Apple says 2017 MacBooks don't have FlexGate defect. Aussie tribunal orders a fix anyway
- Reference: 1660543085
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2022/08/15/ncat_flexgate_apple_macbook/
- Source link:
The Order came from the Civil and Administrative Tribunal in the Australian State of New South Wales (NCAT), in response to an action brought by Tristan Goode – co-owner of OpenStack consultancy Aptira and a former OpenStack board member.
Goode bought a 2017 MacBook Pro and, as he had more time in which to use it during the COVID-19 pandemic, noticed the distinctive "stage light" effect that some MacBooks suffer because their video cables are too short. The displays produce odd artefacts or even become inoperable.
[1]
Not a good look – A photo of the 'stage lights' effect produced by FlexGate. Click to enlarge
Apple has acknowledged that some MacBooks have the problem, and in 2018 [2]arranged free repairs for machines sold in 2016.
Goode complained to Apple about the issue in his machine, but was rebuffed because his MacBook is a 2017 model that Apple does not acknowledge has the curtailed cable. Apple quoted him AU$977 ($695) to replace the screen, but Goode was not happy with that offer.
[3]
He found numerous complaints – including over 80 videos made by independent Mac repairers – depicting MacBook models from 2017 and later years that clearly described the same problems that Apple acknowledged in its 2016 machines. Teardowns of those machines suggested they have the same cable Apple happily replaced in 2016 machines.
[4]
[5]
Goode bought the replacement screen so he could assess the parts it used, and felt it had the unhelpfully short cable Apple replaced in other models.
An attempt to have Apple acknowledge the issue in his 2017 machine failed, as did an attempt to involve the local fair trading regulator, which takes up complaints on consumers' behalf.
[6]
Goode therefore arranged an NCAT hearing and compiled extensive documentation of the FlexGate problem appearing in MacBooks other than those Apple acknowledges as impacted by the issue. Goode also used metadata describing the number of times his MacBook's battery had been charged to demonstrate his machine had been used lightly – so could not have been opened and closed enough times to wear out the cable if it had been sufficiently robust.
The presiding officer had clearly handled matters involving Apple before and wearily asked if it would settle
Apple disputed his analysis and proceeded to an NCAT hearing that was staged online last week.
The Register tuned in. The presiding officer had clearly handled matters involving Apple before, first wearily asking if there was any possibility Apple would settle the matter – the answer was the expected "no" – and later sharing an observation that the Apple representative's audio was characteristically poor and that the company should really do better in future hearings.
Goode made his case that his MacBook had the same problem as a 2016 model because it used the same known-to-be-inadequate parts. Apple's representative contested that Goode's machine was old enough to fail but could not respond to many of the presiding officer's questions – such as why the 2017 MacBook range was not included in Apple's free repair program.
Apple's rep, who was not in Australia, mentioned [7]Apple's environmental impact FAQ to assert that the company designs its products to last four years – making problems that manifested in 2021 reasonable for Goode's 2017 MacBook.
[8]
Goode countered that the same FAQ states: "Most Apple products last longer and are often passed along, resold, or returned to Apple by the first owner for others to use." He even mentioned that a 2011 MacBook he gave to a relative still performs perfectly (running Linux to avoid using an unsupported OS).
Apple's rep could not resolve the seeming contradiction of the passage Goode quoted, and also said she would have to seek guidance on how and why the company decides which machines deserve free fixes. Nor could Apple's rep explain if parts used in the 2017 MacBook differ from those present in models that were fixed for free.
The presiding officer at NCAT did not make an immediate decision, but later issued a written Order – seen by The Register – in which NCAT declared itself "satisfied that a reasonable consumer fully acquainted with the state and condition of the applicant's MacBook would regard it as not free from defects at the time of its supply and for that reason not of acceptable quality."
[9]Apple's M1 MacBook screens are stunning – stunningly fragile and defective, that is, lawsuits allege
[10]No, no, let's hear this out, says judge waving away Apple's attempt to kill MacBook Pro Flexgate lawsuit
[11]MacBook Pro petition begs Apple for total recall of krap keyboards
The Order does not, however, offer an opinion on whether 2017 and 2018 MacBooks have the FlexGate issue. Deciding that matter was not necessary to determine that this individual computer was not free of defects.
The issue of whether MacBooks made after 2016 have the FlexGate issue was therefore left undecided.
NCAT is not a court of law and is neither equipped nor required to hear evidence that would allow that kind of decision. Nor are NCAT decisions used as precedents – other than by NCAT itself.
The decision therefore leaves the way open for Australian MacBook owners to seek redress, but doesn't allow either consumers or Apple a precedent.
Goode feels confident that the evidence and result show that Apple has a systemic issue, and plans to share the filings and results of his case widely, in the hope it gives other possibly FlexGate-stricken Mac owners a chance to seek redress.
"It would end the grief for many affected MacBook Pro purchasers around the world if Apple just fessed up to the fact FlexGate affects many more models than they have admitted to," he said. ®
Get our [12]Tech Resources
[1] https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/04/02/screen.jpg
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2021/04/05/apple_macbook_screen/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YvoZRxDWbHgW5Czd9wDuWQAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YvoZRxDWbHgW5Czd9wDuWQAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YvoZRxDWbHgW5Czd9wDuWQAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YvoZRxDWbHgW5Czd9wDuWQAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://www.apple.com/environment/answers/
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YvoZRxDWbHgW5Czd9wDuWQAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/16/apple_m1_macbook_screen_lawsuits/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2021/04/05/apple_macbook_screen/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2018/05/04/apple_macbook_pro_keyboard_petition/
[12] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Why Do They Insist On Blatantly Denying Anything Is Wrong?
