They refused to replace an iPad whose screen shattered after falling from a chair less than two weeks after my wife bought it. One should note that it was specifically recommended to her in the shop as a good device to let the children watch Netflix on. Obviously, it wasn’t fit for that purpose. All they offered is buying the exact same fragile device again at a discount. I was so angry that I contemplated secretly putting “Careful, fragile glass! Breaks very easily.” stickers onto the devices in the shop. :)
It would really be incredible if Apple devices were the only device with unbreakable glass screens. That's why phone cases are ubiquitous. Why should they pay for your negligence? You might have a point if they refused to replace the screen at your cost.
Force = mass × acceleration.
The larger size of the tablet means that if it fails at an angle where the glass is subject to the impact, the force will be greater. It's possible that tablet glass is designed to withstand a larger force to compensate. I don't have any info on that, anyone has any insight into this?
I also managed to drop my iPhone without it getting a scratch. It does not prove anything, though. Glass is a fragile material and seemingly similar shocks can have very different results. AFAIK most of high-end smartphones use the same gorilla glass.
There are different revisions of the Gorilla recipe, with different tradeoffs.
The 5X in particular also made a bunch of other decisions that helped the glass survive, like having the frame raised slightly past the glass, so that the frame would absorb the impact rather than the glass itself.
I had a Nexus 4, with a glass back and I dropped it and chipped it early on. Since then I use a case, but I've never broken a screen for whatever reason.
Not all glass is equal. There is a trade-off between being scratch-proof (harder glass) and shock-proof (softer). Apple seems to be particularly aggressive in going for the former. Also, Apple tends to sacrifice robustness for elegance. Both design decisions make iPads less suitable for children than the average tablet. My wife’s mistake was to trust the advice of the Apple salesperson who claimed that the iPad is a good choice for children.
I firmly believe that when I buy a phone I take ownership of the phone and this means also responsibility and potential risk of the phone being destroyed through my carelessness. Since Apple is no longer owner of the phone they are only responsible for their own actions with regards to the phone.
That still means if there is a hidden fault in the phone or they brick it by sending an update, they are still responsible in my understanding. But no longer if I give the device to family member and he/she is careless enough to sit on it.
And I firmly believe that if a company sells you a product and claims that it is fit for a particular purpose, you should be able to get your money back if it turns out that this was not the case.
Okay... and you also expect the car manufacturer to replace the car your wife crashed?
When you buy shiny sleek phone with edge-to-edge screen you should understand this is not a phone to be dropped or sat on. It is not possible to fit so much screen, electronics and battery into such sleek enclosure and make it drop resistant. If you need drop resistant phone, there are phones that advertise the feature (see: https://www.techradar.com/best/best-rugged-smartphones)
In other words, dropping an iPhone is not an intended use of the phone.
Why? They sold us a product claiming it is fit for a particular purpose and then it turned out this wasn’t true. A device that cannot withstand being dropped from minimal hight is not suitable for children. Period.
