Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Iphone The Almighty Buck Apple Technology

The iPhone Is Guaranteed To Last Only One Year, Apple Argues In Court (vice.com) 435

Reader Jason Koebler writes: Last month, Greg Joswiak, Apple's VP of iOS, iPad, and iPhone Marketing, told Buzzfeed that iPhones are "the highest quality and most durable devices. We do this because it's better for the customer, for the iPhone, and for the planet."
But in a class-action court case over the widespread premature failure of tens of thousands of iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus devices, Apple argues that the company cannot guarantee any iPhone for more than a year. In a motion to dismiss, Apple argued that "to hold Apple's Limited Warranty substantively unconscionable simply because Plaintiffs expect their iPhones to last the length of their cellular service contracts 'would place a burden on [Apple] for which it did not contract.'"

The iPhone Is Guaranteed To Last Only One Year, Apple Argues In Court

Comments Filter:
  • by chispito ( 1870390 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:32AM (#55188051)
    "Guaranteed to last only" =/= "Only guaranteed to last"
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      +1 this. This headline is a lie. People will stop reading this website.
      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I stopped reading it years ago and never comment. They can't fool me with click bait like this.

    • by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:46AM (#55188149)

      "Guaranteed to last only" =/= "Only guaranteed to last"

      "the highest quality and most durable devices" =/= "Reality"

      Bullshit semantics are bullshit when their claims of durability cannot stand up to a longer warranty, which is more than justified when most people are forced into a 2-year cellular contract.

      And, no replacing a phone every year isn't the fucking answer either.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Here's a novel solution: Don't get an iPhone?

      • by UnknowingFool ( 672806 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:14PM (#55188377)
        Well if you read the article or the summary, Apple is not saying their devices only last 1 year. They are saying their warranties are 1 year which is standard for the US. But please show me the wide ranges of cell phones that has more than a 1 year warranty in the US. Also you realize that when you enter into a contract with a cellular carrier that is not Apple, that is the legal definition of 3rd party contract. What you are asking for is that your contract with Verizon, AT&T, etc whatever overwrites Apple's warranty to which Apple didn't agree. It's the same as saying when you get a 5 year auto loan for your new Honda (3 year limited, 5 year powertrain) from your bank, your 5 year bank loan should supersedes Honda's warranty and force Honda into a full 5 year warranty.
        • In the UK, the Consumer Rights Act (which largely just does what the EU requires) states that the device warranty is largely irrelevant and that the device must continue to work for the expected lifetime of such a device or it can be returned to the seller for a full refund. If Apple wants to argue that 1 year is the expected lifetime of an iPhone, then that's fine, but they'd better expect all of their competitors to put that in their adverts.
          • No Apple is arguing that their limited 1 year warranty is the standard in the US to which is expressly written. Defects that extend past warranty periods are dealt with other case law. For the most part, the plaintiffs have to prove a number of different things to overcome this.
      • by iCEBaLM ( 34905 )

        Bullshit semantics are bullshit when their claims of durability cannot stand up to a longer warranty, which is more than justified when most people are forced into a 2-year cellular contract.

        Nobody is forced in to any cellular contract.

      • by Raistlin77 ( 754120 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:28PM (#55188533)

        "the highest quality and most durable devices" =/= "Reality"

        Bullshit semantics are bullshit when their claims of durability cannot stand up to a longer warranty, which is more than justified when most people are forced into a 2-year cellular contract.

        But Apple didn't stuff you into that 2-year contract, your shitty wireless provider did, and you happily accepted it to get your grubby little paws on a shiny new iPhone. Why is your failure to make a good decision Apple's problem?

        This is no different then an auto warranty. Do you see any class action suits against automobile manufacturers for not repairing out-of-warranty vehicles that just happen to still be within their initial 4, 5, 6, and 7-year loans? Of course you don't. But by your logic, your vehicle should be guaranteed by the manufacturer to stand up to the length of the loan.

        There is no justification for this whatsoever - the life of the phone and its manufacturer's guarantee have absolutely nothing to do with the length of the contract or finance agreement that your dumb ass got yourself into. Perhaps you should make better decisions about managing your money, like not locking yourself into a bad contract or finance agreement for a phone that you can't afford in the first place.

        And, no replacing a phone every year isn't the fucking answer either.

