Apple Products Now Include 7-Day Complimentary AppleCare+ in Australia

Though it could have been for 30 days.

It's about as useful as a fart in your face.

7 days? Whoo hoo!

Consumer laws need to catch up in many parts of the world (including the US).

7 days only, why not a whole year of complimentary Apple Care

Wow, all these responses seem super 'entitled'. Consumers are protected by a warranty against manufacturer defects, we can argue that it should be more than a year (which I agree with) but that is a separate conversation.

Apple is obviously offering the 7 days because of the stupid 4 day moratorium on discussing the extended warranty but why should it be any longer? Why should Apple do anything for you if you drop your phone 2 seconds out of the box? I agree it sucks for the consumer but it certainly isn't Apple's fault you dropped it or their responsibility to repair it. That is why Apple offers AppleCare+ as an insurance policy for the consumer.

Is a car dealer expected to fix a car that you smash pulling out of the dealership?
If your brand new TV falls from its wall mount 2 seconds after you hang it is the manufacturer expected to repair it?

Edit: removed a quote from @tobefirst that I misread.

That's pretty cool. Every year there's a thread from someone who dropped their phone the minute they took it out of the box. This will take a bit of the sting out of that.

I can’t believe we got this far without anyone mentioning the whole ACL/statutory warranties which go for two years anyway which make extended warranty type products (or insurance like products - the distinction often blurs due to commonality in feature sets) an even worse value proposition.

Exactly this.

After HP, Apple and another large tech companies were all pulled up on failing to comply with Australian statutory warranty law, underwhich products must be covered for the "period reasonably be expected to last after purchase".

This is determined by a number of factors, but in Apples case iPhones were usually sold on 2 year contracts at a very high price and thus the owner would expect the product, given its price and "quality" touted by Apple, to be covered from faults for that time.

This also extends across to laptops and other devices; HP were fined $3M and even made to place advertisements explaining that they now understand consumer law in Australia and that in fact advertising a "1 Year Warranty" on all products is illegal.

https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/hp-to-pay-3-million-for-misleading-consumers-and-retailers

A cheap $300 plastic laptop, sure, you wouldn't expect massive durability there unless advertised as such.

$5000 MacBook Pro? You bet a consumer expects that to last a couple of years - and the ACL protects the consumer being told to pay for repairs by the manufacturer if product fails before a reasonable time. That being at least 2 years on Apple gear, but that is not a limit and in fact is illegal to advertise as such.

With these protections in place, AppleCare+ actually really just offers protections Australian consumers inherit already from the consumer protection laws. Thus, its a bit of a scam to tell customers to buy it to gain those protections under insurance as well.

The only good thing about AppleCare+ is accidental breakage (which would be cheaper to repair by third parties if Apple didn't void warranty anyway) and customer support - which you can get in a Genius Bar anyway.

Wow, all these responses seem super 'entitled'. Consumers are protected by a warranty against manufacturer defects, we can argue that it should be more than a year (which I agree with) but that is a separate conversation.

Apple is obviously offering the 7 days because of the stupid 4 day moratorium on discussing the extended warranty but why should it be any longer? Why should Apple do anything for you if you drop your phone 2 seconds out of the box? I agree it sucks for the consumer but it certainly isn't Apple's fault you dropped it or their responsibility to repair it. That is why Apple offers AppleCare+ as an insurance policy for the consumer.

Is a car dealer expected to fix a car that you smash pulling out of the dealership?
If your brand new TV falls from its wall mount 2 seconds after you hang it is the manufacturer expected to repair it?

There is nothing self-entitled about it. In fact, it is very obtuse to believe that.

If it weren't for consumer laws, companies like Apple would constantly put two fingers up at you and deny you any right to repair.

Citing your examples, they are all a bit naive. In all cases, you have demonstrated examples of consumer negligence and this isn't what consumer protection is about.

But, having said all that. In the instance of the car; This is why you have insurance. On new cars, you must also have fully comprehensive insurance. With regards to the television, this is clear negligence on the part of the consumer, however, in most cases, insurance will once again cover this level of damage, or part of it.

It's about as useful as a fart in your face.

7 days? Whoo hoo!

Consumer laws need to catch up in many parts of the world (including the US).

ACCC would have enforced that upon . Australia is the nanny country when it comes to regulation. I'm sure we (consumers) pay for it as Apple will factor this bureaucracy into the sale price - thanks Canberra!

Yes it'll ultimately be borne by the customer (although some might say it's just out of Apple's healthy margins which can wear these consumer protection costs) but in all honesty, after living abroad in other countries with varying degrees of consumer protection, I really do appreciate the proactivity and effectiveness of the ACCC and consumer law protections. Goods not being of merchantable quality or fit for purpose sounds like an obvious case for a refund, but you compare it to other NFP consumer protection organisations in other countries, and they're proud to even get a 50% refund in store credit for similar matters.