments of people here siding with Apple, and against other users who have had this experience, over baseless claims. Are you adults or just children sucking on the Apple teet?
post #170 of 177
[QUOTE=jragosta;1614965]All of the above examples are great explanations of why the whiners are wrong.

If the device gets wet, the electronics can be damaged - and Apple should not be responsible. The funny thing is that all of these people think they're false positives - but they're not.

Take a cold phone out on a hot, humid day and water will condense. Take a phone into a humid bathroom where you're taking a shower and water will condense. Sorry, folks, but Apple is entirely within its rights to block warranty coverage when the phone gets wet - and ever single example above shows that the phone was abused.

You don't need to drop a phone in the toilet for it to get wet.



Bad move. Read articles in the press. If 0.01% of iMacs have a problem, the press talks about 'widespread' problems. EVERYTHING gets blown out of proportion.

You'll notice that none of those press reports talks about what percentage of items are defective (other than some schmuck who has no way of knowing making up ridiculous figures). The press thrives on making mountains out of molehills.

Not to mention, of course, that the press would jump on examples like the ones above and claim that they were false positives--when they clearly are not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tawilson View Post

All electronic devices work under "normal humidity" which I think goes upto about 60% for the iPhone.

At 60%+ humidity the phone isn't guaranteed to work. So if the indicator triggers because of that (60%+ humidity) then Apple doesn't haven't to replace it, as they say it won't work in those cases./QUOTE]

Not quite. The iPhone warranty specifies 95%. The problem is that it specifically says 'noncondensing'. So those of you who take a 72 degree iPhone out into 100 degree, 95% RH weather are going to get condensation - and violate your warranty. That's too bad, but it's not Apple's problem. They can't change the laws of physics to suit you.

Explain to us how a triggered sensor equates to damage. As more than one poster has explained, the sensors are a reasonable way to tell if there MAY be damage, but an inspection for actual damage doesn't seem too much to ask -- particularly since actual damage is the only way Apple has a right to deny coverage.

One other question: Why is it that self-perceived "tough guys" always talk about people as if they're "whiners" if they stand up for themselves -- yet the "tough guys" are usually the first ones to cry like babies when THEY have a problem?
post #171 of 177
Yesterday I noticed someone trying to get his iPhone repaired at the Apple shop and they told him the water sensor was triggered. I'd have to check but if the sensors trigger already at 90-95% humidity there might be a problem in Singapore. The humidity here is never below 80% and sometimes tops 97%

Quote:
Take a cold phone out on a hot, humid day and water will condense. Take a phone into a humid bathroom where you're taking a shower and water will condense. Sorry, folks, but Apple is entirely within its rights to block warranty coverage when the phone gets wet - and ever single example above shows that the phone was abused.

So I can't take my iPhone out in a cab or on the bus because the minute I get out the warranty expires? How can that be a consumer problem when Apple should know that their phones are not only sold in the dry desert but in countries that practically drip with water?
post #172 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

To your point if Apple claimed it can be used an any environment without restriction then everyone has a case. If you want a phone that can operating in wet environment buy a Motorola Tundra. I can tell you that phone cost far more than a iphone but it will survive getting wet, but it was designed to do so.

To your point, if Apple defined their operating conditions so strictly as to preclude it reasonable for most folks to use their phone in the advertised mobile manner, then the court would find against them. Apple could define in their operating environmental standards that the phone warranty is void if the phone is ever exposed to sunlight, but the the court would declare them wrong for advertising it as mobile.

Again, bad faith, look it up. The concept exists for a reason and just because Apple or others stick it in a contract doesn't mean a court won't find against it.

Quote:
You live in a nice world if you think these product work under all conditions. They do not, in a prior career I spend many years testing and certifying product to demonstrate the conditions which are in the warranty. I have work with contract and legal teams on these provisions and they hold up specially when you have test data to back it up and I can tell you there is no bad faith on Apple part since they do test and no where does it saw that mobile means it works under all environmental conditions.

I apparently live in a nice world where people make up strawman arguments. Please quote where anyone in this thread ever said that the iPhone ought to work under ALL conditions. That is a strawman. Clearly people are suing because they are using their iPhones under common everyday mobile conditions and having their warranty revoked. You claim they hold up but I've not read where they've been tested in courts or with class action status. Please cite the cases for me.

Likewise Apple lost a case in 2005 because their iPods were so easily scratched. Apple lost another case on iPods due to battery failure. The courts regardless of contract language, found against Apple or Apple settled. Is it reasonable to expect an iPod owner to put their iPod in their pocket, yes. Is it reasonable for someone to take their iPhone from indoors to outdoors when advertised as mobile. Yes.

You say go buy a different phone with different operaing specs. That won't happen. The courts will use the standard of reasonableness to rule against Apple based off how a reasonable person would use their MOBILE phone and if the operating specs are too tight, they will rule against Apple.

