Finnish regulator calls for iPhone refunds Finnish iPhone users unhappy at the inability of the handset to operate below zero are entitled to their money back, even if the limitation appears in the small print. The clarification comes from the Finland's Consumer Agency, as reported by Finnish news agency YLE.fi, in response to numerous questions from concerned Finns …
Anywhere around the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn. You'll have to keep an eye on the humidity restrictions, though.
They also work year around in Gibraltar, Jersey, Isles of Scilly, Cambodia, Laos, VietNam, HongKong, Lebanon and few other places.
California actually does freeze - the spring melt of all the mountain snow is where the water fr the south comes from. Funny how the Japanese haven't complained about this - they did manage to get new batteries out of Jobs.
I guess the specs were written for Cupertino - or 'Snow Birds' who follow the sun in their retirement.
Let's not forget that Finland's outside temperatures are well bellow the -10 deg Celsius you encounter i/t UK, Scotland or similar parts of Europe during winter.
I do wonder why nobody from Alaska has complained nor Finland's neighbors Sweden and Russia (or ppl from Norway for that matter). I do suspect that weather conditions are slightly different (even during winter) in the south of Finland and the north next to the north-pole.
Anyway, are there any Alaska residents or ppl up north of Canada who can enlighten us?
Who do other cellphones fare during winter-conditions?
Is the Reg taking some news tips from Engadget. Nice to get a bit of conspiracy in there but there is quite a big difference between -10 and -25 or lower, which isn't uncommon in Finland. Even in the south.
I've had my iPhone screen stop responding whilst here. I don't think it's really a refund worthy fault (I might think different if I was in Northern Finland) but the judgement is more reflective of Finland's generally socially orientated government and regulations than some silly protectionist policies (which wouldn't work anyway, everyone here seems to be buying HTC's or iPhones)
I take it you were there on vacation? You might see this different when you live there and rely on your cellphone for day-to-day communications.
If iPhones aren't indeed suitable for polar conditions then indeed Apple must warn potential (polar) customers (which it apparantly does albeit in small print). I think its obvious that consumer products being sold there would be tested for such harsh local weather-conditions. And if not valid then the product should be banned or modified to withstand those local weather-conditions (albeit at higher consumerprices). I believe Volvo's sold in Sweden ARE different from the ones sold in Belgium or France. They have surplus issolation.
However it is suspicious that finnish regulator comes with this after 2 generations of iPhones have been sold (3G and 3GS). So either the 3G(s) models withstand those harsh conditions or there is another motivation behind this.
The truth is out there :-)
that's not really true. it means that the item is unfit. and you are entitled to a refund. it doesn't force apple to honour the warranty.
additionally. a point that everyone seems to have missed is that the warranty claim would be against apple. the refund is against the retailer.
what this ruling does is move the responsibility on to the carriers. their right of redress against apple will depend on their contracts.
"around -10°C without complaint. "
Bah, that's warm... In Helsinki the temperature has so far in this year been -18 C at the lowest at my thermometer. Temperatures below -25 C are not unknown in January and February - and Helsinki is at the south end of the country. The record cold in Finland was -51.5 C measured in 1999, in Pokka, Lapland.
It's not exactly a secret that ALL electronic devices malfunction outside of a fairly limited range of operating conditions. I'm not sure just how reasonable it is to expect an iPhone to behave differently to any other device with respect to temperature. Having said that, it is a mobile 'phone (duh!) and a user might therefore 'reasonably' expect to use it outdoors, while indoor electronic kit would never be expected to suffer the same conditions. Presumably the same ruling would affect all other mobile 'phones, too. Perhaps Nokias are made of hardier stuff.....
No, I don't own an i-Anything, don't plan to do so and am not a fan of Apple in any way.
"I'm not sure just how reasonable it is to expect an iPhone to behave differently..."
If I go to a shop down the street and buy a mobile phone, then I expect that phone to work when I walk out of that shop. Also in the outdoors. If the phone can't handle that, then I expect the shop to not offer that phone in the first place.
If I were mail-ordering something, that'd be a different story.
.....made it clear in rather larger type that these restrictions exist. Then we who live in the upper half of the northern hemisphere would not bother to buy the iPhone. That of course is why a certain greengrocer does not exactly go out of its way to alert the aforementioned geographically challenged customers to this problem.
It might be 'not at all' in your own experience but earlier this month you reported on this case http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/11/frozen_iphone/ where Apple refused to repair an iPhone on the grounds that damage had been caused by use in too cold an environment (Norway).
Just calling it a hunch, but I'd bet if Apple hadn't been refusing warranty repairs none of this would be a problem. That action pretty much made the case that they are selling a device unfit for purpose.
i.e. "[here's your phone, thanks for shopping with Apple... oh and please read the fine print where you really shouldn't use your phone outside in this country because if anything happens to it we'll tell you to uck foff if you want us to fix it]"
One way to read this, IMO at least, very well could be that this is their way of forcing Apple to honor its warranty regardless of the fine print.
