Hacker News Reader

Comment by donatj | Hacker News Reader

Wait wait wait, they advertise the iPhone as waterproof but still void the warranty and won’t fix it if their waterproofing fails? We lost the headphone jack for this?

View on HN

Nothing in the article says Apple will void warranty on an iPhone if water has been detected in the charging port (water damage is a different thing entirely). This concerns Mac computers, which are not sold as waterproof.

I don't know, the first sentence says:

> Apple’s limited warranty doesn’t cover damage caused by liquids, even for water-resistant products like the iPhone, Apple Watch, and some AirPods models.

But the article is kind of all over the place. It then says Macs can now detect water in USB-C ports while having pictures in the article of iPhones showing messages that they detected liquids. They like to make the point that Macs will report this back home to the mothershop while iPhones do not? idk

Let's assume on Macs this is used to void warranty because like you said, they are not sold as waterproof. On iPhones it's to alert the user, so he can remove the water from the port - not concerning warranty?

(7) at the bottom of https://www.apple.com/uk/iphone/compare/

""" iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus, iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, iPhone X, iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max, iPhone XR, iPhone SE (2nd generation), iPhone SE (3rd generation), iPhone 11 Pro, iPhone 11 Pro Max, iPhone 11, iPhone 12 Pro, iPhone 12 Pro Max, iPhone 12, iPhone 12 mini, iPhone 13 Pro, iPhone 13 Pro Max, iPhone 13, iPhone 13 mini, iPhone 14 Pro, iPhone 14 Pro Max, iPhone 14, iPhone 14 Plus, iPhone 15 Pro, iPhone 15 Pro Max, iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Plus are splash, water and dust resistant and were tested under controlled laboratory conditions; iPhone 12 Pro, iPhone 12 Pro Max, iPhone 12, iPhone 12 mini, iPhone 13 Pro, iPhone 13 Pro Max, iPhone 13, iPhone 13 mini, iPhone 14 Pro, iPhone 14 Pro Max, iPhone 14, iPhone 14 Plus, iPhone 15 Pro, iPhone 15 Pro Max, iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Plus have a rating of IP68 under IEC standard 60529 (maximum depth of 6 metres up to 30 minutes); iPhone 11 Pro and iPhone 11 Pro Max have a rating of IP68 under IEC standard 60529 (maximum depth of 4 metres up to 30 minutes); iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max and iPhone 11 have a rating of IP68 under IEC standard 60529 (maximum depth of 2 metres up to 30 minutes); and iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus, iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, iPhone X, iPhone XR, iPhone SE (2nd generation) and iPhone SE (3rd generation) have a rating of IP67 under IEC standard 60529 (maximum depth of 1 metre up to 30 minutes). Splash, water and dust resistance are not permanent conditions. Resistance might decrease as a result of normal wear. Do not attempt to charge a wet iPhone; refer to the user guide for cleaning and drying instructions.

Liquid damage not covered under warranty. """

The iPhone is full of water detector stickers inside and they do reject warranty claims if water got in. They say you must have done something you shouldn't have if that happens, like diving deep or something.

They will even refuse to install a new battery if you pay them.

Apple recently quoted me 2,300$ to fix just one broken keyboard key (it was M, if you were wondering), because according to them the water sensors were tripped and it's policy to replace the mtherboard if that happens. Which apparently costs more than buying another two working identical MacBook Pros.

The laptop has never gotten wet, and everything apart from the M key was working perfectly.

Do you live in a hot, humid climate? I think a lot of those water alarm stickers show false positives if people move from a cold, air conditioned place to the humid outdoors. Condensation is unavoidable unless you wrap the laptop in fairly airtight bag every time you go out.

I am certain that many people have been denied warranty claims because they live in cold climates and visit indoor swimming pools regularly (coaches/lifeguards/spectators etc). The condensation in that situation is impressive.

I came here to point this out - sounds like a class action lawsuit waiting to happen.

Whenever there is a 'detection' method it's almost never foolproof and usually pretty junk.

For me at least, add it to the list of reasons why "never Apple", dirty broken process by another corrupt tech company.

It's okay, we did the same thing for warranty claims when I worked CS and Tech Support for one of the major phone carriers a decade ago. If the LDI was tripped we wouldn't replace it under warranty, and I'm sure there was more than one warranty replacement I rejected that was a false trip instead of actual liquid damage (a better indicator for this is corrosion on solder joints than those stupid stickers).

