- Last Active
GeorgeBMac said:PART of the trouble here is, in fact, the fault of Apple:
While they "encourage" people to get repairs & upgrades done at an authorized center they neither enforce the policy nor (critically) publicize it up front. Instead they use a sorta passive - aggressive approach where, when there is a problem they say: "See, you didn't follow directions. It is your fault".
I think Apple and its customers would be best served by making it very clear up front that, while they won't block you from getting third party repairs that all bets, warranties, guarantees, assurances and everything is gone if you do. They need to do that BEFORE somebody buys an Apple product, not after they get the third party repair that impacts their product.
(I don't mean to absolve the person of responsibility for their actions. But that we will continue to have these debates and discussions until Apple makes their policy very clear UP FRONT.)
Rayz2016 said:wanderso said:Replace the word “iPhone” with automobile. Would you feel the same way about Apple’s decision if Ford, Toyota, or the like behaved in this manner? There are certain components that I would only go to a dealer for. The air bag system is an example. Yet there are ample things I can do on my own car, using OEM or aftermarket parts that meet or exceed OEM quality.
Battery replacements on a Prius have to be carried out using a genuine Toyota battery and at a genuine Toyota service centre, otherwise your warranty is automatically invalidated. In order to do this, Toyota can obviously tell when you’ve gone off-piste, repairwise.
Also bear this in mind: the iFixit report didn’t say that installed battery doesn’t work; they just said that Apple won’t provide information on it (without the correct chip on the battery, they can’t). If the battery was installed by a non-authorised dealer then Apple doesn’t want to get stung by warranty claims for case damage, damaged touchscreens, failed waterproofing, and broken security hardware that can come from dodgy repairs. When an authorised dealer carries out the repair, the info on the phone will tell Apple engineers who carried out the repair and when. If they get a spate of damaged phones returned from the same 3rd party dealer, them they know they have a problem. Without that info, they don’t know where the problem originates.
But that doesn’t stop you fitting dodgy batteries to your phone to save a few quid. If it explodes in your pocket then I don’t have a problem. But replace the words “in your pocket” with “on a plane” then that’s a different matter.
But we can still use your Prius as a base to demonstrate the problem with Apple's stance. Imagine if you had to use Toyota branded/approved replacement headlights or tires or window glass or door handles or... you see where I'm going. You don't and it doesn't void your warranty or stop your car from communicating with you.
Your last sentence is FUD. That same nightmare scenario you tried to build could occur with a battery supplied by Apple or an authorized repairer. Moreover, it's a highly unlikely scenario, otherwise we'd be hearing about it happening on a regular basis.
rogifan_new said:Wonder what HP, Dell and Lenovo think about this.
tzeshan said:Microsoft and Google are competitors. It is strange Microsoft CEO shows up at an event mainly for Android devices. Maybe Apple is so strong that Microsoft hopes to bundle with Google to defeat Apple.AppleExposed said:
When has Sammy gave a F about Google? This is about selfish Sammy not Google.They're scumbags and will stab everyone in the back if it means getting closer to being Apple.
I'd laugh my a$$ off it Samsung builds a strong relationship with Microsoft and pisses off Google.
Rayz2016 said:But why do they need folk to listen to the recordings? I’m a bit unclear on that.
As many have said, there are very legitimate reasons for human listening. There just has to be improvement. First thing, they need to get rid of the 3rd party outsourcing and use in-house employees only. Yeah, it's going to cost more for them but none of these companies are hurting for a dollar. Second, implement controls in the work environment that make stealing data a difficult process. Third, in plain language inform customers there's a chance their interactions can be recorded and used for blah, blah, blah. Third B - a pop up that makes participation OPT-IN not opt out.
Not high priority, but I think they should all use raw number when reporting to the public. Vague "less than 1%" or "approximately 0.2%" doesn't really paint an illuminating picture for customers using these services. What raw number represents less than 1% of interactions per day x 365 days per year? 1000 per day? 100,000? A million?