Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

EU Says Apple's Warranty Advertisements Are Unacceptable

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the apple-I-am-disappoint dept.

EU 266

An anonymous reader writes "The European Union believes that Apple should be investigated for the way that it advertises warranties on their products. EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding wrote to the member countries which is 27 to ask them to check whether Apple retailers failed to let buyers know about the right to a minimum 2-year warranty for products such as the iPhone and iPad under EU law."

cancel ×

266 comments

Apple needs to think a bit more... (4, Interesting)

dryriver (1010635) | about 2 years ago | (#41517485)

...about consumer rights, and about the information it passes to buyers. A lot of Apple fans pay a steep premium for Apple products, assuming that they are "the best", even though that is hardly the case. There really is no legit reason why a Mac will cost 1.5 - 2 times more than a similarly specced Windows PC. ---- There's only one way Apple will go from here if it doesn't implement more ethical policies across the board: Down, down, down...

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (-1)

uglyduckling (103926) | about 2 years ago | (#41517525)

A Mac doesn't cost 1.5 to 2 times more than a similarly specked PC.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0, Troll)

raydobbs (99133) | about 2 years ago | (#41517587)

Don't break his rhetoric with fact - he's on a roll. When you figure in the service and tech support you get that are usually extra from PC manufacturers, the charge for the OS built into the price, and the use of substandard parts - forcing immediate upgrades for out-of-the-box PCs, they are about on kilter with each other for average machines. Some products don't hold true with this though - their entry-level notebooks are a bit high for what you get.

Do work in professional audio/video or work in graphics, a Mac is the cheapest route to go.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517611)

Including software/app support? I believe this comment. Especially considering the "high maintenance" user base you refer.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (4, Interesting)

Khyber (864651) | about 2 years ago | (#41517867)

"and the use of substandard parts"

Hi, former Apple Tech here.

You want to talk about substandard parts? How about receiving boxes of Apple logic boards, filled with sand?

How about roughly 2/3 new Macs failing off the line and needing to go back for repairs?

How about getting charged $200 for THE EXACT SAME BINNED RAM that would only cost you $50 for a non-Apple PC?

Give me a break.

"Do work in professional audio/video or work in graphics, a Mac is the cheapest route to go."

Nope. $300 Windows Box and Audacity + Tracktion, which came free with my $80 Mackie mixer, plus a $150 swap-meet special Alesis electronic drum kit with software.

My guitar cost more than most Macs. Better build quality, too. Even comes with MIDI pickups.

Oh, did I mention I did audio and video work for several local Los Angeles bands, as well as record my own music?

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518065)

You are knowledgeable, I will give you that. But I dont understand why you find lying irresistible (especially with easily spottable lies). You should probably seek counseling before it gets out of hand.

Peace out.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

arbiter1 (1204146) | about 2 years ago | (#41518221)

well you think about it little more research and some work that 300$ windows box turns in to a very cheap OS X machine if you are one those ppl that needs to use OS X

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (4, Informative)

cdrudge (68377) | about 2 years ago | (#41517635)

You're right. Sometimes it's more then twice the price.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0)

Joce640k (829181) | about 2 years ago | (#41518419)

You're right. Sometimes it's more then twice the price.

So...? Apple can charge any price its customers are willing to pay.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518479)

So you're saying that Apple's customers are stupid?

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (2)

Reverand Dave (1959652) | about 2 years ago | (#41517663)

right, it's more like 2.5-3 times more.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (3, Informative)

Khyber (864651) | about 2 years ago | (#41517807)

Yes, it does, and we have this discussion every fucking week on /g/ and a new price comparison chart comes out which proves it time and time again using the latest prices from various manufacturers.

EVERY. TIME. Apple is AT MINIMUM 1.5X the price of a similarly-specced Windows Boxen.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (3, Insightful)

narcc (412956) | about 2 years ago | (#41517977)

If you deny that apple products cost 1.5-2x more than other comparably spec'd computers long enough and loud enough it magically becomes true.

All part of the magic that you get when you, a special and interesting person, buy Apple products!

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (-1, Troll)

Myopic (18616) | about 2 years ago | (#41518269)

I understand what you mean by "specs", but if you want to make this comparison you need compare a Mac to a PC that will run the Mac OS. If it doesn't run the Mac OS, then it isn't "comparably spec'd". Windows is not "comparable" to Mac OS or Linux. Windows is a steaming pile of shit while Mac OS and Linux are beautiful, stable, well-behaved systems. And if you want to run Linux then, yes, you can save money by not paying for Apple hardware.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518899)

So what fairy dust do they put on the completely standard Intel based hardware that makes apple computers cost so much? Specced as they are, they can easily run Windows 7 Ultimate if given the correct drivers.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518431)

If you deny that apple products cost 1.5-2x more than other comparably spec'd computers long enough and loud enough it magically becomes true.