        Then don't buy one every year. And if you don't like the 1-year warranty that Apple provides, maybe you should just not buy an iPhone. What was that? You say NO manufacturer offers a warranty longer than 1 year? Hmph, imagine that.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by war4peace ( 1628283 )

          What was that? You say NO manufacturer offers a warranty longer than 1 year in the USA? Hmph, imagine that.

          FTFY.

          The EU enforces a two year guarantee for sold consumer goods.
          http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal... [europa.eu]

          This is also called "conformity guarantee" and makes the seller legally bound, regardless of what the manufacturer states. the manufacturer could say "we offer one year guarantee" but the seller MUST offer a two year guarantee regardless.
          If the manufacturer is also the seller (e.g. sells the product directly to end-users through a webshop), then they need to offer a two year guarantee anyway.

        • No but they did make defective iPhone 6 and 6s models. That is what the class action lawsuit is about. I don't particularly care about the phone contract vs apple warranty argument -- though I do think it would be smart for apple and ATT/Sprint/et al to address that -- as much as I care about defective products. If the axle on an out-of-warranty car cracks during normal use because of a casting/fabrication error, the manufacturer better damn well replace it.

          We know this because Apple is currently fightin
      • which is more than justified when most people are forced into a 2-year cellular contract.

        And, no replacing a phone every year isn't the fucking answer either.

        Who forced you into a contract? Or do you mean you were forced into a contract as that was the only way to get a brand new, top of the line phone? Because for me, the answer is to buy a cheaper phone on Amazon or eBay, pay month to month, and if I drop the phone a few times and have to buy another, I come out way ahead.

      • "Guaranteed to last only" =/= "Only guaranteed to last"

        "the highest quality and most durable devices" =/= "Reality"

        Bullshit semantics are bullshit when their claims of durability cannot stand up to a longer warranty, which is more than justified when most people are forced into a 2-year cellular contract.

        And, no replacing a phone every year isn't the fucking answer either.

        Since a "warranty" is essentially another BOM component with an associated "cost", do you really think that Apple should withstand the burden of DOUBLE the potential cost of warranty work for no additional increase in the product's MSRP?

        Thankfully, there is already a solution: AppleCare+. It provides a relatively low-cost solution to doubling the warranty period, and even provides reduced/flat-fee coverage for CUSTOMER-INDUCED damage, such as $29 for screen repair, or $99 for ANYTHING else. Run over your iP

        • by sjames ( 1099 )

          So DOUBLING the warranty is a huge burden, but AppleCare+ is low cost and an incredible value? Which of those is true?

    • by UnknowingFool ( 672806 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:58AM (#55188243)
      Also missing from the context: "for warranty purposes". Essentially what Apple is arguing in court is that they are not under obligation to repair or replace a device under warranty after a year. That seems rather standard.
      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) <mojo@NOSPAM.world3.net> on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @01:04PM (#55188893) Homepage Journal

        Isn't there any provision in law for design flaws? In most European countries if there are design flaws the liability extends well beyond the warranty period, because the warranty is only for manufacturing defects that result in premature failure. Design flaws are considered a failure to disclose the true MTBF.

        • Isn't there any provision in law for design flaws?

          Yes. If you are sold a device that is not "fit for purpose", then the law allows for you to get reimbursed. This is separate from warranty considerations.

          The court case, however, is about the warranty.

    • by jandrese ( 485 )
      This damn article has been making the rounds all over the internet and every single time people immediately point out that the headline is garbage yet no "editor" ever has the balls to fix it. This is what is wrong with modern journalism.
  • I don't see it (Score:4, Insightful)

    by makerfixer ( 5082071 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:37AM (#55188069)
    The summary makes a bold claim and then gives the legal nuance which was "just because someone sold you our phone with an X year contract doesn't mean we give you an automatic X year warranty." Suddenly most people look at the actual statement and say "well, yeah, of course they're right about that" and move on.
    • Re:I don't see it (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) <mojo@NOSPAM.world3.net> on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:43AM (#55188121) Homepage Journal

      Why accept such shitty consumer protection? You should demand European style protections - minimum 2 year warranty and where a device is tied to a contract it must last at least as long as the contract or the contract ends.

      Why do you put up with this crap? Do you think it saves you money?

