12 ms·

Links to The Times of India article: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/violence-breaks-out-at-wistron-corps-iphone-manufacturing-plant-near-be

• PedroBatista 6y ago
  Well, Apple doesn’t include chargers on their new iPhones to protect the planet and their keynotes are feel-good orgy of virtuosity. Hard to believe they exploit people...
  • arethuza 6y ago
    Is that new, I got a new iPhone in July and it came with a charger?
    • foxfoxfox 6y ago
      It’s the 12 that doesn’t. The logic being that everyone already has a draw full of chargers and cables so it makes sense to remove the brick from the packaging which slims it down and reduces waste.
      • MaxikCZ 6y ago
        Dont forget the 12 is first iPhone supporting fast charging, which none of the previous iPhone chargers supports. So if you want to utilize its full potential, you need to spend bucks.
        • gambiting 6y ago
          Wait, that's absolutely not true. IPhone 8[0] was the first one that supported fast charging, and it didn't come with a compatible charger in the box. You had to use an 18W USB-C charger and a USB-C to lighting cable, neither of which were in the box. But the phone supported it. So the same argument was true for years and yet people behave as if it's new. [0] https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT208137#:~:text=You%20can%20fast%20charge%20your,battery%20in%20around%2030%20minutes.&text=Fast%20charging%20works%20when%20you,96W%20USB-C%20Power%20Adapter https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT208137#:~:text=You%20can%2...
        • chrisseaton 6y ago
          > Dont forget the 12 is first iPhone supporting fast charging This is beyond false and way into absolute nonsense. Been there since iPhone 8. https://www.ipitaka.com/blogs/news/everything-you-need-to-know-about-fast-charging-your-iphone https://www.ipitaka.com/blogs/news/everything-you-need-to-kn...
          • pc86 6y ago
            So if you have an iPhone 9, 10, or 11 charger that came with the phone, you can utilize fast charging for the 12?
            • chrisseaton 6y ago
              Yes the same fast charging still works. It’s the same protocol and connector.
        • hajimemash 6y ago
          WTF MAN do you always spout lies so confidently xD
      • PedroBatista 6y ago
        Couldn't they just make it optional? When buying the iPhone 12 one could chose to get the charger ( free ).
        • chrisseaton 6y ago
          Why should it be free?
          • MereInterest 6y ago
            Because it is necessary for a functioning device. Because they made changes to their charger during that generation for improved performance. "Free" is a loaded term in this context. It should be included in the purchase.
            • chrisseaton 6y ago
              You can’t use a paintbrush without paint but they still sell them separately. If you need one, buy one. I don’t see any practical, technical, ethical reason to include one. I see environmental and simplicity reasons to not include one.
              • pc86 6y ago
                I can see simplicity reasons to sell the user guide and box separately, too. Why not just hand them $1k in cash and get an unboxed phone? Much simpler than packaging and credit cards. The means by which people will bend over backwards to paint Apple in a good light is insane.
                • chrisseaton 6y ago
                  This attitude leads to mountains of e-waste. No thanks. But yeah drop the user guide too and put it on a website, good idea. The box, not that because it protects the product leading to less wastage.
      • TheRealSteel 6y ago
        Except that they changed the cable for the iPhone 12, so none of your existing chargers work.
        • benjymo 6y ago
          But you can use your existing charging cable. But apples cables are notorious for breaking easily. But I have been using the same cable since X years and it's working fine.
        • kube-system 6y ago
          My old Qi charger works just fine
      • cbozeman 6y ago
        Which is rather humorous, because if I buy a $1500 phone, I want and expect a big ass box with fancy ass packaging, and I expect a charger, and frankly I expect high-end earbuds. Goddamn, this is why I really fucking hate Apple so much. Its why I fucking hate the fact that I picked up a base model Mac Mini. I can't argue its better for many use cases and that I switch between it and my 3900X workstation throughout the day for various workloads, but fucking Christ in Heaven it pisses me off that I have to, to begin with. I fucking hate giving that shit company even a dollar.
    • ben_w 6y ago
      Yes, as of the iPhone 12 range. Here’s a report from October: https://www.macrumors.com/2020/10/13/iphone-12-ships-without-earpods-or-charger/ https://www.macrumors.com/2020/10/13/iphone-12-ships-without...
  • Jipazgqmnm 6y ago
    > to protect the planet Oh, hello there, my breakfast. If it were about the planet they would say something like: "You're eligible for a free charger if you need it." It's the company that sells headphone ear cushions for 77 EUR.
    • christophilus 6y ago
      He was using heavy sarcasm.
      • srtjstjsj 6y ago
        Which causes more trouble than it's worth and forum posters should stop.
      • sundvor 6y ago
        "feel good orgy" left exactly zero other ways to read it (other than sarcasm). I am glad I wasn't drinking my coffee, there would have been cleaning involved. :D
    • ldrndll 6y ago
      I'm fairly certain the parent was being sarcastic. I completely agree, if it was about the planet and not just saving money on their BoM they could (should?) at a minimum have included a discount voucher for a USB-C charger.
      • tomp 6y ago
        Can you explain this? I don't understand the reasoning. Surely it's better for the planet to manufacture less USB-C chargers? Especially assuming that people/families likely have them already (from iPhones or other devices they've bought before)
        • 411111111111111 6y ago
          If it was about the environment they wouldn't have included a charger either, yes. (They wouldn't sell disposable in-ear headphones either. No exchanging batteries) But if it wasn't about money, they would've added a coupon/code to buy a charger because the product is useless without one... Just because the actual action can also be spun in q environmental friendly way doesn't mean the company actually did it for that. They didn't want to include a charger and just used the environment as an excuse so they can argue all criticism away
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• aarong11 6y ago
  This shit isn't new, and it's not like Apple don't know about it. They will move to a new supplier, do a press release condemning them. Rinse and repeat, see you in a few years when the next thread pops up.
