7 ms·

To quote this article[1] mentioned in thread: > The crack appears to be a sudden shear in the nose bridge, which would be the weakest part of the glass mold. T

To quote this article[1] mentioned in thread: > The crack appears to be a sudden shear in the nose bridge, which would be the weakest part of the glass mold. Those with the issue speaking to Apple Support have been told to pay the AppleCare deductible of $300 for a repair. > Without AppleCare a cover glass repair would cost $800. Minimum "deductible" to the tune of several hundred dollars?! How is this obvious defect not covered in full by the device's basic 1-year limited warranty[2]? If these claims are indeed true at face value, then I fully expect a massive class action lawsuit would be entirely in order. [1] https://appleinsider.com/articles/24/02/22/reports-are-spreading-about-a-very-specific-apple-vision-pro-front-glass-crack https://appleinsider.com/articles/24/02/22/reports-are-sprea... [2] https://www.apple.com/legal/warranty/products/ios-warranty-document-us.html https://www.apple.com/legal/warranty/products/ios-warranty-d...

gjsman-1000 3y ago
Even more fun, AppleCare is $499 at checkout; and comes with a $299 service fee per incident. Guess how much a cover glass repair costs without AppleCare? To cite yourself... $800. You literally save... nothing. It's like insurance that pays out your own deductible dollar-for-dollar. Maybe you save $1, depending on where you ask. You really only save money on the second accidental crack. But not the third, because AppleCare only covers 2 accidents.
- EchoChamberMan 3y ago
  Holy shit, what a scam.
  - gruez 3y ago
    Wait till you hear about auto insurance. They gasp collect more in premiums than they pay out!
    - Macha 3y ago
      The point with auto insurance (and why you'd use it rather than just putting the equivalent of your premium in a savings account) is that they win the bet most of the time, which means they can afford outlier events which your saving approach alone wouldn't cover. This is different to the claim here AppleCare is profitable on every unit even if they do pay out.
      - gruez 3y ago
        >This is different to the claim here AppleCare is profitable on every unit even if they do pay out. It's clearly worth it if you have butterfingers and manage to break it twice.
        moogly 3y ago
        But only exactly twice. Not once. Not thrice.
        gruez 3y ago
        1. You save $501 when you break it twice, but you still save $501 when you break it 3, 4, or 5 times. You don't get any additional benefits for the additional breaks, but you're still ahead overall. 2. all of the above analysis only covers glass breakage. More costly breakages also changes the equation.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - dghlsakjg 3y ago
      Not to be that guy, but; actually, a lot of auto insurance companies regularly run their premiums below cost. The profit from insurance comes from investing the premiums before they get paid out as claims. Warren Buffet explains it in a lot of his letters to investors, basically the consumer insurance game is about growing the pot by discounting as close to cost of claims (or below) so you can make investment gains on the money paid as premiums.
    - shrubble 3y ago
      You don't buy the car, the insurance, and the repair from the same company, however...
      - gruez 3y ago
        You can buy overpriced phone insurance from third party insurers as well. Apple doesn't have a monopoly on those.
    - EchoChamberMan 3y ago
      In this scenario, you have to break your product twice to see a benefit. I feel like that's not true for cars.
    - blackoil 3y ago
      From a person making claim? That's not a common scenario. It is expected that most people won't have any claim.
      - gruez 3y ago
        Then don't buy applecare. Nobody is forcing you to do so. It's not any different than say, booking a refundable airline ticket, which is the equivalent of "insurance for your plans changing". I checked a random US flight and it's about 60% more. Given that in the past decade or so of flying I never had to cancel or reschedule a flight, it doesn't really make sense for me to pay the premium, but I wouldn't call option of buying such a flexible ticket "a scam".