Your O key might be broken as well

My fiance had a similar experience with actual liquid damage. I've forgotten the details, but she spilled a tiny bit of a drink into her M1 MBP keyboard, taking out most of the lower half of the keyboard. Apple wanted roughly the cost of a new M1 MBP to fix it. She ended up just getting a BT keyboard..

To fix this problem never buy a Mac again.

What did you do in the end? Take it to a 3rd party repair shop?

I don't understand why people let them get away with this inductive logic.

While it COULD mean you used the device out of spec, it could just as easily mean THEY MESSED UP when manufacturing your device.

On the whole, its more likely that your phone had a pinhole defect from the factory than you ran into 3+ feet of water and threw your phone in.

If they can't prove they did waterproof compliance testing my specific device before they shipped it, then they should be assumed to be responsible.

There at least used to be (years ago) many complaints of the sensors being inaccurately tripped in areas with high humidity, that never actually got liquid spilled on them. :(

>They will even refuse to install a new battery if you pay them.

On a phone with triggered water detector stickers? Yeah. Common sense. Why the hell would I work a device that might be damaged already? If something goes wrong after the repair due to the pre-existing damage it becomes a finger pointing game. Fuck that

It’s far more likely your repair damaged it in this situation than any pre-existing water “damage”.

They check the stickers before starting any work. Unless you think they’re opening it under a water mister, those are accurate indicators of past damage.

I know this because I had an iPhone display start acting odd shortly after a battery replacement. They opened it up and reported water damage, but the pictures they take before every repair showed that the same indicators were not triggered two days before, and I ended up getting a replacement phone because the water seal was probably effective for 5 years prior to the battery replacement.

> The iPhone is full of water detector stickers inside and they do reject warranty claims if water got in.

I once went in for an out of warranty replacement where I said it was water damage and my phone was in the washing machine. The guy still went back to check the stickers and said "It must really been wet because it triggered all of the stickers" I pointed out it literally had water pouring out of it when I got it out of the washing machine. Fun fact, it was still powered on and operating when it came out of the washing machine for a few minutes then it went dead.

> Apple’s limited warranty doesn’t cover damage caused by liquids, even for water-resistant products

If the product meets the advertised water resistance, damage caused by liquids must be caused by usage outside of that.

So, _if_ they can prove their product meets or exceeds those specs, I think it’s fine they won’t cover that under warranty, as long as local laws don’t force them to do more (in the EU, for newish devices, they’d have to proof that the device wasn’t already broken when sold, for example)

My android pixel 7 reported water ingress in the usb port during a hike to kinder scout in the peak district (UK). It was raining lightly, but mostly there was a very thick fog / mist / drizzle that didn't really fall from the sky or land on you, rather it enveloped and coated you such that you were soaked.

I'd only removed my phone from my waterproof jacket pocket on two occasions to verify GPS location as I was still using a laminated map and compass.

This weather descended on me in about 10 minutes, I did not choose to be soaked.

Sounds like taking an iPhone camping in parts of the UK where the weather can do this is now an absolute no.

The pixel was fine btw, didn't stop working, and as soon as the air was less like soup it told me the water had cleared. Wouldn't want that to have been a warranty voiding event on a newer device though (I'm probably already out of warranty).

I don't think it's to void the warranty, it's just that the phone will refuse to charge (and blare an alarm if you try) in order to prevent corrosion when using the USB-C port wet.

Conversely my iPhone 13 Pro was taken all round the world and been soaked through, frozen and dropped tens of times in snow and a river. The clear TPU case looked like a water puzzle on a regular basis.

Apple replaced the battery in it last week without a whimper and I expect they would do the same in the future.

If I did this to my MacBook they probably would not. Which is the point.

You don't necessarily need rain exposure. When I'm actively hiking, and especially during colder conditions, heavy condensation forms on the surface of the phone directly in the pocket. This is more frequent on sport jackets, which are designed to release internal humidity/sweat faster.

My Iphone 12 recently spent a full night in a gutter during a rainstorm, water rushing over it. It was completely fine, didn't even seem to bother the hotspot.

Wonder how my warranty's doing.

I keep trying to conjure stories for how this happened.

My favorite is that you were lying passed out in a gutter all night with water rushing over you. And the phone. But you only mentioned the phone. lol.

How is your warranty doing? ;-)

Ha. Not the parent but most likely it fell out of their pocket while on the roof - perhaps cleaning said gutters - and wasn’t noticed until later.