So, what, people are forging prices on various sites to promote fanboyism?

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518921)

LMAO!! You claim people are forging webpages to make Apple products look more expensive?

You fanbois are a barrel of monkeys. You'll throw anything at the wall to see if it will stick wont you.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518109)

Just because someone can find a Windows box cheaper than a Mac doesn't magically make them all work out that way. I spec'd a Dell T5500 against a Mac Pro with the same specs and the Dell ended up being $50 more. Of course, this was in the $3500 workstation range. You can always find some cheap plastic Windows box for cheaper than a Mac.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | about 2 years ago | (#41518169)

feel free to share your spec, We will show you where to buy equivalent quality it far less cost.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518523)

MacBookAir $999

Give me a similar box. Make sure to include battery life, screen resolution and case dimensions.

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macbook_air/select [apple.com]

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518935)

How are you going to make that comparison, simply looking at CPU, RAM and HD size? I'm sorry, but if you only compare those, you should not be giving advice about computer purchasing decisions. I've seen so many people go out and buy one of those cheap $300 laptops with the same CPU/RAM/HD as a $1200 one, and yet for some reason they perform absolutely horridly.

Macs use business class hardware; and once you compare it to another business class machine the prices are not that different.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518261)

Are you on drugs? You must be on drugs. or maybe that Apple juice has fermented.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

JakeBurn (2731457) | about 2 years ago | (#41518125)

Considering that a feeling of smug superiority is nearly priceless I could see where many would find that 1.5X much too high.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (4, Informative)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about 2 years ago | (#41518179)

This is the comparison I did over the summer when shopping for a new computer.

Envy 15
Display: 15.6" 1920x1080
Processor: 3rd generation Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3720QM Processor (2.6 GHz, 6MB L3 Cache)
Graphics: 1GB Radeon(TM) HD 7750M GDDR5 Graphics
Storage: 750GB 7200 rpm Hard Drive
Memory: 8GB 1600MHz
Height: 1.11 inches
Weight: 5.79 lbs
Warranty: 2 years
Price: $1,579.99

Macbook Pro 15
Display: 15.4" 1680x1050
Processor: 2.6GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory
Storage: 750GB 7200-rpm hard drive
Memory: 8GB 1600MHz
Height: 0.95 inch (2.41 cm)
Weight: 5.6 pounds
Warranty: 1 year
Price: $2,349.00

Comes down to the Macbook Pro costing $770 more, with the Envy 15 having better specs in almost every category where I couldn't make them 1:1. The most notable deficiency of the Macbook Pro is the puzzlingly low resolution display for their "premium" label. And yes, before anyone says it the Envy 15 has amenities like aluminum housing, backlit keyboard, and slotload optical drive.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1, Informative)

tibit (1762298) | about 2 years ago | (#41518345)

Such comparisons are IMHO only in order right after the Apple has released its product. The deal is that Apple doesn't lower their prices really, while others come out with cheaper products. Besides, nobody forces you to buy brand new Apple. There's buyers remorse and you can usually get it a couple hundred bucks cheaper just weeks after release, and $500+ cheaper months after release. That doesn't seem to happen to other hardware that was much cheaper to begin with.

Envy 15 looks pretty much like a product made to look like Apple as much as possible without getting sued into oblivion. I'm pretty damn sure without healthy competition from Apple it'd never have seen the light of day. Not from the sedentary headless monster HP currently is.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518531)

Such comparisons are IMHO only in order right after the Apple has released its product.

Why? I want to buy a computer today. I am not interested in waiting for a specific release day nor do I want my phone to stop working just because I am "holding it wrong" or any other silly stuff.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (3, Informative)

sodul (833177) | about 2 years ago | (#41518585)

Amongst other things he forgot to mention is battery life. First review I could find:

Since heat has a negative effect on battery life, the included 6-cell, 51Wh battery was simply not enough to accommodate a portable power-house like the Envy 15. It scored 1 hour 55 minutes in MobileMark 2007 tests. Meanwhile, similar systems like the MacBook Pro 15-inch and Dell XPS 16 delivered scores of 5 hours 30 minutes and 4 hours 20 minutes, respectively.