        blackoil 3y ago
        I have better idea that will save me $3500+299.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- snypher 3y ago
  Ask me and you can save $2 :-) but can you imagine every pair that doesn't break while still having Applecare coverage - that $300-800 is just straight profit.
  - arcticbull 3y ago
    It's not profit, it pays for the ones that do break... The residue from that is the profit. But remember AppleCare+ covers accidental damage. If the glass breaks due to manufacturer defect in the 1 year limited warranty period, you get a free replacement whether you have AC+ or not.
    - gjsman-1000 3y ago
      Except that it whether it’s a “manufacturer defect” or “user error / accident” appears to be a matter of interpretation and luck at the moment…
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
crazygringo 3y ago
If these do indeed turn into a pattern Apple is usually extremely good about free replacements/repairs. But it generally takes them a bit of time to confirm that it's actually a manufacturing or design defect rather than people who just dropped it on the floor, and then ensure they have non-defective parts available. I've personally had one MacBook screen and two AirPods replaced completely for free because of manufacturing defects over the past ten years -- all of which were out of the warranty period.
- gjsman-1000 3y ago
  It’s very hit and miss. I had a pair of AirPods Pro which developed, in both ears, a very strange hardware issue. Almost like random high pitch shrieking noises blended with the audio; like the noise cancellation would go berserk. Both failed Apple’s test in the store. There was a repair program for audio issues - but my pair was made supposedly 4 months after it was fixed, so I had to get a new set. I also had a MacBook 2017 which clearly, obviously, developed the stage light backlight issue. Only to find out the repair program only covered 2016 models. Thus, if I had a nickel for every time Apple had a repair program for the exact issue I was having, but only up to the model just before mine, I’d have two nickels. Which isn’t a lot, but it’s weird that it happened twice, right?
  - gjsman-1000 3y ago
    Addendum to the above: For what it’s worth, the best experience I’ve had with a company that had a hardware screw up is Nintendo. Fill out form, print their shipping label, pop into box, Joy-cons are back 2 weeks later without paying a penny. They’ve also repaired things that clearly aren’t stick drift - like broken shoulder buttons, torn joystick caps, and one I sent in that was completely unresponsive.
    - fbdab103 3y ago
      Surely they sent you new ones and did not bother repairing yours?
Macha 3y ago
In the EU, literally every AVP sold direct is so new that the burden of proof is on Apple to prove it's the consumer's fault and not a manufacturing defect, and otherwise repair/replace/refund free of charge. I'm amazed their premium warranty is not even meeting their legal obligation. Same for non-direct purchases, but for non-direct it's the retailer's problem. (Well, actually, they were pretty slow to comply with faulty charging cables and home buttons on a iPod Touch a decade ago too)
- morcheeba 3y ago
  The AVP isn't sold in the EU yet.
  - boesboes 3y ago
    Now we know why.. jk :)
tjpnz 3y ago
In New Zealand we've got the Consumer Guarantees Act which expressly covers goods which "break too easily"[0]. Are you telling me that in the US your only option is legal action? 0: https://www.consumerprotection.govt.nz/general-help/consumer-laws/consumer-guarantees-act/ https://www.consumerprotection.govt.nz/general-help/consumer...
- mvdtnz 3y ago
  And Apple are famous for fighting customers despite their rights. Try searching /r/newzealand for "Apple disputes tribunal", they're second only to PBTech for their poor behaviour in this country. The Australian consumer rights regulator has slapped them with fines several times but as usual our ComCom is asleep at the wheel.
wilg 3y ago
Christ you guys, it's been like 12 hours since this was reported. You literally do not need to flip out yet.