      • Re:I don't see it (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Daemonik ( 171801 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:02PM (#55188281) Homepage
        Because a lot of Americans fall into the Libertarian "business transactions are between you and the business, not the government" trap, even when it severely disadvantages them.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by sabri ( 584428 )

          Because a lot of Americans fall into the Libertarian "business transactions are between you and the business, not the government" trap

          Because in general it is not the government's business to interfere with private agreements. If you and I agree to something, we should not need the government's permission.

          , even when it severely disadvantages them.

          In this case, it does not. The system works as designed and the courts are now going to determine whether or not Apple's point of view (that an iPhone cannot be guaranteed to work after 1 year) is reasonable or not. This is based on general principles of reasonableness, not on a codified mandate for consumer warranties.

          We don't need th

          • by mx+b ( 2078162 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @01:24PM (#55189075)

            Because in general it is not the government's business to interfere with private agreements. If you and I agree to something, we should not need the government's permission.

            Sir, you have this backwards. Government regulations are not granting permission, they are there to set a process that ensures everyone's rights are protected during the negotiation process, and to enforce penalties on those that break their contracts.

            Without regulations, why should a billionaire CEO of a multi-national company give a shit what *you*, sabri, think about their policies and contracts? They can tell you anything you want to hear and then say "nevermind" after they've gotten your money. And what are you going to do as an individual?

            Our government is of the people, for the people, by the people, because together we are strong and can protect ourselves and our rights. Individually we are weak, particularly in the face of a strong business adversary.

            In this case, it does not [severely disadvantages them]. The system works as designed and the courts are now going to determine whether or not Apple's point of view (that an iPhone cannot be guaranteed to work after 1 year) is reasonable or not. This is based on general principles of reasonableness, not on a codified mandate for consumer warranties.

            Our court system is effectively broken for most Americans. Have you been to court? I have. It's a lot of legal fees, meeting with lawyers, filing paperwork, waiting months for a court case, only to have the decision appealed by a defendant with way more money and time than you. It is extremely delayed justice, if you get it at all. The working and middle classes are typically hugely disadvantaged in court. We could fix it by requiring speedy trials, hiring more judges and public defenders, and other tweaks, but that would require a more expensive court system and likely higher taxes, which many completely flip their shit when they hear the word "taxes" so we've not been able to have constructive discussion on the topic.

            We don't need the government to create laws that "protect" us, because those laws will have side effects. Don't believe me? Let me give you one example. It's somewhat off topic and may start a flame war, but that is not my intention. In my home country, the unions have been successful in creating very strong labor protection laws. In short, once you hire someone on a permanent contract, it becomes very difficult to fire them. That resulted in employers being careful in giving permanent contracts, and opting for temporary contracts which kept getting extended. Then the government created new laws to prevent that from happening, by mandating a permanent contract after three extensions. And guess what? Do you think more people got permanent contracts? No. "Disposable" workers that are easily replaced where replaced after three contracts. In California, where I live, there is the principle of at-will employment. This means (explaining for non-US person), that I can get hired and fired at any time. And you know what: that flexibility causes businesses to hire without giving it a second thought. No bullshit with temporary contracts needed, because everything is flexible. That is the net result of government interference, no matter how well these laws are meant.

            It would be nice if we directed our ire at sociopathic executives of multi-national corporations that have no allegience to country or the people, rather than indirectly defending them when we attack government regulations and actions. No level of government did any of this to you; there is no law that says "no one should ever hire sabri for a permanent position". Corporations decided to do this because they are sociopaths, obsessed with forever increasing their profits regardless the consequences to people, the country, the economy, or the planet. Please note, I am in no way saying they shouldn't be profitable or well compensated for their work. Bei

      • In the context of the lawsuit, this is in the US for which the standard is 1 year. If this was in Europe, I believe Apple has to honor a 2 year warranty. Also in terms of legal standards, the length of a 3rd party contract for a product is not tied to the warranty on that product from the manufacturer. For example, most automobiles have different limits on their warranties however that warranty limit is not the same as the term of the auto loan you have with a financial institution that may not be your aut

      • Why accept such shitty consumer protection? You should demand European style protections - minimum 2 year warranty and where a device is tied to a contract it must last at least as long as the contract or the contract ends.

        Why do you put up with this crap? Do you think it saves you money?

        Marked as a troll? Really?

