Apple Won't Repair I-Mac Pro Reality

[Zera Recka]

Not sure if this will make it to Wan Show but here!

 

I found this information thanks to the Youtube Jason at "Painfully Honest Tech"

 

Link to apple repair terms and service: https://www.apple.com/legal/sales-support/terms/repair/generalservice/servicetermsen/ 

[Mooshi]

And none of that is relevant for PR. If you buy a product from a company and up front offer to pay for repair and get denied, you have a scumbag company policy that will get deserved backlash. Especially if you were told one thing and then didn't have the company deliver on their word.

[TetraSky]

5 hours ago, Zera Recka said:

Not sure if this will make it to Wan Show but here!

 

I found this information thanks to the Youtube Jason at "Painfully Honest Tech"

 

Link to apple repair terms and service: https://www.apple.com/legal/sales-support/terms/repair/generalservice/servicetermsen/ 

They say it's ineligible for Out of Warranty service if you broke it by doing "unauthorized modifications", but then it also says that "Apple will not be responsible for any damage to the product that occurs during repair process that is a result of any unauthorized modifications or repair or replacement not performed by Apple or an AASP. If damage results, Apple will seek your authorization for any additional costs for completing service..."

Which basically means the opposite of the first statement and that they will repair it while charging you for it if you accept. Sounds like a contradiction to me.

 

Any other companies will gladly take your money for out of warranty repairs, because that's better than the terrible PR they'd get by refusing and they aren't losing anything by accepting. If you don't have the parts, order them. It's not normal that some third party can order the parts but Apple themselves cannot.

[Razor Blade]

AFAIK The iMac pro was not modified though. I'm not sure why this is relevant?

[Arika]

so a clause that basically says "we can deny a repair for what ever reason we feel like, suck it up and buy an entire new $5k machine" this would not hold up in court. By the way, just because it's in their EULA doesn't make them any less of a scummy company. in fact i would say it makes them worse

[dizmo]

Still smells like a bullshit policy to me.

[3 Lions]

Again this isn't about warranty of a disassembled product. In this case the refusal is because Apple doesn't have a proper support program in place for this product.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gandek]

Linus strong bias against Apple really hurts.. Watched yesterday's podcast and him constantly not being able to understand why so many people like iMessage was really annoying to watch. Everybody knows Apple is really closed off and repairs for all products can get super pricey BUT Apple has the right to refuse repair if the user broke an agreement. I don't know why this has to be repeated by everyone constantly. Sure the price of the items is less than the total cost of the iMac+labor even if Apple claims its more BUT Apple aren't the only ones that would deem a product as loss even if it wasn't fully destroyed. He needs to just own up to it all and accept it. Also Apple has a generally strong record of customer service they aren't out to get you guys as much as you think they are just don't treat their products like your built PC period thaaats apple.

[Sauron]

The point isn't that they can't do this or that they didn't say they would, the point is that it's a scumbag thing to do for any company.

[Gandek]

3 minutes ago, Sauron said:

The point isn't that they can't do this or that they didn't say they would, the point is that it's a scumbag thing to do for any company.

Well yeah I'm totally with you on that.

[3 Lions]

15 minutes ago, Gandek said:

BUT Apple has the right to refuse repair if the user broke an agreement.

That wasn't the reason why they refused to repair it, they refused because they don't have a proper support program in place for this product. 

[Gandek]

8 minutes ago, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

That wasn't the reason why they refused to repair it, they refused because they don't have a proper support program in place for this product. 

The responses Linus got are a mess and they should have been better explained. There was definitely some confusion coming from HQ to below. 

[3 Lions]

21 minutes ago, Gandek said:

The responses Linus got are a mess and they should have been better explained.

If that's the case why weren't they turned away when they dropped the product off in the first place? 

 

They could not provide the service because there was no support structure in place for the product.

 

 

 

Edited April 21, 2018 by LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo

[potoooooooo]

It would literally be cheaper for everyone involved for linus to just buy a new iMac. He killed the PSU, the motherboard, and the screen at the very least. It would save apple in man hours and it would save linus money to just buy a new one, of course apple wasn't going to repair it.

 

When a car is totaled, it gets scrapped. Not repaired. What linus did was total a computer.

[Gandek]

2 minutes ago, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

If that's the case why weren't they turned away when the dropped the product off in the first place? 

 

They could not provide the service because there was no support structure in place for the product.

I want to see that cleared up from Apple's side say he brought it in not mentioning that he opened it up and just dropped it like you would an iPhone. Would HQ order the parts and have a team ready to repair it? 

[3 Lions]

2 minutes ago, potoooooooo said:

It would literally be cheaper for everyone involved for linus to just buy a new iMac. He killed the PSU, the motherboard, and the screen at the very least. It would save apple in man hours and it would save linus money to just buy a new one, of course apple wasn't going to repair it.

 

When a car is totaled, it gets scrapped. Not repaired. What linus did was total a computer.