I agree with that. I have newer had any problems with Nokia, Ericsson or Siemens phones in Finland, although I have occasionally left them in the car over night at low temperatures, say -20 C and so.
So I think the point here is that the phone should not be damaged in the cold and they should work in the cold too, which is a different thing as you take your warm phone out of your pocket and use it in the cold.
So if Apple starts to referee to the climate each time there is a problem with a IPhone in Finland
then I do see a reason why people should get their money back.
I do not think this will happen as I cannot see how Apple would have been able to produce a phone in such a different way, anyway .
Another non-iPhone Finland resident here. Yep, I've seen temperatures of anything up to -35'C in my time here, and between -10 and -20'C is normal (at the moment it's -2 but has hit -18'C just a couple of night ago, and I'm in the very south. My Nokia N70 has worked in these temperatures for about five years now with nary a problem, except once in about -25'C where response became sluggish due to the coldness of the silicon. No failures though. It's not that I think Nokia phones are particularly tough, just that the iPhone seems to be particularly weak in comparison. But hey, it was designed for pretentious artsy types who hang around all day in offices and "studios" and coffee shops, so what's the problem?
It never occurred to me that a mobile phone sold in a cold country wouldn't work there, in 25 years of living in Norway I've never heard of a mobile that failed to work because of the cold. My N73 works fine here in Norway (it was -14C this morning). If it doesn't work outside at -25C what's the point in owning it in Scandinavia?
"Get-Out" clause's posted on most equipment have always pissed me off so its nice to see one bite the owner in the ass! If I suddenly wake up naked, freezing and lost clutching my phone I really expect to be able to find out where I am and make a call! Its the least my phone could do for me.
Indeed. Expect some regulatory action in Norway if it turns out that people can't do reasonable things like make or receive phone calls outside under normal conditions: the regulatory authorities there don't have a problem sticking it to companies like Apple and Nokia (cluebolt to article author) if it looks like they're selling stuff that shoves a bunch of unreasonable caveats on consumers.
The "ooh, it's Finland, so Nokia must be responsible" commentary is simply juvenile given that Nokia doesn't run Norway (and eventually any other country that has the balls to pick this up), even if one could argue that Finnish politicians might pander to that company, and is akin to saying "How dare those dirty foreigners tell us what is not shiny and/or what is cold?!"
-10C in Scotland for a few days? Thermometer showed -15C? Big deal: you can measure weeks and months with such temperatures the Nordic region, and that includes actual cities, not some village in the Highlands. Thus the Finns might easily have a point.
If it's -25 outside, I'm assuming people aren't going to be hanging around playing Angry Birds on their iPhones (particularly as you can't use one with gloves on), so it seems reasonable to assume that answering or making calls is what you might be doing.
Surely Apple can point to the supplied in the box wired handsfree headset and suggest you can still use your phone, leaving it in your nice warm pocket?
Yeah, but the story from Norway is that it was that cold OUTSIDE, so therefore the warrantee is void. I would think that the phone was with the owner, and that the owner wasn't at -18°C because if she was, she wouldn't have complaned (she'd be frozen!), but Apple said that because the temperature OUTSIDE was -18°C, no dice.
I'm with the other comentard; when companies plaster their T&Cs with get-outs, it's nice when they bite back :)
Hiding negative statements in the small print is, almost by definition, a form of intentional deception.
Companies should be required either to word their big print such that there isn't a requirement to use small print.
To take an example, Dishonest Dora says "Sandwiches £1 off" and then hides in the small print "offer not available Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, Weekends, before 3pm or after 4pm".
Honest Horace has exactly the same offer, but says "Sandwiches £1 off 3-4pm Wednesdays" all in the same size, typeface and colour. And doesn't need any small print, because he didn't start by deliberately trying to imply something substantially bigger than what he was actually offering.
From Nokia N8 user manual:
Always keep the battery between 15°C and 25°C (59°F and 77°F). Extreme temperatures reduce the capacity and lifetime of the battery. A device with a hot or cold battery may not work temporarily.
OK not the same as an operating temperature for the whole phone, but amused me anyway.
3 snow storms this year thus far, VERY rare for where I am, and one day at just 7 F, while we spent an hour and a half outside building snow men and playing with our child, iPhone exposed to the elements most of that time since both of our digital cameras refused to work after about 10-15 minutes at that temp.
I found, even at near 10 degrees F, I could not keep the iPhone in my hand more than 5 minutes or so without handing it off the the wife and putting my gloves back on. For several periods of about 10 minutes each, we set it on the porch and continued to play. At no time did I see anything more than a sluggish LCD, and that was only after an extended period of no activity. The phone recoded video, made calls, and uploaded to the net without issue. I can't imagine using it outside in any lower temps for more than a few minutes, especially in contact with one's face to make calls. My bluetooth headset failed quick in those temps.