I did something similar many years ago with a Motorola razr phone. I was digging trenches for an irrigation system. I checked for my phone a day later and had no idea where it went. My best guess is that it fell out of my pocket and into the trench, which was subsequently covered up.

I joke that one day a more advanced civilization will dig up this ancient artifact, wonder what its purpose could have been, and make up some fantastical story after the fact as to why it ended up in that shallow trench.

In some places they call the the concrete curb that water flows down to a river or a stream a gutter, that sounds more like the usage in this case.

I've used various generations of iPhones over the years for many long damp days in the Scottish hills and I've never had any problems - mind you I do use cases and carry a small plastic bag to put my phone in when it gets really wet - which does occasionally happen in Scotland...

How could you possibly conclude that taking an iPhone camping is an "absolute no" from article that's just about how they have a safety feature to prevent you from charging in situations where charging might cause corrosion

A sibling comment mentioned that the wording covers iPhone, and that usb port water ingress is warranty voiding... This is how I possibly conclude that taking the phone to an environment like that would be a no, if one cared about the warranty and cover from Apple (pay of the advantage of purchasing from Apple)

Where does Apple say that USB port water ingress is warranty voiding? The only thing the article says is that the warranty doesn't cover water damage... there's nothing to suggest that water in the USB port means an automatically void warranty from what I can see?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38923190

That doesn't say "Apple considers the warranty void if water ends up in the USB port", that says "Apple's warranty doesn't cover water damage".

EDIT: to be clear, the warranty can absolutely be a factor! Depending on your situation, having a phone with a warranty (or maybe insurance) which covers water damage could be a good idea! It's just not as simple "water detected in USB port -> warranty void", and this "prevent charging when there's water in the port" thing seems to be there not to insta-void your warranty but to prevent water damage

They claim it's water damage no matter the issue as soon as the indicators are triggered, though.

Yes but the triggers are inside the phone, not inside the port. This detection is only for liquid in the port so as to prevent corrosion and damage to the port itself.

Source?

No you lost the headphone jack to sell more AirPods.

My Samsung S8 was waterproof and had the jack. And it was just as thin as an iPhone.

Even Apple could do it. The iPhone 6S had both, tho Apple never advertised the waterproofing.

I have a 300€ 2021 Motorola Defy. I wash it often under running water, took baths with it, no issues with the headphone jack, neither with the usb c port.

“As a user, I want to be able to take baths with my phone.”?

Sony phones with headphone jacks, ten years ago were capable of all waterproof things you wanted to do.

It's been a massive gaslighting campaign.

Same thing with the Samsung S5 from 2014. IP67 waterproof with headphone jack and removable battery.

I really am super pissed that we let go of removable batteries

We didn't let them go, they were taken from us by force

Same for sanely-sized screens. It really sucks for someone who doesn't watch any videos on their phone and still treats it mostly as a limited communication device rather than their primary gateway to the internet. The fact that I'm a relatively compact person doesn't help either.

The iPhone 12/13 Mini was substantially smaller, but few people bought it, so they cancelled it.

The vast majority seem to want large screens. Currently the only compromise are flip phones. I considered buying the Z Flip 5, but the screen protector needs to be replaced by Samsung to maintain warranty and there is no Samsung Store nearby. I asked and Samsung said I'd have to send it to them, losing my phone for a couple of days. No thanks.

iPhones run iOS and, honestly, I can't stand it for a variety of reasons regardless of how nice the hardware is. Main one being that apps can only be installed from the app store. I can see myself using a jailbroken iPhone, but jailbreaks are hard to come by these days.

Vast majority doesn't know what they want. They would convince themselves that whatever is currently sold must be good. But then I know at least 10 people who truly want a small phone. I'm not the only one. There's clearly a demand for phones for people for whom their computer is still their primary device.

The world would've been a better place if every single phone manufacturer didn't copy the others. It's a vicious circle.

Yeah same here, having Tim Cook decide what I'm allowed to use my phone for is not my piece of cake.

Also I just love some features of the Android ecosystem like the desktop mode (Samsung DeX and alternatives)

Unfortunately bigger phone means more space for the battery and rest of the hardware, so companies will keep making their Pro Ultra models larger and so of course the larger ones are more of a status symbol.

But the screen consumes most of the charge in a modern phone anyway. The smaller the screen, the less battery capacity you need to get a sensible battery life. The CPU also matters, of course — that's one thing I like about my Pixel 4a, it lasts long even after 3 years because it uses a weak-ass SoC that nonetheless is perfectly capable for messaging and web browsing.