And the heat management does not seem to be on par with my experience with MacBookPro, also seem to explain the poor battery life:

The palm rests registered 89-92 degrees Fahrenheit and as high as 110 degrees in the base—while idling.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about 2 years ago | (#41519015)

I did a similar comparison on July 11, 2012, exactly a month after the new macbook pro lineup was released:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2970727&cid=40615089 [slashdot.org]

For this comparison, I didn't increase the price of the macbook pro from the base model, while maintaining the Envy was better specced and cost less. Even for this comparison, the Envy 15 beat the macbook pro by $450, and had better specs in screen size, screen resolution, graphics, harddrive, memory, and warranty.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518721)

It's a good thing you didn't include this year's Macbook Pro.

Since you can't get a 2880x1800 display on any other laptop. for any price.

OK, so where is there an Apple with ATI graphics? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518823)

Not available? Then your Apple is not sufficient to match my laptop specs for any price.

Re:OK, so where is there an Apple with ATI graphic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41519037)

Too bad this was the challenge:

similarly-specced Windows Boxen

You have to match, not me.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 years ago | (#41518211)

BS. I've been having this discussion for 11 years. Pick a mac, configure a Dell, Toshiba, HP similarly and you usually get the Apple coming in cheaper when it is first released moving up to about a 15-30% premium by the time right before it is pulled. What I've frequently happen is this dialogue.

Apple has A,B,C,D and E
PC has A, B,C+ (something even better), D- (something worse) and is missing E and that is much cheaper.

Apple products are priced perfectly (2)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | about 2 years ago | (#41518291)

The pricing is set to create excellent profit margins [yahoo.com] .

Re:Apple products are priced perfectly (1)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 years ago | (#41518791)

Estimates for gross margin from PCs for 2011 were 28%. Average sale prices are in the $1350-1410 range, Conversely their competition sells their system with a gross margin of around 6%. But estimates of average sale prices are $550-620 range. Apple doesn't even sell machines at that price point.

The comparison with Apple is margins on high end systems from the other PC vendors.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

es330td (964170) | about 2 years ago | (#41518647)

Apple has A,B,C,D and E

Please show me the Mac currently made with an i3 CPU or any Macbook with a 17" screen. I can get either of those from Dell and have system fully capable of running the software 99.9% of the public needs at levels of performance more than adequate. Apple offers B through C- at best.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

es330td (964170) | about 2 years ago | (#41518681)

I own and use as my primary portable a 15" Macbook, btw. I do wish it hadn't cost twice as much as my wife's 17" Dell i3.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (2)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 years ago | (#41518727)

Apple doesn't offer nearly the product selection of the other major PC vendors. There is no question about that. The claim was that for the same hardware Apple was grossly overcharging.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518441)

Sure.

Price ANY Ultrabook to similarly spec'd MacBook Air.

Air wins every time. So much so that PC manufacturers are stopping building them because the Air wins. Every Time.

http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/01/remember-ultrabooks-yeah-that-was-a-good-time/ [techcrunch.com]

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

macbeth66 (204889) | about 2 years ago | (#41518225)

Quite right.

More than that. But dryriver's point is well made.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517795)

I'm waiting for the Apple fan boy to find the most expensive PC/laptop they can find and post it as an example on how it compares mand then all of the sheep to quickly mod it up. Here's a helpful hint, for every PC you find that is similar in price to a comparing Apple product, almost anyone browsing the internet can find 10 that are much cheaper and with a similar warranty. For those Apple fans that don't have their head in the sand and already know an equal PC can be found much cheaper will throw in the "other" in their own non measurable specs to justify Apples cost, you know the ones, like shiney, sleek, just feels right, simple etc.. Those are same terms a person could use to describe a dildo.

 

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

aliquis (678370) | about 2 years ago | (#41518085)

There really is no legit reason why a Mac will cost 1.5 - 2 times more than a similarly specced Windows PC.

Sure there is. Apple have likely came to the conclusion they earn the most money that way.

The PC sellers most likely have argued the same for their sales.

(Also you could argue that Apple may put additional effort and money into the design of their products and how they are manufactured.)