Super cold, below zero F, I don't imaging anyone's phone is likely to work in those temps for very long unless it has some form of heated casing. If they're making Apple refund phones, they better be making everyone else do so as well, unless the phones are in fact rated to below those temps (which LCD itself can't be, so it would have to be some odd display tech special made for artic temps).
This kind of "no warranty" warranty behaviour has been around for a while. In New Zealand, the mobile phone companies would refuse to honour warranties because the humidity sticker inside the battery case had turned red - trouble is that Wellington and points south are all so humid and damp in the winter that the sticker would change colour even if the phone had never got physically wet.
FWIW - I have used my iphone skiing in CO and on business in Quebec City in temperatures below -20ºC. The battery doesn't last long in those temps, but the phone functions as long as there's power.
The issue at hand is not whether the phone fails under sub-zero conditions (it sounds like it usually works, just with poor battery performance and a sluggish LCD). The issue is whether trying to use it under sub-zero conditions voids the warranty - which it apparently does.
It's not reasonable to sell a cell phone (or any other product) in Finland (or Alaska, for that matter) when normal use in that locale's climate is sufficient to void the warranty. It would seem as though that condition in the agreement would void the warranty of anyone who used their iphone outdoors in the winter in Finland!
Now that I think about, it, if the key variable is the ambient temperature, and the spec is 0 C, that would effect most of the temperate world! If the key variable is the internal temperature of the phone, what is the mechanism for the user to monitor the internal temperature of their phone to determine whether it can be used without voiding the warranty? If it was in my jacket pocket, it was warmer than the outside air, but by how much?
Don't expect my phones to work below freezing until Hell itself freezes over. And even when that happens, don't expect any warranty coverage anyway, even though my most loyal customer service employees will already be on-site, partnering with Satan to deliver exemplary after-sales customer care.
Sent from my iPho... <signal lost, temperature fell below 0C>
If lot's of people end up getting refunds from whoever they got the phone from in the first place - which I assume to be the mobile carrier -
I rather suspect that said mobile carrier may refuse to do business with Apple in the future....
I agree with some points raised here -
Whether the phone WORKS below 0'C is not the point - the point is whether Apple refuse to honour the warranty because the phone has been taken outside of it's specified operating range.
The second point is "Winters of southern Finland (average day time temperature is below 0 °C/32 °F) are usually 4 months long, and the snow typically covers the land from middle of December to early April." (taken from Wikipedia) clearly if the climate means the phone should not be used outside for 4 months of the year - it is not fit for the purpose for which it was designed.
Clearly Apple could get very smart arsey here and point out that a mobile phone is a portable phone - but there are no guarantees either implied or otherwise about the phones ability to work in an outside environment. But of course that would open a whole new can of worms in that they would effectively be admitting that the iPhone is only built to work in a normal indoor environment.
Guess we just wait and see what magical and well thought response they come out with for this one...... (it could after all be a feature..... to stop you going outside in silly temperatures and either freezing or suffering heat exhaustion........)
We've just gone through a week of -25 days and -33 nights, and I saw lots of people using their iPhones, Androids, Blackberries, and dumb phones outside. My old BB Curve worked fine outside.
I think this is just a get-out-of-warranty-free clause for Apple in case they don't feel like fixing/replacing the phone, and I applaud the Finnish gov't for challenging it.
I remember the consumer ombudsman of Finland in TV program using mobile phones and local climate as a example when no clause in guarantee can get the manufacturer out of hot water, two decades ago. In the same program they explained that a even if a washing machine has a one year guarantee the manufacturer has to repair the machine after it if the fault was cause d by design error. Any design fault within reaconable usage age, abbout 5 years with washing machines.
So if they used mobile phones and freezing weather as a exaple when guarantee clauses are invalid 20 years ago it's no wonder they are saying those clauses are invalid still.
btw. There's a difference of not working in freezing weather, as most LCD:s are prone to slowing down, and breaking, as the norwegian iPhone did. Slowing down is acceptable, breaking isn't. And in Finland consumers expects phone to work when it's freezing.
I don't know about the newer models (Think, anything designed in the 21st century), but my old brick of a Nokia phone with its monochrome LCD and 2+ week standby time really was tough as nails. It's survived everything from being run over by a car, dropped from a third story balcony onto concrete (The casing flew off, but was easily reattached) and dropped in a swimming pool (Continued to work even immediately after immersion, opened up and left to dry inside).
At least some of those old phone designs really were nigh-indestructible.
My current phone is an HTC Magic, which I've been a lot more careful with on account of it costing considerably more than the ~25 euros equivalent I paid for that old Nokia phone back in the day.
Would only that its counterpart here in Sweden would have the courage to do the same ! But alas, our authorities, unlike the Finns, are well-behaved, fully house-broken poodles to US corporations, as demonstrated in the farcicial Pirate Bay trials....
Henri
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