The screen is off most of the time. The iPhone 13 Mini has the same CPU as the larger models and there is a significant difference in battery life, you likely won't find a review for this device which doesn't mention how fast the battery drains.

From my own experience, iPhones are really bad with idle battery life. The iPhone 11 Pro I have for occasionally testing iOS apps would drain the battery in ~3 days just laying on my desk doing nothing. Android phones, on the other hand, last more than a week when not used thanks to "doze mode" and other optimizations in recent versions. But I suppose that difference isn't as noticeable when you actually use an iPhone as your real phone and charge it daily at night.

> The iPhone 12/13 Mini was substantially smaller, but few people bought it

I knew before scrolling down that such a comment would be there.

an iphone costs easily 5x-7x more than an android phone. Most people just want a phone that can do messages, calls, and has a gps. There haven't been any non-overpriced smaller smartphones lately.

For me personally, the cost isn't a factor. I'd gladly buy a small Android phone for up to $2000 if it would satisfy all my needs. Yes, I'm this desperate.

And by the way, high-quality Android phones cost comparable to iPhones. Keep in mind that Apple is simply not interested in the budget segment.

Take a look at the current gen flippy phones (Galaxy Flip 5, Moto Razr+). I've had the latter for a few months, purchased basically because the outer screen is actually usable. With the phone folded shut, it's pretty much a small phone. I can easily reach every corner of that outer screen with my thumb.

A Galaxy S23 can be had currently for just over 600 Euro, which is substantially less than an iPhone Pro (almost half), despite also sporting a 120Hz OLED display, tele lens, etc.

You can get a lot of great/premium Android phones in the 500-800 bracket (Nothing Phone 2, S23, Pixel 8).

Anything over 200€ is expensive.

Could I pay 1000€ for a phone? Yes. But I don't want to deal with the feeling of dread every time it slips out of my pocket.

Most people won't buy expensive stuff that is also very fragile.

As someone who uses an iPhone SE, I have to disagree. I have a small phone with incredible internals at a price that can’t be be beat. You can go cheap as you want to on android for sure but you’re going to pay the price one way or the other. Having helped support people works budget android phones, it’s painful. I don’t use my phone like most people, I would never watch a video on my phone or use it extensively for general purpose computing by choice, but those budget android phones are disgustingly slow and stuffed to the gills with bloat.

The only pain point with my current phone is the camera is still effectively 10 year old hardware. I would like a nicer camera and I could probably find that on a similarly priced and sized android phone if I really wanted to I’ll admit. That said, I’m worried what the next generation of SE will end up being. I’m going to guess it’ll be physically bigger and I’ll have to say goodbye to TouchID (which I vastly prefer to FaceID). I love this phone otherwise and am in no hurry to replace it. Outside of the camera, the parts of its design that are stuck in the past are the things I love about it.

Flagship android phones from every major vendor are priced to compete with iPhones though and let’s not pretend otherwise. You can spend more on an android phone now than an iPhone if you’re so inclined.

I have quite large hands and the iPhone 13 Mini is kind of the upper limit of what I call comfortable to use with one hand. The perfect phone for me is roughly the size of the iPhone 4, or like the BB Passport where the designers fully committed to the two-handed use case and made that work well.

With Apple's Vision Pro and its controls based on eye movement and finger gestures in mind I think this might become a thing on larger sized phones as well. For example a dedicated button at the bottom of the screen that will just click wherever I look. At least I'd prefer that over having to do finger gymnastics on a 6 inch screen.

That is a questionable statement, as there were phones with removable batteries and phones without them on the market for quite some time and the phones with removable batteries were simply not successful enough.

If they were identical in all aspects, including cost, your comment might make sense.

I suspect there was more than one variable involved and so the entire idea that there is any correlation is flawed.

Revealed preferences.

Revealed preferences assumes that there are no confounding factors, no tyranny of small decisions, no information asymmetry and an unlimited selection of products that vary along every combination of features. It’s economic drivel, and serves only to dismiss opinions out of hand.

My point is that small phones don’t sell well.

Then that's an entirely different point. There are many reasons why small phones don't sell well. There's the changing market in which a phone is the primary computer for many people. There's incomplete information, as the tethers in a showroom prevent you from holding a phone one-handed, or noticing that it is too big to fit in your pocket. There's a potential for decreased design costs, as a larger space provides more options for how the phone's internals can be arranged.

But calling those "revealed preferences" is a sleight-of-hand. It takes all those external factors and treats them as something intrinsic about the buyer, to be "revealed" by the market. The term itself is a lie.