 

[3 Lions]

5 minutes ago, Gandek said:

Would HQ order the parts and have a team ready to repair it? 

A product released at the back end of 2017 should have a proper support structure in place by now.

[potoooooooo]

2 minutes ago, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

 

The display is easily a thousand dollars, the motherboard is probably also that much. Vega 56 and all the supporting components aren't cheap. Plus, chances are if the power supply fried the motherboard, then there is a nonzero chance that the RAM and CPU (which are a bulk of the cost) are also fried. And even if they aren't, Apple will have to spend time testing them and making sure they're working before they're used today. Labor isn't cheap, at the very least the cost would be more than half of the sticker price of the machine.

[3 Lions]

3 minutes ago, potoooooooo said:

The display is easily a thousand dollars, the motherboard is probably also that much. Vega 56 and all the supporting components aren't cheap. Plus, chances are if the power supply fried the motherboard, then there is a nonzero chance that the RAM and CPU (which are a bulk of the cost) are also fried. And even if they aren't, Apple will have to spend time testing them and making sure they're working before they're used today. Labor isn't cheap, at the very least the cost would be more than half of the sticker price of the machine.

And somehow that costs more than a new one...

 

Have you heard of logic? 

[Gandek]

47 minutes ago, LinusTechTipsFanFromDarlo said:

And somehow that costs more than a new one...

 

Have you heard of logic? 

Well we don't know the exact cost+ man power that Apple would charge so it can go both ways. I'm on the side that the parts+labor would cost less. Many companies deem products as losses even if it would be cheaper for them to repair it they decide not to repair it for a multitude of reasons especially insurance companies. So people end up buying cars at salvage auctions and repair them themselves often times making good amount of profit but for a insurance company that is just too much work. Seriously go look at some of the examples and you might be shocked... (Samcrac on youtube) An insurance company deemed a Audi R8 V10 plus which only had vandalism damage like car key'd  etc as total loss.  Apple is one of the biggest companies and this a $10k overpriced desktop were talking about here not one of their MacBooks/Regular Mac which is a lot cheaper. Apple didn't even tell Linus this so we shouldn't even be arguing about this part. In typical Apple fashion we don't know what is behind the scenes in terms of the cost.  You shouldn't be like " Have you heard of logic ? " Because we're talking about Apple here and this has generally been a pretty civil discussion lets keep it that way. I'm trying to stay unbiased as possible here.. I own both Apple and Android devices. I tried using a mac once.. no thanks ;p.

[Mira Yurizaki]

2 hours ago, potoooooooo said:

When a car is totaled, it gets scrapped. Not repaired. What linus did was total a computer.

For the purposes of being pedantic, "totaled" means it costs more to repair the car than the insurance company will reimburse the insured for it. So if the car is old enough and has a low enough value, someone could say break a window or two and the cost to replace those windows would likely be more than what the insurance company will pay and so it's now "totaled," even though the car is perfectly driveable otherwise.

[Ertman]

9 hours ago, M.Yurizaki said:

For the purposes of being pedantic, "totaled" means it costs more to repair the car than the insurance company will reimburse the insured for it. So if the car is old enough and has a low enough value, someone could say break a window or two and the cost to replace those windows would likely be more than what the insurance company will pay and so it's now "totaled," even though the car is perfectly driveable otherwise.

So in the iMacs case  and being compared to a new car, would it be like breaking:

 

Transmission

Engine

Alternator and battery (and/or the fuel system)

 

And not knowing if the ignition system, onboard computer, and steering still work?

 

This kind of damage will still be pretty costly to repair.

 

[mr moose]

I don't know why people are getting hung up on this. Regardless of whether there is a law that allows them to refuse a service or not, they are still arseholes for refusing the service.   I find it highly unlikely that they can't fix it.  I don't know a single other PC manufacturer who doesn't have a repair centre for this exact thing. 

 

[Nicnac]

I actually just watched the Tailosive Tech Response and though I was on Linus' side at first I really agree with this dude. They definitely don't have to fix it, they played around with the screen to make a funny video and they blame apple for their own inabillity to tinker with the imac. kinda pissed now.

I mean nowhere in another business would you expect something like this from a company when you deliberately fuck up their product.

 

I also hate the sense of entitlement Linus displays the whole time while this story is unfolding. It's just not nice trait of his.

[Lurick]

1 minute ago, Nicnac said:

I actually just watched the Tailosive Tech Response and though I was on Linus' side at first I really agree with this dude. They definitely don't have to fix it, they played around with the screen to make a funny video and they blame apple for their own inabillity to tinker with the imac. kinda pissed now.

I mean nowhere in another business would you expect something like this from a company when you deliberately fuck up their product.

They are willing to pay out of pocket to get it fixed. Nobody is asking Apple to do this for free and no matter how much they might have messed up the screen or other parts they should have either been denied originally or charged more to the extra parts to fix it.