  • Jipazgqmnm 6y ago
    > it's not like Apple don't know about it ?! Worker wages were their main reason to move from China to India. It's not something they "might notice", it's pure purpose from start to finish. And it will continue as long as people are willing to pay for it.
    • mehrdadn 6y ago
      > Worker wages were their main reason to move from China to India. You mean, after the Foxconn PR fallout? And to my knowledge the "main reason" they moved out of China was to reduce their dependence on China due to ongoing political tensions, not that they were feeling bad about worker wages.
      • Jipazgqmnm 6y ago
        I like your "Foxconn PR fallout". [1] Regarding your issue, let me copy-paste randomly [2]: > “With India’s labour cheaper compared with China, and the gradual expansion of its supplier base here, Apple will be able to use the country as an export hub,” Neil Shah of Hong Kong-based tech researcher Counterpoint said. > India is also working to boost electronics manufacturing by firms such as Foxconn and last month launched a $6.65 billion plan, offering five global smartphone makers incentives to establish or expand domestic production. > Building more phones in India will also help Apple save on import taxes that further push up its prices. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CINZhtB2aHU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CINZhtB2aHU Edit: [2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-foxconn-india-apple-exclusive-idUSKBN24B2GH https://www.reuters.com/article/us-foxconn-india-apple-exclu...
        • srtjstjsj 6y ago
• accurrent 6y ago
  To be honest, Apple will simply blame Wistron suspend them. In the end these folks here will loose their jobs, and Apple will simply switch manufacturing suppliers. The problem is the big corps have zero accountability when operating in developing nations. On the flip side, developing nations are desperate to attract big firms in order to bring profits in. For a country the size of India, though they definitely can demand that Apple pay a hefty fine or face even more tariffs. If they can't guarantee workers pay, they deserve to be treated exactly like TikTok was.
  • api 6y ago
    Couldn’t Apple put it in the contract if they wanted?
    • GrumpyNl 6y ago
      They could but why would they, its all about pricing.
    • JumpCrisscross 6y ago
      > Couldn’t Apple put it in the contract if they wanted? It is probably in there. We are dealing with a party who broke their word to their employees. I see no reason to assume they aren’t similarly dishonest with their customers.
    • momokoko 6y ago
      This is kind of what fair trade certification tries to address. The issue is that a company like Apple will require in the contract certain things like wage minimum or environmental requirements, but the winning bid will be below the amount required to actually fulfill those requirements. It’s not even that the manufacturer set out to ignore Apple’s requirements, but what happens is that these bids have zero margin of error built in. So once something unexpected happens(lower order volume, initial inaccurate estimation, tax or regulatory changes, etc) these companies are faced with a choice. If they cannot renegotiate the contract they are forced to either reduce salaries, cut environmental and quality corners, or run at a loss and go out of business. The very nature of this type of third party bidding for a few large and powerful customers is that you are almost guaranteed a high percentage of labor and environmental violations because the companies will eventually be forced to chose between that and insolvency.
• game_the0ry 6y ago
  > Smash it up, make noise and don't let Apple ignore this. Huh? It was Wistron that was witholding and lowering wages, not Apple. > No doubt they respond with the usual "When we worked with factories promising us cheap labour and massive profit we didn't realise people and the planet would be exploited. No one could have known". Again, wut? That cheap contract labor helped the Chinese middle class, and also helped China set up the most advanced technical manufatcuring pipeline and supply chain in the world, and now China is the first place the western world goes to make their stuff. No doubt that conditions were sometimes terrible (like creating nets around the building in case workers would try to commit suicide), but those workers (probably) got paid their promised wages and the China realized some benefit. It's not always all exploitation by Apple all day everyday. And again, those Indian folks are employed Wistron, not Apple.
  • i_haz_rabies 6y ago
    China's growth didn't have to happen that way. You can promote economic growth without having to install suicide nets.
    • game_the0ry 6y ago
      Yes, but what company was more responsible for that: Apple or Foxcon? I would say Foxcon, not Apple.
      • i_haz_rabies 6y ago
        This reminds me of the "are companies or individuals responsible for climate change" debate.
• sbmthakur 6y ago
  Well, in all seriousness smashing things does send a bad signal to everyone and motivates companies to look for other options. Paying peanuts for hard work is certainly bad but not having jobs in the first place is even worse.
• agensaequivocum 6y ago
  No. Destroying another's property is not right regardless of the wrong they did to you. Both parties here are in the wrong.
  • claudiawerner 6y ago
    That would be according to one moral theory, but another (critical) approach elaborated upon by 19th c. thinkers rejects it as a "mere pretension", just as with the system's laws and rights. In the wrong conventionally, according to our morality developed in the system it works for? Sure. But on a matter like this, I'm personally more than happy to take another look. Many moral systems that serve the current structures we are rightly critical of - the moral system that had no problem with slavery or marital rape, for instance. I imagine the people destroying property might just feel the same way about Apple's right to property, and the system which provides it.
• caycep 6y ago
  this may be a bit OT but for some reason, that recent book "blockchain chicken farm" or something like that popped into my head, where a chicken can be cryptographically verified to be organic, etc, in every stage of its "production". I realize this isn't the whole solution - part of this is Apple's heavy handed way of squeezing margins, but for at least the "supply chain labor compliance" part, could blockchain be a useful tool for labor unions and workers' rights to ensure that workers are paid their fair share?