They will do so for exactly the reasons you noted as well. A layperson does not have an entire lab set up to determine what about their daily routine runs inside or outside of the operating specs. Apple advertises the device as mobile, by that standard it ought to work in a standard manner within the environments of 95% of the population.

Your car wasn't designed to work in ALL environments either but if the very act of taking it out of the garage invalidated your warranty, there would be suits and if environmental operating conditions were defined as no higher than 90 degree weather and no lower than 70 degree weather, they would be declared bad faith.

Quote:
The only thing I would said is the sensor should not trip under high humidity condition especially if the phone is not physically wet. But no one has presented test data that this does happen. I have seen where these sensor will change colors when exposed to high humidity conditions for long periods of time.

Since you supposedly write this contract language, you ought to know in denying a claim, Apple is declaring the other party took certain actions. If they don't have solid proof then that party has suffered damages and can recover them which is exactly what this case is about. Apple has the burden of proof because they are the ones denying warranty terms. The person seeking damages only need proof they agreed to a one year warranty and were denied it. It is Apple that must proof their rationale for denying the warranty they entered into.
Quote:
Lastly, most all Cell phone companies these days use these sensors since it a common practice to dump a phone in water then try and return it under warranty. The only difference is Apple's can be seen easily and the other manufacturers require the phone to be taken apart or it hidden under the battery.

Most likely Apple will fix this persons phone to make this go away since it will cost more to entertain this lawsuit. They will have a confidentiality agreement and they will not be able to talk about it.

These lawyers will seek class action status and will seek additional plaintiffs who were denied warranties. When you break an agreement, you need a good reason. People purchased Apple phones and expected a one year warranty. If they didn't get it, the burden is on Apple. It doesn't matter if the industry practice is a bad one. A class action lawsuit is exactly the type of tool that will change a bad industry practice.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #173 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

To your point, if Apple defined their operating conditions so strictly as to preclude it reasonable for most folks to use their phone in the advertised mobile manner, then the court would find against them. Apple could define in their operating environmental standards that the phone warranty is void if the phone is ever exposed to sunlight, but the the court would declare them wrong for advertising it as mobile.

Again, bad faith, look it up. The concept exists for a reason and just because Apple or others stick it in a contract doesn't mean a court won't find against it.



I apparently live in a nice world where people make up strawman arguments. Please quote where anyone in this thread ever said that the iPhone ought to work under ALL conditions. That is a strawman. Clearly people are suing because they are using their iPhones under common everyday mobile conditions and having their warranty revoked. You claim they hold up but I've not read where they've been tested in courts or with class action status. Please cite the cases for me.

Likewise Apple lost a case in 2005 because their iPods were so easily scratched. Apple lost another case on iPods due to battery failure. The courts regardless of contract language, found against Apple or Apple settled. Is it reasonable to expect an iPod owner to put their iPod in their pocket, yes. Is it reasonable for someone to take their iPhone from indoors to outdoors when advertised as mobile. Yes.

You say go buy a different phone with different operaing specs. That won't happen. The courts will use the standard of reasonableness to rule against Apple based off how a reasonable person would use their MOBILE phone and if the operating specs are too tight, they will rule against Apple.

They will do so for exactly the reasons you noted as well. A layperson does not have an entire lab set up to determine what about their daily routine runs inside or outside of the operating specs. Apple advertises the device as mobile, by that standard it ought to work in a standard manner within the environments of 95% of the population.

Your car wasn't designed to work in ALL environments either but if the very act of taking it out of the garage invalidated your warranty, there would be suits and if environmental operating conditions were defined as no higher than 90 degree weather and no lower than 70 degree weather, they would be declared bad faith.



Since you supposedly write this contract language, you ought to know in denying a claim, Apple is declaring the other party took certain actions. If they don't have solid proof then that party has suffered damages and can recover them which is exactly what this case is about. Apple has the burden of proof because they are the ones denying warranty terms. The person seeking damages only need proof they agreed to a one year warranty and were denied it. It is Apple that must proof their rationale for denying the warranty they entered into.


These lawyers will seek class action status and will seek additional plaintiffs who were denied warranties. When you break an agreement, you need a good reason. People purchased Apple phones and expected a one year warranty. If they didn't get it, the burden is on Apple. It doesn't matter if the industry practice is a bad one. A class action lawsuit is exactly the type of tool that will change a bad industry practice.

Well here Apples Published spec

http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html

I can tell most ever phone on the market has similar spec so it is a standard within the industry, the courts will these standard and see if what Apple is doing is outside the norm. Not that all say no condensing humidity.

You are the one who keeps talking about what Mobile device should and should not withstand show us the industry spec for what is consider a mobile environment.

Also site the fact that Apple choose to fix prior issues most were not settle in court, So that is not a precedent. Apple elected to settle them and the reason to do so are many, but most likely it was to stop bad press. In most of those cases, lawyers made lots of money and the consumer go some sort to gift card for their next purchase. Also, when Apple fixes a true defect that is not the same as this, the is not a defect since they have a spec, you can argue whether the spec is valid or not but it is a spec.

