4 ms·

In any one specific case, fixing a litigious customer's laptop is definitely cheaper for Apple. But by having a policy of fighting legal claims vigorously regar

In any one specific case, fixing a litigious customer's laptop is definitely cheaper for Apple. But by having a policy of fighting legal claims vigorously regardless of merit, they can make it wildly uneconomic for customers to sue, which decreases the probability of getting sued. I suspect the economics of their behavior work quite well overall.

aczerepinski 7y ago
The economics might suck for Apple but they can easily afford to pay the lawyers. The customer on the other hand probably has a much tougher time missing work for court sessions.
dd36 7y ago
If it’s wildly uneconomic for its customer, it’s also wildly uneconomic for Apple.
- chipperyman573 7y ago
  It's supposed to be a scare tactic, like how Walmart always sues people who steal more than $20. The point isn't to make it more worthwhile in the one case, it's to scare off 1000 other people who would otherwise do the same.
  - benologist 7y ago
    It's more like a fraud against consumers than a scare tactic. Walmart is being robbed, trace amounts of moisture doesn't mean Apple is being robbed they've just invented that condition and threshold as an excuse to not service warranties. They have a rich history of requiring legal action before respecting consumers rights, even to fix their own mistakes.
- scott00 7y ago
  Correct, in any specific case. But Apple's playing a repeated game, and any given customer is playing a one-time game. Apple can reap the deterrence benefit in future cases, but the customer doesn't really get any reputational benefit from playing hardball, and so has to evaluate the wisdom of suing or not suing based on the outcome of just the single case at hand.
  - sitkack 7y ago
    Having the howto guide on Reddit definitely makes it more difficult for Apple. Independent service shops, opening the case, taking some pictures and sending it back to the customer for a flat rate would tilt it even farther in the consumer's favor.

aczerepinski 7y ago

The economics might suck for Apple but they can easily afford to pay the lawyers. The customer on the other hand probably has a much tougher time missing work for court sessions.

dd36 7y ago

If it’s wildly uneconomic for its customer, it’s also wildly uneconomic for Apple.

chipperyman573 7y ago
It's supposed to be a scare tactic, like how Walmart always sues people who steal more than $20. The point isn't to make it more worthwhile in the one case, it's to scare off 1000 other people who would otherwise do the same.
- benologist 7y ago
  It's more like a fraud against consumers than a scare tactic. Walmart is being robbed, trace amounts of moisture doesn't mean Apple is being robbed they've just invented that condition and threshold as an excuse to not service warranties. They have a rich history of requiring legal action before respecting consumers rights, even to fix their own mistakes.
scott00 7y ago
Correct, in any specific case. But Apple's playing a repeated game, and any given customer is playing a one-time game. Apple can reap the deterrence benefit in future cases, but the customer doesn't really get any reputational benefit from playing hardball, and so has to evaluate the wisdom of suing or not suing based on the outcome of just the single case at hand.
- sitkack 7y ago
  Having the howto guide on Reddit definitely makes it more difficult for Apple. Independent service shops, opening the case, taking some pictures and sending it back to the customer for a flat rate would tilt it even farther in the consumer's favor.