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (2)

Myopic (18616) | about 2 years ago | (#41518099)

The marginal value of a Mac is the OS, not the hardware, and certainly not the hardware *specs*. If any part of the hardware is superior it is the design not the components. But even the case of the computer isn't so special as the operating system.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 years ago | (#41518249)

Just to throw out a specific example. When the retina macbook pro came out I specked out a Dell with similar features (16g of ram, Nvidia 650M, same CPU, 256g SSD)

The Apple was about $200 cheaper.
The SSD was way faster.
Dell didn't have the Retina display.
The Dell did not have the same factor i.e. nowhere near as thin and light.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (0)

tibit (1762298) | about 2 years ago | (#41518271)

No legit reason? Have you looked at their stock prices lately?! I don't care if it's no legit reason you you. Myself, if they keep at it, I'll get a free house courtesy of Apple.

Re:Apple needs to think a bit more... (1)

tibit (1762298) | about 2 years ago | (#41518277)

s/you you/to you/ sigh

Does it really matter (4, Funny)

abhi2012 (2739367) | about 2 years ago | (#41517491)

Apple is going to release a slightly bigger version of the iPhone in 6 months anyway and you are going to throw your old phone out the window. So does it really matter anyways?

Re:Does it really matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518989)

Yeah, because no other smartphone manufacturer makes new models except for once every two years, right?
 
I never got the point of people pissing and moaning about Apple's update cycle when every other manufacturer does the same thing. I'm really puzzled by it.

And they thought dealing with Microsoft was hard (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517513)

Good luck to them. Apple considers discovery of flaws as breaches of their conditions of sale

Re:And they thought dealing with Microsoft was har (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517967)

Well, Apple game is profit... Close a substantial big market to them and they'll cave. And in case you don't believe it, think about Apple (well, Foxconn) opening a factory in Brazil just to make iPhones (yeah, trade laws in Brazil can be a pain). And it isn't even about Apple caving, it's about Apple following the warranty and marketing laws on those countries.
Yeah, the problem is Apple announcing just 1 year of warranty, misleading people to buy the extra warranty law, and breaking a marketing law, and also with that it breaks the EU warranty law as well... I would hate to be Apple right now). You see, Apple in the warranty page say that the law in EU nations only covers, in those two years, for factory defects, while the law in itself states that all problem with the products, except if evidence otherwise, if they break before those two years (even if it's one day before end of warranty) is factory defect. So Apple tries to pitch their extended warranty instead. Limited warranty is one year but covers all defects even those after purchase and tries to make as EU warranty law is only valid for defects existing prior to purchase (problem is, according to EU warranty directives that were put into law on each individual state, all problems are factory problems except if there's evidence otherwise).
We're not just talking about iPhones... it's iPhones, iPads, iPods, Macbooks, Macs, Apple TV, basically everything then have to sell. Like I said, would hate to be Apple right now.

Re:And they thought dealing with Microsoft was har (-1, Troll)

tibit (1762298) | about 2 years ago | (#41518381)

Apple doesn't really give a fuck about those EU laws. They got so much money they could fund a couple smaller european countries for a year or two if they so wished. When ordered by court, they'll obey, other than that -- well, they have learned well enough from Microsoft, I guess. FUD.

Re:And they thought dealing with Microsoft was har (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518593)

Apple doesn't really give a fuck about those EU laws. They got so much money they could fund a couple smaller european countries for a year or two if they so wished. When ordered by court, they'll obey, other than that -- well, they have learned well enough from Microsoft, I guess. FUD.

You do realize that the EU market is larger than the US market don't you? Apple can easily ignore one or two European countries. EU as a whole? Not so much.

but but but but (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517515)

job killing regulations!!!

killing $2.50 an hour foxcon jobs big deal now if (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 2 years ago | (#41517689)

killing $2.50 an hour foxcon jobs big deal now if the jobs where in the usa then its a deal.

Re:but but but but (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 years ago | (#41518143)

Why exactly should I care whether it kills a job in China?

on the plus side, (5, Funny)

joostje (126457) | about 2 years ago | (#41517575)

On the plus side, apple will now sue anyone with sleazy advertisements.

What about... (1, Offtopic)

msauve (701917) | about 2 years ago | (#41517617)

Does the EU require a 2 year warranty on calendars? How does that work?

Re:What about... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517655)

Or liter of milk?

Re:What about... (2)

mseeger (40923) | about 2 years ago | (#41517743)

Does the EU require a 2 year warranty on calendars? How does that work?

Usually well ;-).

In the first six months, any burden of proof is on the side of the vendor. So unless it's obvious that it wasn't used according to the specs, replacement is painless.

After six months, the burden of prood switches over to the buyer. Which may be a hassle, but doesn't need to be.

Re:What about... (3, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | about 2 years ago | (#41518163)

Not everywhere; here in Portugal the burden of proof never shifts.