And don't forget the IR blaster, so you could control most of TVs. And IIRC it was the first Samsung phone with fingerprint reader. I miss that phone.

I disabled the fingerprint reader since they've decided it was a good idea to put it on the power button, so locking the screen also reads my fingerprint and unlocks the screen immediately.

Are you sure, that you are talking about the S5?

The S5 had a swipe fingerprint reader integrated into the home button.

https://www.samsung.com/levant/support/mobile-devices/galaxy...

And Sony Xperias still come with headphone jacks today[1] after they tried Apple'ing for a couple models and got laughed at.

[1]: https://www.sony.com/electronics/support/mobile-phones-table...

Real question / No trolling: I feel like I am the last living human who still uses the headphone jack. When I walk around my city, I see almost zero other people using it. They using wireless earbuds. I avoid wireless earbuds to avoid yet-another-battery-to-be-charged.

Is this true for other HNers also?

I also don't like having to charge headphones, so I have a Moto G5 stylus phone with a headphone jack. I also don't like most earbuds for comfort.

Besides the charging issue wired headphones are:

- better value, $35 will get you a decent sound - compatible with music production equipment - low-latency - save your phone if you drop it - impossible to lose one side.

I've been holding on on my 6 years old Galaxy S8 for this reason. <rant> It's yet-another-battery-to-be-charged, it introduced lag in audio especially where it matters(think video playback or games), the battery degrades over time, can't be used with my laptop as seamlessly as unplug-here-plug-there, and I personally like to keep headphones ON all the time even when I'm not listening, in case something comes up. this would be impossible with the Bluetooth ones. sign such a crappy direction they all headed in.

Personally I never particularly liked wired headphones because of the annoyance of dealing with the wire and it breaking any time it got snagged. My Bluetooth ones last for ages without charging so it's not a big deal to charge them. Since they're pretty cheap now I think a lot of people are the same way.

People love to complain about the dongle but really it just adds a couple of inches to the wire. If you can deal with the wire you can deal with a wire with USB-C on the end.

Nah the reason I complain about the dongle is because I don't know where to get a reasonably priced one with good audio except apple and theirs break like crisps crack.

No, here in Spain most people I see use wired headphones.

People here but cheap phones (100€-200€) due to the low wages. Most of those still feature the jack. Turns out that they still prefer wired earbuds when given an actual choice. Because wireless earbuds (eg Redmi airdots) cost 10€ here now so they're accessible to anyone.

I use it with my pro-grade microphone, because I don't want latency or degradation when it matters the most.

But that's just at the office. For casual use out and about, it's all wireless - simply because cables are annoying to store and they break way too easily.

I switched to Bluetooth earbuds way back in 2007 when they were still novel (Sony Ericsson HBH-DS980 represent - with an LCD screen for switching between paired devices!). When I use wired headphones they get caught on door handles etc and have a lifespan of like 6 months before they get torn apart.

I still use wired (with a dongle) for calls, since Bluetooth Headset profile sounds like crap and I have enough trouble understanding people/being understood as it is. MagSafe helps with charging when the port is in use.

your headphones get caught on door handles? How?

How would they not? I can't count how many times I snagged my headphones on something and my phone went flying or the headphones got yanked out of my ear before wireless headphones.

- airpods are considerably more convenient than wrapping and unwrapping a cable every time i want to listen to music - a cable also conducts sounds into my ears when the cable is jostled by clothing or while running - nobody makes ANC wired in ears - i just throw my airpods case on my apple watch charger when im at my desk, i basically don't worry about charging

I dislike wired headphones for daily use and I've wanted small wireless in-ear headphones since long before the wireless earbud explosion kicked off. However, I still really, really want the headphone jack back. Mainly for connecting to non-wireless sound equipment, for easily attaching a microphone and for phone calls where sound quality is important.

Nobody really cares about audio quality any more.

I used to, but I realised that my mid-40s ears are now the limiting factor, so I might as well have the convenience of wireless.

The real problem isn't 'another device to charge' though, it's battery degradation and the wasteful, disposable nature of Airpods.

Can people really hear the difference between wired and unwired headphones? I find it hard to believe. The bandwidth that Bluetooth can provide should be sufficient for very high quality audio. I'm confused by this reply.

>Can people really hear the difference between wired and unwired headphones?

Personally: Yes. Absolutely.

Even if I'm listening to just MP3s instead of FLACs, I can immediately notice that the wired headphone connection is better than wireless in both quality and latency. It's easy to compare since the headphones I use when travelling can do both, and I've used both as practicality demands.