The other thing you have to ask is why use the sensors in the first place and why do all manufactures have them, because consumer lie and expect not to pay for damage they do to their products. More times than not people dumb their phone in water and then have some stupid expectation that it should work afterward. When it does not they want the manufacture to pay for it.

In this case these people exposed their very expense phone to water and they do not want to admit to it since no one have proven the sensor is not doing its job. So there people will have to show that the sensor tips even not not exposed to water and that fact that there phone was no longer work it was not due to water since Apple could very easily show the something most likely shorted out. However, we know it will not go that far it will be settle and it will go away and these people will get a gift card.

Just because electronics get wet does not mean it will not work, I personal saved a couple peoples laptops after they dumped coffee in them and saved my kids friend cell phones after they jumped in a pool with them in their pockets. Grant in all instance the sensor was tripped so no free repairs for them but their devices are still working.
post #174 of 177
I too experienced problems when a rain drop landed in the headphone socket, the sensor turned red. I didn't try to get a replacement because I had read on several sites that once the indicator had turned red then your warranty was void.

Expensive rain drop!

I've since come across a site called ICATCHI.com, they have heaps of headphone plugs with cool designs and they also have a little cable clip that holds your plug when not in use.

If I had one of these it would have stopped that rain drop and saved me $800 bucks!
post #175 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by easy288 View Post

Deny warranty repairs = bigger profits.

I would like someone to test this indicator in a bathroom after a long hot shower.

Condensation will trigger the indicators. I had that happen to me on my HTC hero a few years ago.
post #176 of 177
How alike are the (reputedly pink?) Apple dots to the pink or other color humidity indicator dots that are quite widely used in shipping?

Whats the difference between the two,

The cobalt II chloride free ones look like this:


The cobalt II chloride ones look like this (they are red)

http://www.google.com/search?q=cobal...ndicator&hl=en

Who manufactures the Apple dots, and what kind of testing have they been subjected to to ensure they in reality only measure water thats abnormal..and don't ALSO register humidity, under normal micro-climactic conditions? (which vary quite a bit both indoors and outdoors)

For example, RH near a cold wall or floor (north side of house, or outer wall, for example) or in an air conditioned area near a source of moisture like a kitchen, or in a finished basement, normally soars..

Cold air flows downward, and when it meets warm air, the moisture in the warm air will condense.

If little dots can be used to make big decisions.. that is very important. For example, the temperature where an iphone is put at night might get cold.. when the iphone is then put in a pocket, it may be cold enough for a while to have water condense inside.. Or what if its wearer goes outside in the summer, without an air conditioned shell around him or her?

The same is even more true for a computer..which can go from cold and closed to on, and having air pulled in to it.

Given that cobalt II chloride dots are widely used to test for humidity, and normal humidity in the US can range up to 90%- (I saw that once this last summer!)

its an important question.. Has any decision dot been tested by independent entities to gauge the resistance to normal HUMIDITY conditions in homes and offices? And pockets?


Humidity indicators are standardized-

Google "IPC/JEDEC J-STD-033" or
"MS 20003-2" or "EIA583" or "MIL-I-8835"


They are used globally to disclose if a shipped product has been subjected to high humidity. Humidity, and the variables involved in same is the reason many products are shipped with a dessicant like silica gel. But, humidity is also a normal issue in homes. Humidity high enough to turn a humidity indicator red is not an abnormal condition in homes, or pockets.

Humidity is a constant in the tropics, and in the summer, in much of the US as well..(the only area that is immune is the Southwest desert area)

The combination of air conditioning and humid weather equals condensation.. Liquid water.. Like when your glasses fog up..

Also, a window open, i.e. ventilation - which means fresher air, also means that humidity indoors will spike, when it rains, just as it does outdoors. water can condense on walls if cold conditioned air meets warm indoor or outdoor air..

Micro-climates also exist anywhere that is close to cold walls or floors. A typical finished basement will have micro-climates routinely. Its normal. A non-contact thermometer and a humidity sensor can show them. Humidity indicators (which are typically made from cobalt chloride) will change color in a humid micro-climate situation. Micro-climates also occur anywhere human skin is nearby.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humidity_indicator_card
post #177 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by tullius View Post

I'm a bit skeptical of the false positive problem if in fact the description of the independent testing is accurate. Who would let their phone be exposed to -11C temps for an hour at a time, three times in a row? If you're outside in those temps, the phone will be in a pocket or close to your body - your body heat alone will keep it from getting that cold.

I'm sure all my phones have been exposed to that much. Haven't measured pocket temperature, but -11C shouldn't be far off the mark when air temps are e.g. -30C. Completely normal usage IMO.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple sued over use of moisture indicators to deny free repairs