A capitalist would say that this is how they are among the richest companies on the planet. By not actually spending it putting things right and instead forcing customers to spend even more money. The capitalist would pat them on the back and say, "Keep it up!"
Re: Why Do They Insist On Blatantly Denying Anything Is Wrong?
It's quite absurd of them, my research shows there are 7 models affected and there's a tonne of evidence available. The affected models (other than the 2x 206 units, are:
MacBook Pro (13-inch, 2017, Two Thunderbolt 3 Ports)
MacBook Pro (13-inch, 2017, Four Thunderbolt 3 Ports)
MacBook Pro (13-inch, 2018, Two Thunderbolt 3 Ports)
MacBook Pro (13-inch, 2018, Four Thunderbolt 3 Ports)
MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2016)
MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2017)
MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2018)
So if you have one of these that stagelights or wont open without the screen blanking and you're in Australia, I'm up for helping you get it sorted. I'm working with about a dozen people already, and really enjoying it.
Apparently
He's holding it wrong.
Re: Apparently
He's opening and closing it wrong :-)
Re: Apparently
Opening the box it came from was the first mistake.
Re: Apparently
He's viewing it wrong.
Re: Apparently
He's holding it wrong.
Hmm ...
Could be.
But from where I stand, what I see is that what is wrong is the choice of hardware vendor.
If I received as a gift, I'd sell it at discount and get myself some
Should I receive an Apple MacBook for my birthday/anniversary/xmas, win it in a contest or whatever (very doubtful but still remotely possible) I would not even bother to take it out of the box.
I would flog it a discount to some fanboy and purchase decent hardware with the cash.
O.
Re: Apparently
Yeah I'm not sure what I'll do with it now, I still have the box and all its ingredients, and even the tissue paper that sits between the screen and keyboard. (I can think of an immediate use for that)
The reason I bought it was only because the little MacBook Air I bought in 2011 was so solid. It superceded a Vaio, and at that time, the metal shelled laptops weren't common. It's still firing away, and it was part of my evidence presented in the case as to what my expectations were about quality and longevity. It's done 24,760 hours of use according to S.M.A.R.T, and it ran Mint for a while but now happily runs ChromeOS for my mother in law.
I had a Mac in 1985, had an iphone for few weeks in 2009, but have no other apple gear, nor ever intend to have.
If it is the same cable as in the 2016 model which is defined as being defective, unless there is a major design change at the joint that means the shorter length is now acceptable in the 2017 model, and nothing I've read speaks of ANY design changes in this area, then it should be quite clear that the 2017 model is ALSO defective. To claim anything else is just nonsense.
Too bad Apple cant get a right kicking for such blatant bollocks, but most of the consumer protection agencies have been so hobbled by lobbied governments that they dont have the resources to go after even blatant cases like this...
I went and bought affected screens from independent (non Apple authorized) repairers to prove my point. I did not purchase 15 inch model screens, but I reckon they fail because their design genius used the same physical design dimensions as the 13 inch models.
It's not hard
"Apple's environmental impact FAQ to assert that the company designs its products to last four years – making problems that manifested in 2021 reasonable for Goode's 2017 MacBook."
"He even mentioned that a 2011 MacBook he gave to a relative still performs perfectly (running Linux to avoid using an unsupported OS)."
I bought 2 Dell business lappys off eBay for £150 a piece in early 2017. They were manufactured around 2012/2013.
With WIN10 latest and Dell BIOS/driver updates, old drivers for odd bits of hardware (hence no Linux), Visual Studio 10 (I know, I know- but it works), sleep modes, etc., they perform pretty much perfectly. And that's a very high bar for me.
Not wishing to big up Msoft (or Dell), but that's pretty decent for backwards compatibility and tech lifetime.
Why people put up with Apple's garbage is utterly beyond me.
Re: It's not hard
I suppose if your USP is being the new shiny being long-lived is irrelevant.
Re: It's not hard
It used to be new, shiny and *it just works*, which I could accept.
If the people want new, shiny and *it's just garbage*, they've only got themselves to blame.
Re: It's not hard
Apple should respond better to complaints and the case should be pursued, as it doesn't seem beyond reasonable bounds that the 2016 issue may have rolled into 2017. This is especially so as the devices are not actually made by Apple themselves and there is an assumption that a decision by Apple to change a part was actually addressed throughout the supply chain - I'm not formally in IT but I had a career helping manage complex supply chains in another sector (that had a significant IT element).
As an aside, however, it would be good to get an impartial account of this instance as the reporting appears to start with the premise that the complainant is 100% right. It's not unknown for genuine complaints to get exaggerated along the way, to emphasise the point needing to be made. The consequence of that is often a more aggressive denial.
On the matter of Apple tat - my own experience, as somebody who switched from Windows (high end laptops) to Mac around 10 years ago for my own use, it may be more expensive for the initial capital outlay but the lifetime cost is certainly no greater. My original 2011 iMac has only just been retired from service as my daily desktop - it still performs as well as when bought, but the needs of modern software have overtaken it. It's recently been wiped and in may be line for donation to a charity and a new life as a public internet hub.
Why Do They Insist On Blatantly Denying Anything Is Wrong?
So Apple had already admitted there was an issue with 2016 model year machines and offered free repairs. Now someone rocks up with a 2017 model displaying the exact same issue but it's immediately dismissed as 'not the same issue' so not covered by the free repair.
Any company with an ounce of common sense would do the sensible thing, investigate, be truthful about their findings and offer a free repair if it's essentially the same issue. Sadly, it seems to be the standard response for these high-value companies, especially Apple and Tesla.