Re:What about... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518461)

Dammit Portugal... stop trying to convince me to move there! All of your policies that I actually hear about (because I really don't hear about much, so maybe I just haven't been enlightened enough yet) are actually goddamn sane and in the interest of the people... how the hell are you not being bombed into oblivion yet?!

Re:What about... (2)

icebraining (1313345) | about 2 years ago | (#41518965)

Let's see:

- High corruption compared to most of the European countries
- High number of companies, foundations and individuals living from state rents.
- High taxes (e.g. 23% VAT), and rising
- High unemployment, especially among young people, including college graduates
- Low education rates (only 28% finish High School), including among business owners
- High number of workers under a special "no contract" regime
- Low salaries and pensions, which together with high taxes leads to
- Low purchasing power

And the most important: it'll only get worse in the medium term.

Re:What about... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517751)

The EU is not really requiring a two year waranty. Well it theory it does but not in real life.
The first year it's on the manufacturer to prove that the customer broke the thing, wich is hard to do.
The second year it's upp to the customer to prove that it was manufacturer error wich is hard to do so it's really seldom companies need to replace anything the second year.

Re:What about... (4, Informative)

sjames (1099) | about 2 years ago | (#41517809)

Does the 2011 calendar still correctly show the days of the week and the dates for 2011? If so, not defective.

Re:What about... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517855)

I'll bet you wonder why you're never invited to parties.

Re:What about... (1)

Hentes (2461350) | about 2 years ago | (#41517955)

Only on electric devices.

Re:What about... (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about 2 years ago | (#41518223)

That's not true, the Directive (99/44/EC) applies to all non-perishable goods.

Re:What about... (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 2 years ago | (#41518851)

Aren't (annual) calendars perishable?

Re:What about... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 years ago | (#41518201)

Are you deliberately being silly?

Of course there are goods that expire or perish by their very nature before the 2 years period is over. I doubt I can get my money back on the bottle of milk of 2010 that I recently found in the back of my fridge because it's ... let's not be gross here and leave it at that. That's because it is reasonable to expect milk to have a best before date that's way lower than the mentioned 2 years.

It is by NO means to be expected that electronic devices last less than 2 years.

Why would you return old milk? (1)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | about 2 years ago | (#41518319)

This is Europe we're talking about - just call it cheese and you are good to go!

Re:What about... (1)

msauve (701917) | about 2 years ago | (#41518371)

I can think of lots of electronic devices which can be expected to last less than 2 years with normal use. There are whole websites [dx.com] full of electronics which I'd be pleasantly surprised to find still working after 2 years of use.

Re:What about... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518481)

Apple's new solution:

The iPhone 5!

[small print]Best before August, 2012[/small print]

Apple is a cunt (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517659)

Anyone who buys Apple products is a cunt. Don't be a cunt.

Re:Apple is a cunt (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517945)

wrong, they're snobs

Re:Apple is a cunt (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | about 2 years ago | (#41518551)

"I'm superior to people who buy Apple products!"

You always turn into what you hate.

So... (1)

jellomizer (103300) | about 2 years ago | (#41517697)

It is not enough to follow the law you need to embrace it and advertise it too.

Don't get me wrong Extended Warranties tend to be the biggest rip-off because they tend to not cover most of the reasons why your device will break, and cover things that will last forever anyways. However why should apple be under so much pressure for trying to sell as an add on an extended Warrantee. Shouldn't their customers know the law?

Re:So... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517803)

They are selling extended warranties for the period the *law* says they have to cover and hiding the fact the devices are covered. If Apple don't like it, they're welcome to not sell their products in the EU.

Re:So... (5, Informative)

jkflying (2190798) | about 2 years ago | (#41517817)

They're trying to make people think that they will have to pay for something when in fact Apple is required by law to provide it for free.

Re:So... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517861)

And that's because Apple is a cunt.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518839)

Not exactly for free because one can expect that the cost of a good with a 2-year warranty will be higher than the cost of the same good with a 1-year warranty. The vendor has the costs of either higher quality components or of more replacement units. So any company could be excused to sell at an higher price in the EU than in the USA. On the other side, prices in a 0-years warranty country should be lower.

Disclaimer: I live in the EU and I'm happy with the 2 years warranty.

Re:So... (4, Informative)

sjames (1099) | about 2 years ago | (#41517853)

The law includes a requirement to point out what remedies the customer is entitled to under the law. Probably, that is exactly to prevent sellers from deceiving the buyer into thinking they must pay for an extended warranty. Apple ignored that bit exactly so they could sell the extended warranty.

