CloudTalkin

In response to The Journal, X-Mode said it was "re-evaluating" its government contracts, but added that those contracts prevented third parties from linking device location data to personally identifiable information like a name or address.

This BS rings so hollow, anyone spewing it should be punched in the face repeatedly.  It's entirely too well known that personally identifiable info like name and address isn't even close to being necessary to identify an individual.  It's pablum for the tech illiterate.  

It's good that they're both getting rid of X-Mode, but there are still many more data brokers out their hoovering up and selling as much data as fast as they can before they get caught.  When they get caught they'll trot out that same tired BS about not linking blah blah blah.

gadgetfreak-apple said:

Apple should go ahead and release a nutrition label for iMessages, Mail etc.  They'll look much better than those for WhatsApp, gMail, etc.  Then Zuck will complain that it's not fair because they load so much digital sugar and fat into theirs.

That's exactly what they are going to do.  The labels will apply to Apple's first party apps as well.  As they should.
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/12/09/apple-responds-to-whatsapp-app-store-privacy/

rcfa said:

Totally ludicrous claims.

First and foremost, water resistant is not the same as water proof. If that were the case they would have to take the entire watch industry to court. 

Second, Apple referred to industry standards of water resistance, and these standards clearly specify the circumstances and conditions of testing, etc. it’s the whole point of referring to a standard and of having well defined standards that one does NOT have to restate over and over the specific of the testing and conditions.

And last but not least, there are other liquids than water, so of course advertising water resistance doesn’t mean excluding liquid damage. You can drop your phone into battery acid, molten lava, corrosive salt solutions, boiling water, crude oil, etc. etc. all of which are liquids, and even if the phone were advertised as water proof and not just water resistant, that would be no reason not to exclude liquid damage from the warranty, as temperatures, acidity, conductivity, corrosiveness etc. vary widely among liquids and can damage the phone irrespective of whether it’s water proof, water resistent, or unprotected.

Just another bankrupt, corrupt country trying to get on the good side of the voters by attacking the supposedly evil corporate overlords and extracting money from them, with the result of them having to get it back somehow by squeezing their contractors yet another bit more or raising prices.

People don’t get it: corporations cannot pay anything, they are pass-through entities: it’s always people who end up paying, and that means consumers or workers.

Ludicrous how? 
First, no one is claiming water resistant and waterproof are the same, 'cept maybe forum members incorrectly mentioning waterproof as part of their arguments.  The Italian complaint doesn't even mention waterproof... not even once.  It's not even a part of their complaint.

Second, you're 100% wrong.  IP68 is an industry standard rating.  Yes.  It is, however, not tested at standard circumstances and conditions.  The manufacturer (in this case Apple) decides the conditions and circumstances.  May be hard to believe, but it's true.  The only real expectation is the 8-rated device is more water resistant than an equivalent 7-rated device.  7 and 8 are immersion ratings.  It also means that a 7 or 8 rated device might not pass 5 or 6 rating certification.  5 and 6 are water jet ratings (spray).  

Lastly, none of the other liquids you mentioned are covered by the IP68 rating.  All of the liquids you mentioned could cause damage that make the device dead-as-all-get-out.  Tripping the liquid indicator would be the least of your worries in those cases.  It's pretty simple.  Don't advertise the device doing things that will void the warranty.

EsquireCats said:

lkrupp said:

Funny how we watch YouTube videos of iPhones submerged for hours with no damage. Then we see reports on various blogs, and the Apple Discussion Forums, from users who dropped their iPhone in a water puddle and it died instantly. The marketing and “testing” don’t seem to align themselves with the real world. If Apple’s claims are valid then it would seem the devices affected should be covered by the warranty. 

Obviously whatever wording apple uses in the region will need to be rectified to be in the same spirit as "water resistance" versus "water proof".

But just an anecdote: I have an iPhone X, I still take underwater photos with it (including in crashing waves) and it has lived at the bottom of a busy swimming pool for hours by accident. I don't use a case, and have dropped the phone plenty in its lifetime. 

If you consider the number of iPhone sold while marketed as "water resistant" then we'd know by now if Apple were lying here.

Nitpick: water resistance doesn't require quotation marks.  It's a defined term, not a euphemism or colloquialism.  Waterproof is a word as well.  The wording in Italy won't need to be rectified.  Apple uses the proper term (water resistance) worldwide.  Apple's only use of the word waterproof is to state it's products aren't waterproof.  Waterproof in this instance, is a moot point since the Italians aren't taking issue with Apple claiming waterproof products.  They are taking issue with Apple's marketing of the water resistance of their products.  They are saying essentially two things.
1.  Let customers know how the IP ratings apply to the product.  Example: iPhone 12 is IP68 certified.  That certification is derived from... (testing procedure).  That certification is only valid under testing procedure conditions.  Activities outside of the controlled testing procedures can alter the device's IP rating effectiveness.  Apple technically already does this, but the info has to be hunted down.  It's not accessible in a practical and easy manner.  Linked below.

2.  Products shouldn't be marketed as water resistant if water intrusion can void the warranty.  Example: Don't advertise by showing people using your products doing activities that can void their warranty.

Part one can easily be resolved by 3 single sentences somewhere in the packaging:  Your phone is not waterproof.  Liquid damage can void your warranty.  Details can be found at https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207043#:~:text=iPhone 12, iPhone 12 mini,meters up to 30 minutes) and https://support.apple.com/en-in/guide/watch/apd707b42a5e/watchos

Part two can easily resolved by not marketing the product in a way that could void the warranty.  Or, don't void warranty for use in activities that are actively promoted by the company.  This applies to the phone and the watch.

The value proposition for this device keeps getting lower.  You gotta really really want this to drop coin.  This is for the fan's fan.