        My opinion is the phone should indeed last as long as the contract. The phone is part of the contract, and once the phone breaks, the provider is no longer holding up their end of the contract, so should either replace the phone or release the contract.

        But, and I'm not defending Apple here, the customer beef should be with the contract provider in that case(as it would be under European consumer laws), not Apple.

        Of course, if the phone is bought out of contact, and is warranted for

    • Re:I don't see it (Score:5, Interesting)

      by networkBoy ( 774728 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:47AM (#55188155) Journal

      Look at the flip side of that:
      Joe Sixpack buys an iPhone from ATT and it comes locked into a 2 year contract (because it's subsidized). Joe didn't buy the phone from Apple, and true to some people who call the Internet "the google" and similar things, thinks of his phone as his "ATT iPhone" not "Apple iPhone".

      Now the phone takes a shit at day 366, there are still 364 days remaining in his contract, but the phone is out of warranty. Joe is now officially screwed and either must:
      A) buy a retail phone
      B) break his contract and start a new one with a subsidised phone
      C) get a replacement phone, but tack on an additional 2 years on his existing contract (not sure if ATT offers this, but they used to)

      It is not unreasonable for Joe to expect the warranty of the phone to equal the duration of the service contract. Whether or not that's Apple's issue is between Apple and ATT. I would be inclined to require the contract provider to be the one required to warranty the devices under the contract and to deal with the OEM/ODM on the customers behalf if the device was still within manufacturer warranty.

      • AT&T doesn't subsidize anymore. They finance the hardware.
        • Okay, same deal then. It's still AT&T's phone until it's paid for. Customer should be able to take the phone back to AT&T and AT&T should deal with Apple.
      • Joe can also buy a used replacement (he is replacing a used phone with a used phone);

        Price of the used phone will only be slightly more the the "insurance" would have been with the original phone. After a couple of phones (or other electronics, Joe will come out ahead by not purchasing the insurance).

        As much as I'm not a fan of the carriers or manufacturers, I don't see the issue here. All the carriers and most manufacturers offer extended warranties (not a good deal, but protect you against surprise expens

        • I get that this is a non-issue to many, and I actually agree with Apple insofar as they sold the device to the carrier etc. with an explicit one year warranty.I just also see how people feel there is a jarring disconnect between contract time and warranty time, and wanted to feed some thoughts to that end.

          I like the idea of vendors competing based on warranty (and yes you'd start seeing the same item at different price points based on the warranty).

      • In my other post, I generally agreed with you. Remember, though, that Apple makes a *special* ATT version for these contracts. If this was a standard unlocked iPhone, I think you would be spot on. But if you are going to make a version designed for two-year financing, then it seems reasonable to warrant it for two years!
      • (because it's subsidized)

        It's not subsidized. They've given you a loan.

    • And if Apple didn't have direct relationships with the carriers, I would tend to agree with you. Those who seem to have a different opinion are getting modded down. And the summary was flamebait (too bad we can't moderate articles or editors). It doesn't make sense to have a finance contract longer than the expected life of an item. You would laugh at the idea of a 30 year fixed *auto loan* We are, however, seeing similarly ridiculous things in automobiles. 60 month loan with a 36 month warranty? Th
    • by MeNeXT ( 200840 )

      No.

      The summary quotes marketing hype, "the highest quality and most durable devices. We do this because it's better for the customer, for the iPhone, and for the planet." and then quotes Apple's defense when the phone doesn't meet marketing hype. "the highest quality and most durable devices" tells me that the phone should last between 5 years and 20 years. That's how long "most" of my devices last. Most of the devices that I purchase get replaced by newer, better, more efficient products and not because t

  • Author not Reader (Score:5, Informative)

    by Luthair ( 847766 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:37AM (#55188071)
    Jason Koebler is the author of the article, which is true for all his submissions..... which makes him a spammer.
  • by QuietLagoon ( 813062 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:39AM (#55188083)
    When you buy an iPhone, as I understand it, the warranty is for one year, unless you buy extensions. So why would anyone expect the warranty to be longer than one year (assuming one did not buy any warranty extensions)? To me it looks more like the problem of Apple corporation has a lot of money, so let's try this approach to a lawsuit and see how much money we can get out of Apple.
    • by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:52AM (#55188195)

      When you buy an iPhone, as I understand it, the warranty is for one year, unless you buy extensions. So why would anyone expect the warranty to be longer than one year (assuming one did not buy any warranty extensions)? To me it looks more like the problem of Apple corporation has a lot of money, so let's try this approach to a lawsuit and see how much money we can get out of Apple.