The best wireless has to offer still can't hold a candle to good old wired.

I don't believe codec makes meaningful difference. Most biggest difference should be by integrated small efficient amp vs bigger amp.

Wired enables a wider choice of higher-end headphones/IEMs, as well as avoiding bluetooth lossiness.

there are wireless in ears with replaceable batteries (notably, the sony WF1000XM_ series), they just have a considerably worse form factor and a comparatively dogshit software experience while competing at the same price point as airpods pro

The sony are better: ANC + LDAC

I avoid wireless earbuds because I don't want bluetooth enabled (tracking via bluetooth is pervasive) and there are way to many drawbacks (poor audio quality, high latency, pairing issues, battery). You get far more options (and higher quality options) with wired headphones.

I also prefer wired ones.

At work they gave me some wireless ones… they cost about 200€. They occasionally lose connection despite the receiver being ~1m away and the sound jumps.

I don't think I have zoomed with another SWE that had a headphone cable in a decade.

That's because they use whatever crap the company gives them.

Do you think i chose my keyboard? No, our IT budget is too low to buy me the 50€ keyboard I'd actually want. For some reason we can afford 200€ wireless headphones that have jittery sound however.

How is this "gaslighting"?

Gaslighting now just means scammed, or tricked into, or lied to, unfortunately.

Been charging my iPhone 12 mini since it was 5 months old because of my toddler for this reason. Charging port died, went in and couldn’t get through a round of apple care people and gave up

They will disable charging if they detect liquids in the port as a way to reduce the chance of causing failures.

Water resistant is not water proof.

A cop out is not warranty. If your phone can't deal with water you probably shouldn't advertise that it can.

Except it can deal with water, and it's not a Mac, which is what the article refers to. The iPhone is nothing at all to do with this as it's not a Mac.

It's like testla's autopilot. It's self driving until you crash, then it's your own fault.

A water sensor tripping is no proof of misuse independent of the devices IP-rating.

Not very resistant then

I simply don't understand this dense sneering snark.

The real world is analogue and not a binary on/off setting you click in a config file. "Make this thing indestructable"

There is an infinite sliding scale from normal air humidity to the corrosive wetness of a tropical rainforest near a saltwater ocean or the difference being splashed with a few raindrops to being submerged for 100 years at the Mariana Trench.

*water

Pure not salt water or tap water, not contaminated toilet water where most phones seem to end up. And only for a certain time at a certain depth (pressure). And not pressurized just static.

Maybe they should be named USB-Sea? /s

Have you seen the same Apple ads as me? Because they show it under rain, under the faucet, covered in Coke, etc.

I agree it's resistant and it does what you say... But the way they advertise it....

None of those things would trip the internal liquid sensors, though. That's the entire point. If the phone is actually up to spec (which, I have to assume it is), then any internal liquid damage would have to come from using the phone out of the spec.

Well, if water damage your iPhone then you are simply watering it wrong

No they do not and you know that. They've always been advertised as water resistant

This is Mac, not iPhone.

Read the first paragraph:

>> Apple’s limited warranty doesn’t cover damage caused by liquids, even for water-resistant products like the iPhone, Apple Watch, and some AirPods models.

That's because it's a warranty - it covers faults, not damages. If you want apple to fork out for a new one because you've dived into the sea with the phone on an armband then you need to pony up for Apple Care +

If you sell a device as waterproof and then it gets damaged by water, that’s obviously a fault: it wasn’t waterproof like it was meant to be.

Who is selling a waterproof phone. Because it’s not Apple.

My iPhone 15 was advertised as meeting IP68 under IEC standard 60529 (maximum depth of 6 meters up to 30 minutes) and Apple even publishes a handy list of their products and how water resistant/proof they are:

https://support.apple.com/en-us/108039

> Because it’s not Apple.

It is.

That's IP68 Water Resistance. That's not the same thing as Waterproof.

Water resistant not proof - no consumer product is going to be sold as water proof if the seal can be broken by undoing a few screws to change battery or repair.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/108039

> These iPhone models are splash, water, and dust resistant and were tested under controlled laboratory conditions...

iPhones are sold as IP67 or 68. Terms like water resistant and waterproof are too ambiguous.

Not sure what you're referring to. The parent comment specifically mentioned iPhones, waterproofing (not a Mac feature), losing headphone jack (not true of Macs). I was clarifying this article is about Macs, not iPhones.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com