gjsman-1000 3y ago

Even more fun, AppleCare is $499 at checkout; and comes with a $299 service fee per incident. Guess how much a cover glass repair costs without AppleCare? To cite yourself... $800. You literally save... nothing. It's like insurance that pays out your own deductible dollar-for-dollar. Maybe you save $1, depending on where you ask. You really only save money on the second accidental crack. But not the third, because AppleCare only covers 2 accidents.

EchoChamberMan 3y ago
Holy shit, what a scam.
- gruez 3y ago
  Wait till you hear about auto insurance. They gasp collect more in premiums than they pay out!
  - Macha 3y ago
    The point with auto insurance (and why you'd use it rather than just putting the equivalent of your premium in a savings account) is that they win the bet most of the time, which means they can afford outlier events which your saving approach alone wouldn't cover. This is different to the claim here AppleCare is profitable on every unit even if they do pay out.
    - gruez 3y ago
      >This is different to the claim here AppleCare is profitable on every unit even if they do pay out. It's clearly worth it if you have butterfingers and manage to break it twice.
      - moogly 3y ago
        But only exactly twice. Not once. Not thrice.
        gruez 3y ago
        1. You save $501 when you break it twice, but you still save $501 when you break it 3, 4, or 5 times. You don't get any additional benefits for the additional breaks, but you're still ahead overall. 2. all of the above analysis only covers glass breakage. More costly breakages also changes the equation.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
  - dghlsakjg 3y ago
    Not to be that guy, but; actually, a lot of auto insurance companies regularly run their premiums below cost. The profit from insurance comes from investing the premiums before they get paid out as claims. Warren Buffet explains it in a lot of his letters to investors, basically the consumer insurance game is about growing the pot by discounting as close to cost of claims (or below) so you can make investment gains on the money paid as premiums.
  - shrubble 3y ago
    You don't buy the car, the insurance, and the repair from the same company, however...
    - gruez 3y ago
      You can buy overpriced phone insurance from third party insurers as well. Apple doesn't have a monopoly on those.
  - EchoChamberMan 3y ago
    In this scenario, you have to break your product twice to see a benefit. I feel like that's not true for cars.
  - blackoil 3y ago
    From a person making claim? That's not a common scenario. It is expected that most people won't have any claim.
    - gruez 3y ago
      Then don't buy applecare. Nobody is forcing you to do so. It's not any different than say, booking a refundable airline ticket, which is the equivalent of "insurance for your plans changing". I checked a random US flight and it's about 60% more. Given that in the past decade or so of flying I never had to cancel or reschedule a flight, it doesn't really make sense for me to pay the premium, but I wouldn't call option of buying such a flexible ticket "a scam".
      - blackoil 3y ago
        I have better idea that will save me $3500+299.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
snypher 3y ago
Ask me and you can save $2 :-) but can you imagine every pair that doesn't break while still having Applecare coverage - that $300-800 is just straight profit.
- arcticbull 3y ago
  It's not profit, it pays for the ones that do break... The residue from that is the profit. But remember AppleCare+ covers accidental damage. If the glass breaks due to manufacturer defect in the 1 year limited warranty period, you get a free replacement whether you have AC+ or not.
  - gjsman-1000 3y ago
    Except that it whether it’s a “manufacturer defect” or “user error / accident” appears to be a matter of interpretation and luck at the moment…
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

crazygringo 3y ago

If these do indeed turn into a pattern Apple is usually extremely good about free replacements/repairs. But it generally takes them a bit of time to confirm that it's actually a manufacturing or design defect rather than people who just dropped it on the floor, and then ensure they have non-defective parts available. I've personally had one MacBook screen and two AirPods replaced completely for free because of manufacturing defects over the past ten years -- all of which were out of the warranty period.

gjsman-1000 3y ago
It’s very hit and miss. I had a pair of AirPods Pro which developed, in both ears, a very strange hardware issue. Almost like random high pitch shrieking noises blended with the audio; like the noise cancellation would go berserk. Both failed Apple’s test in the store. There was a repair program for audio issues - but my pair was made supposedly 4 months after it was fixed, so I had to get a new set. I also had a MacBook 2017 which clearly, obviously, developed the stage light backlight issue. Only to find out the repair program only covered 2016 models. Thus, if I had a nickel for every time Apple had a repair program for the exact issue I was having, but only up to the model just before mine, I’d have two nickels. Which isn’t a lot, but it’s weird that it happened twice, right?
- gjsman-1000 3y ago
  Addendum to the above: For what it’s worth, the best experience I’ve had with a company that had a hardware screw up is Nintendo. Fill out form, print their shipping label, pop into box, Joy-cons are back 2 weeks later without paying a penny. They’ve also repaired things that clearly aren’t stick drift - like broken shoulder buttons, torn joystick caps, and one I sent in that was completely unresponsive.
  - fbdab103 3y ago
    Surely they sent you new ones and did not bother repairing yours?

Macha 3y ago

In the EU, literally every AVP sold direct is so new that the burden of proof is on Apple to prove it's the consumer's fault and not a manufacturing defect, and otherwise repair/replace/refund free of charge. I'm amazed their premium warranty is not even meeting their legal obligation. Same for non-direct purchases, but for non-direct it's the retailer's problem. (Well, actually, they were pretty slow to comply with faulty charging cables and home buttons on a iPod Touch a decade ago too)

morcheeba 3y ago
The AVP isn't sold in the EU yet.
- boesboes 3y ago
  Now we know why.. jk :)

tjpnz 3y ago

In New Zealand we've got the Consumer Guarantees Act which expressly covers goods which "break too easily"[0]. Are you telling me that in the US your only option is legal action? 0: https://www.consumerprotection.govt.nz/general-help/consumer-laws/consumer-guarantees-act/ https://www.consumerprotection.govt.nz/general-help/consumer...

mvdtnz 3y ago
And Apple are famous for fighting customers despite their rights. Try searching /r/newzealand for "Apple disputes tribunal", they're second only to PBTech for their poor behaviour in this country. The Australian consumer rights regulator has slapped them with fines several times but as usual our ComCom is asleep at the wheel.

wilg 3y ago

Christ you guys, it's been like 12 hours since this was reported. You literally do not need to flip out yet.