      Semantics aside, the bottom line is if Apple is going to boldly claim that they make "the highest quality and most durable devices", then they should be able to offer a factory warranty longer than a year. Offer a warranty to match your claims of durability, or stop with the bullshit marketing.

      I have other electronic products that are factory warrantied up to a decade, and was included in the base price. It can be done.

      • ... Semantics aside, the bottom line is if Apple is going to boldly claim that they make "the highest quality and most durable devices", then they should be able to offer a factory warranty longer than a year. ...

        I agree that in an ideal world the warranty should match (or come close to matching) the marketing-speak. But it doesn't. Apple sells their devices more as fashion than technology, Being fashionable is one of the ways to justify paying the high prices of Apple devices. . That aside, the one-year warranty is the one currently in effect. So I continue to look at this lawsuit as a money grab.

        • Had a funny exchange in college about marketing slogans. I spilled some hydrochloric acid on my Dungarees and when they dissolved upon being laundered I emailed Lee to ask about the "Can't Bust 'Em" slogan they were using at the time. They wrote a surprisingly length and polite response explaining that their slogan was not an implied warranty but instead represented the "indomitable spirit of Buddy Lee" and that my only recourse would be to try to return them to the point of sale.
  • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:39AM (#55188085)

    Apple argues that the company cannot guarantee any iPhone for more than a year.

    I guess they should pull out of the EU then seeing how they are unable to meet the minimum legal required guarantee. Or does the QC department bin the devices and send the good ones to the EU and the crappy ones to the USA where consumers are used to being screwed over and not have any recourse other than costly legal battles or lawyer enriching class actions which may net them a $15 discount coupon?

    • The part you missed is that this is a lawsuit in the US. The standard in the US is 1 year. So EU standards don't apply to this lawsuit.
    • They bake it into the price of the unit. In the UK, te new iPhone X is going to cost 999 GBP, which is equivalent to 1,320 USD. The price in France will be 1159 Euros, which is equivalent to 1379 USD. The price in Germany will be 1149 Euros, or 1367 USD. Sure some of that is accounted for by the VAT, but the VAT in Germany is 19%, which doesn't completely account for the entire price difference. The price in Germanyu based on the US price of 999 USD should be 839.71 Euros + 19% VAT = 999 Euros.

      They are b

      • They bake it into the price of the unit. In the UK, te new iPhone X is going to cost 999 GBP, which is equivalent to 1,320 USD.

        Sure if you ignore taxes, regulation and differences in generalised cost of living then yes we'll go with "baked in the price of the unit".

        Did you see further down on the Slashdot front page, there is a new freely available online course in Economics. You should take it.

  • This is certainly a fight that Apple and others would love to win. To now say their devices are only good for one year due to "issue X", creates a steep curve into devices that always shut down just after 1 year. If in fact this were to go through, it wouldn't be far fetched to see companies specifically put in a 1 year "kill switch" so that there was no chance that anyone didn't "upgrade" and pay the fee. At a minimum, that could open up companies from having to deal with patching anything older than a

    • l At a minimum, that could open up companies from having to deal with patching anything older than a year.

      By "could" you mean that's the standard now for most cell phones. A 1 year warranty been the standard in the US for a long time.

  • by phalse phace ( 454635 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:44AM (#55188129)

    and it's guaranteed to last 2 years (because that's how long it will be warrantied for).

  • Curious (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Artem Tashkinov ( 764309 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:00PM (#55188261)
    My only question is, does Apple sell different devices in the US and Europe? Strangely, Apple customers in the EU enjoy a 2 years warranty.
    • by xlsior ( 524145 )
      That's because the EU requires a 2 year warranty on all electronics. On the flip side, you may have noticed that the retail price of an iPhone is higher in the EU than it is in the US as well.
    • Six years, thanks to European Consumer Law:

      https://www.apple.com/uk/legal... [apple.com]

      (Link is to the UK, but it's the same for all EU countries)

      Apple don't seem to put up much of a fight when making a claim either.