Re:So... (1)

aliquis (678370) | about 2 years ago | (#41518283)

Back when I looked at it Apple Care covered things not in your regular warranty.

Though I assume regular warranty and a home insurrance with a bonus insurrance for you messing up will be more cost efficient.

Re:So... (1)

sjames (1099) | about 2 years ago | (#41518831)

That's exactly it. Consumers need to know that they are paying for a lesser value since they would have the basic warranty anyway. Instead, the materials implied that the price was for any sort of warranty after the 1st year, which would be a greater value if they didn't already have any coverage from EU law.

Re:So... (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 2 years ago | (#41518403)

The law includes a requirement to point out what remedies the customer is entitled to under the law. Probably, that is exactly to prevent sellers from deceiving the buyer into thinking they must pay for an extended warranty. Apple ignored that bit exactly so they could sell the extended warranty.

No, that's what someone is claiming, but not what is actually happening. If you go to store.apple.com/uk and enter "applecare" in the search box, then click on one of the products offered (the first one is applecare for iphone), you see in bold letters (yes, it's actually bold): "Important Note: Apple One-Year Limited Warranty and AppleCare Protection Plan benefits are in addition to rights provided under consumer law. For details, click here." And when you do "click here", you go to http://www.apple.com/uk/legal/statutory-warranty/ [apple.com] which actually explains your rights rather well, and provides links to government websites.

Now compare to Dell: They say - nothing.

Re:So... (2)

sjames (1099) | about 2 years ago | (#41518797)

That is on the website and TFA said so. It's not what the printed materials say.

Re:So... (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 years ago | (#41518217)

Do I have to go to law school now just to avoid being ripped off when I go shopping?

Re:So... (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 2 years ago | (#41518885)

Ironically, the post RIGHT above yours has(d?) this in it.

  go to http://www.apple.com/uk/legal/statutory-warranty/ [apple.com] which actually explains your rights rather well, and provides links to government websites.

So, no.

Not honouring the warranty (2)

Bogtha (906264) | about 2 years ago | (#41517879)

However the issue isnt that Apple is honoring the warranty

Just the other week I brought in some Apple equipment that had a slight hardware fault (charging problems) that was over a year old but under two years old, and they told me they'd charge for it to be fixed. I'd forgotten about the two year EU warranty (it used to be a year, IIRC). The defect wasn't apparent for the first year or so, but there's no visible damage and I haven't knocked it around at all. Anybody know where I stand?

Re:Not honouring the warranty (1)

fermion (181285) | about 2 years ago | (#41518139)

This I think is the issue. At one time Applecare was more than just a warranty. It would fix things like DVD drives that would break with excessive us. Now it is nothing more than a warranty for manufacturers defects, so Applecare has become much less than it used to be. I agree. A manufacturer should be held liable for defects that occur within the expected lifetime of a product, which for a computer is 2-3 years. The extended warranty should cover damage that is not a defect, just stuff that happens.

Since the iGadget thing they are much more focused on cutting costs than making the most reliable products. Don't get me wrong, I still would rather use a Mac than any of the PCs I have laying around, but I am just not going to be so quick to buy Applecare. In the last two incidents I had, they first refused to repair a refurb unit because it was not in pristine condition on the outside(they eventually did fix the computer), and in the last incident they refused to fixe the computer without really looking at it at all. This really effects sales in two ways. First it limits the sales of $2000+ machines that really need to last three years without major repairs, and it limits of the sales of Applecare, which at one time was a good value.

Re:Not honouring the warranty (1)

pointyhat (2649443) | about 2 years ago | (#41518203)

Yeah you are entitled to a replacement/repair for free. Tell them that. If they deny it, tell them that you're entitled to it and it's either replacement here and now or you'll phone your solicitor for advice. Make as much noise as possible to show that you're willing to put off other customers.

I've had to do this 3 times now on my kids iPod failures (knackered cables, battery failure, one 4th gen nano actually melted).

Also don't buy Apple again.

We now buy Lenovo laptops, Nokia phones (Lumia) and Archos media players now - no problems ever! Grab it from a respectable store such as John Lewis in the UK and you're sorted - they will NEVER argue with you.

Re:Not honouring the warranty (2, Informative)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 2 years ago | (#41518547)

You didn't say where you bought the Apple equipment. Statutory warranties are provided by the seller, not the manufacturer. So if you buy a Mac at PCWorld, it's PCWorld's problem. If you buy a Canon printer at the Apple Store, it's Apple's problem.

Now in the first 6 months the seller has to prove that the fault wasn't present when you received the item, after that you have to prove that the fault was there when you received it. You also didn't say whether a repair has happened; after a repair it would be impossible to prove anything about the defect. If you haven't paid yet, the important things are EU law, _and_ that you haven't caused the damage and no reason to believe you did.

(You have to _prove_ the fault was there when you bought the item. But clearly with every fault either it was faulty when bought, or you damaged it, or someone else damaged it. If the item is something that shouldn't break without visible outside damage, and there is no visible damage, that would look like you bought it with the fault).

Re:Not honouring the warranty (2)

Neil_Brown (1568845) | about 2 years ago | (#41518981)

Anybody know where I stand?

Here's what I would do — just my thoughts, not legal advice or anything like that. This is based on a number of things:

  • * I am based in the UK, as my thoughts are based on UK law;
  • * I bought the product as a consumer, and not a business;
  • * Apple was the seller — the party from whom I bought the product. If Apple is the manufacturer, but not the seller, because I bought the product from a third party store, O would need to pursue your claim (which is for breach of contract) against that third party instead; and
  • * It genuinely is a case of a latent fault, not me having broken something and looking for a remedy — for example, that I was poking about inside the machine / trying to take it apart, and, in doing so, caused the problem in question.

I would not cite the legislation, or make it sound all legalistic — in my experience, that just causes problems and gets people nervous, but knowing the position can be helpful, to avoid being fobbed off. I've cited and linked the relevant legislation, for reference, and tried to outline my thinking / methodology, but I would *really* be aiming for it to be a casual exchange rather than one full of legal overtones.

I would go back to the Apple store and explain that under English law, goods sold in the course of business must be "of satisfactory quality" (s14, Sale of Goods Act 1979 [legislation.gov.uk] ). This is a requirement which is implied automatically into a contract, and which cannot be excluded in a business to consumer relationship (s6(2), Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 [legislation.gov.uk] ).

With this in mind, would they please fix the product for free, on the basis that, because of this fault, the product was not of satisfactory quality.

If necessary, I would explain that:

  • * the fault was latent, in that, without abuse, which would be obvious from the outside of the machine, the problem should not have happened, and thus must relate to a defect present at point of purchase;
  • * the fault is not something which could fall within reasonable wear and tear; and
  • * it is reasonable to expect the part in question would have an operational lifespan of longer than a year and a bit.

If pushed further, I would explain that:

  • * because it is a requirement that goods are of satisfactory quality, and that Apple supplied a product which was not of satisfactory quality, Apple is required to provide a remedy and that I was looking for a repair (although, if this would be uneconomical, I would accept a refund (long shot) or a replacement), to put me in the position which I would have been in if I had not been supplied with a faulty machine;
  • * whilst Apple may only reference a one year warranty, what this means is that Apple has offered additional support, over and above its legal requirements, for a period of a year, but that this does not mean that any right of remedy under the Sale of Goods Act ceases after a year; and
  • * in the case of a breach of contract, I have six years from the breach to bring a claim (s5, Limitation Act 1980 [legislation.gov.uk] ). Since I would be claiming that the contract was breached when the goods were supplied, because the goods which were supplied were not of satisfactory quality, this would give me six years from supply / purchase (if I took the goods away with me from the shop). (This does not mean that the product has to work for six years — it may be reasonable for a given product to only work for, say, a year, or two years, but that, if it should fail within the period of time in which it should reasonably be expected to work, I have six years from the point of supply to make the claim. As above, I would be stating that the nature of the product means that it would be reasonable to expect an operational lifespan beyond the year and a bit in question.)

If Apple were to state that the duty was on me to prove the fault, given that the product was supplied more than six months ago (s48A(3), Sale of Goods Act 1979), I would agree, and talk gently the point that, given the nature of the fault, the only likely explanation is that of a defective product because, if it were something I had done, such as dropping the machine, or damaging it whilst I was taking it apart, there would be signs of this — scratches around the screws, dents and so on. Without this, it is more likely than not that the machine was faulty from the beginning.

Of course, if the machine did have a few dings on it, or if there were scratches around the screws, I might run into problems. Because the obligation is on me to prove on the balance of probabilities that the machine was faulty, rather than on Apple to prove it was not, if there is a plausible explanation other than latent fault, I would be on weak ground — a potentially harsh reality.

If this did not get the fix, I would politely escalate, and exhaust my options in store. If there is no movement, I would ask for the cost of the repair and, if possible, get the quotation in writing.