    • by Misagon ( 1135 )

      The mandatory legal warranty in the EU covers only "pre-existing defects".
      If a component is rated from the beginning to expire less than then the full warranty period does not cover that component.

      So it may be possible for Apple to legal-wrangle themselves out of the full two-year period, but I think that reasonably, the only thing they could do it for would be battery life ... or the OLED screen of the iPhone X.

    • Yes and no. Apple might sell a different device based on the carrier but not necessarily a different device for a region. For example there is specific model for Japan as it uses certain FDD-LTE bands otherwise it's a difference between CMDA carriers (Verizon and Sprint in the US) and GSM (AT&T and T-Mobile in the US). In terms of warranties though, Apple has to maintain longer warranties in Europe. So a GSM iPhone under a 1 year warranty in the US is exactly the same GSM iPhone in Europe under a 2 yea
  • by sarbonn ( 1796548 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:00PM (#55188263) Homepage Journal
    I've bought practically every version of the Iphone that has been released, so I'm obviously an Iphone fan, but I can see how people might get a bit upset over this. The part I believe Apple failed is in its agreement with cellular phone companies, in which it plays the "well, we didn't say it, so you have to blame them" game. Apple should have made it a part of their contract with cellular phone companies that they reveal IN THEIR contracts with customers that the Iphone is only guaranteed to work for a year, especially when these companies contract payment plans that last over a year.
    • Apple should have made it a part of their contract with cellular phone companies that they reveal IN THEIR contracts with customers that the Iphone is only guaranteed to work for a year, especially when these companies contract payment plans that last over a year.

      First of all it's standard in the US that cell phones have a 1 year warranty. It is in their warranty and contracts with Apple. Second, when Apple sells their product to another company, why should they have to agree to terms between the customer and the cell company that they didn't make? By definition the cell service contract is a 3rd party contract. Cell companies can make warranties on top and extend Apple's warranties but not for Apple. Some business cell phone contracts do that.

  • Lazy journalism, lazy putting it up onto Slashdot's news of the day...
  • by Jfetjunky ( 4359471 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:03PM (#55188291)
    As someone who designs electronics, if you had to design it so it couldn't possibly fail in 2 years it would be so prohibitively expensive no one would buy it.

    Warranties are meant to catch the outliers, and they are a liability. Of course they are going to limit it. Yeah it sucks if it dies at one year and one day, but there a lot of other conditions that Apple did not force that make that suck more. Sincerely, an android user.
    • You don't design it not to fail in two years. When you make a special version designed for two-year finance contracts, you design in a way that maximizes your profit while providing a two year warranty.
      • Re:Black and white (Score:4, Interesting)

        by that this is not und ( 1026860 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @01:04PM (#55188891)

        Companies employ what are called 'continuation engineers' or 'cost reduction engineers.' Sometimes these engineers don't even work for the product development department, they answer more to the purchasing and finance management.

        Their job is to reduce the cost of materials so as to increase the profit for selling the company's products. This often involves using the lowest possible quality of components and material that will last the company's product through the warranty period.

        These critters have to maintain a balance, of course, because there is also the marketing department involved, who want to maintain the good name of the company's brand.

        The bottom line is that the Maytag Repairman was a good marketing stunt, but a total disaster to the Maytag company, who wanted to sell a higher volume of white goods. So they (as Whirlpool now) employ big teams of 'continuation engineers.'

  • by Oswald McWeany ( 2428506 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:25PM (#55188491)

    Just heard a joke recently:

    Q: How do you milk sheep?

    A: Release a new iPhone and charge £1000 for it.

    * - My apology to apple fans

  • Warranties are pretty pointless, in my opinion, because the terms are so short. If a device only lasts the term of the warranty, then it's disposable and not worth hundreds of dollars -- but almost all devices aren't as terrible as that. So I ignore warranties.

  • good thing the EU has 2 year warranty by law in usa you need to buy applecare

  • by Tom ( 822 ) on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @05:12PM (#55191221) Homepage Journal

    Come to socialist Europe, here the minimum warrenty is 2 years. I actually got a brand new iPhone SE recently, two months short of the 2 year period, when my old one failed.

    But hey, we're just communists over here, with healthcare and proper laws. Don't get any ideas. ;-)

Lo! Men have become the tool of their tools. -- Henry David Thoreau

Working...