I'd then file a money claim online for the full cost of the repair — this is a formal legal process, like the small claims court, for dealing with money claims. I am claiming that, by virtue of Apple's breach of contract, through supplying me with a product which was not of satisfactory quality, that I would need to incur a cost of £x to have it repaired through Apple, and that this is the most reasonable route for me to go. I would need to accept that, if contested, I would need to prove that the machine was faulty at the point of supply; as above, this may not be an easy task as, at most, I can really only adduce circumstantial evidence (unless I could point to a known defect in the particular component) that the damage in question could not have happened other than because of a latent fault without some obvious sign on the machine. I might lose, but it could well be worth a try; I'd have thought I'd have a good chance of it being settled.

As I say, this would be my gut reaction approach — it's not legal advice, and may well contain errors, or omit useful bits, or simply be misguided / not the best approach. YMMV.

Google translate fail? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41517939)

EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding wrote to the member countries which is 27

Seriously, did AC simply copy&paste the article without even reading it?

The Euro Zone continues its war again US companies (-1, Flamebait)

bdsesq (515351) | about 2 years ago | (#41518165)

Microsoft, Google, Apple -- what do they have in common?
All are based in the same country.
Anyone have a list of French or German companies fined?
Didn't think so......

Have to get the money to pay bailouts from somewhere.

Re:The Euro Zone continues its war again US compan (1)

SomeKDEUser (1243392) | about 2 years ago | (#41518327)

there [europa.eu] you idiot, the vast majority of cases is against companies in the EU. The Comission's role is the functionning of the internal market. If you want to see action against US companies for petty nationalistic reasons, look at the WTO cases.

Also, it is Apple's subsidiary in Europe which is being sued.

I understand that for a US citizen it is difficult to comprehend the concept of good market regulation and going after companies which try to fuck over the consumer, but this is the way it works in the EU. The Commission, for all its defects, does one thing well: market regulation in the domains where it is allowed to regulate the market.

USA continues war against rest of world (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41518383)

Canada: Softwood Lumber.
China: Wind Turbines
Cuba: Everything, in or out.
South Korea: Samsung vs Apple.
Germany: Motorola vs Microsoft

Just to start off with.

Re:The Euro Zone continues its war again US compan (2)

rbrausse (1319883) | about 2 years ago | (#41518475)

Microsoft, Google, Apple -- what do they have in common?
All are based in the same country.
Anyone have a list of French or German companies fined?

hu? are you crazy?

take a look at p. 3; "Ten highest cartel fines per undertaking" [europa.eu] - not a single US-based company.

The EU is strict about this. (5, Informative)

Animats (122034) | about 2 years ago | (#41518185)

The European Union is strict about consumer law [europa.eu] so that consumers will be comfortable buying across national boundaries within the Union. It's part of the "single market" concept which defines the EU.

"A practice is misleading if it contains false or untrue information or is likely to deceive the consumer, even though the information given may be correct. In particular, this information relates to: ... the consumersâ(TM) rights on aspects of the sale of consumer goods."

Here's how Apple misleads customers: Start at the Apple UK site. [apple.com] Try to find warranty information. The "support" page does not mention a warranty. There's "AppleCare Products - extend support coverage for your Apple products." Going to that page, we see "All Apple hardware comes with a one-year limited warranty (1) and up to 90 days of complimentary telephone technical support.". Down at note 1, in grey 77% white type, there's a link to "Apple Products and EU Statutory Warranty" [apple.com] Only there does Apple admit there's a 2-year warranty.

Much needed investigation (1)

ideaz (1981092) | about 2 years ago | (#41518645)

US should follow.

How desperate is the EU? (0)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | about 2 years ago | (#41518671)

They are suing all three major US tech companies. Google, Microsoft, and now Apple. They must really need money to bail out Greece.

I wish all three of them would refuse to release new products and take their existing services home until the EU gets some sense.

Re:How desperate is the EU? (2)

SomeKDEUser (1243392) | about 2 years ago | (#41518917)

So much is wrong in your comment. a) This is about consumer protection. You don't get to lie to customers in Europe, even if you are more akin to a cult. b) The bailout of Greece is not funded by the EU, but by state actors and the IMF. That means that you, even if you are American, are bailing out the Greeks. c) If Apple decided to not sell stuff in Europe, they would lose a lot of money, and their market share would collapse to the benefit of google. Which would be bad for them.

Also, you need to get off the libertarian crack: if all "job creators" all left at once, they would be replaced almost instantly...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...