iPhone 6 screen easily scratched?

I'm sorry but I can't see any correlation between 40,000 iPhone owners that updated to 8.0.1 within the first 90 minutes, and what percentage or quantity of iPhones may be easier to scratch. I also have to disagree wholeheartedly with a Global Manufacturing concern "skipping a process step" due to a target availability date and a revenue plan. The reason I must disagree is that those same firms are very aware of the exponential cost of fixing a problem in the field vs. preventing the problem pre-release. Am I saying there are no manufacturers that would skip steps ...certainly not, but not one with the maturity of Apple. I have to say that it is easy post-release failure (i.e. iOS 8.0.1) to assume the issue was "skipping steps" but I'm quite sure it is a great deal more complex than that.

My point is if something as near and dear to Apple's heart as iOS can go out the door without proper quality controls, it is not hard to imagine that something like the quality of the oleophobic coating on the screen, which is much farther removed from Apple's direct control, might have similar issues. Perhaps Apple even new about it. After all, General Motors has people whose entire job is to weigh the cost/risk of shipping a defective product that might kill people vs. the financial rewards of selling it anyway. You must be naive to think Apple doesn't have people who make the same decisions, especially when we are talking about an oil resistant coating on a smartphone that might only affect a limited number of users in the first few weeks of launch. It's the cost of doing business.

I wouldn't go so far as to say the manufacturers deliberately sabotaged some phones. Having short experience in a factory, I know that if that happens, then we end up paying the price having to remanufacture them and it'll cost us not only time, but also supplies.

I can believe that there was a bad batch create (not every single iPhone is going to get tested, maybe 1 out of every 100-200, maybe 1 out of every 1000 will get tested as a representative for a certain batch). But nothing deliberately done.

Apple got back to me about the phone and wants me to send it back to them to get a new one. They will then make a decision about what to do. Hope they don't send me the same defective phone back. Will keep this thread posted on what comes back, but there is clearly a defect with the coating on my phone.

I'm not saying anyone intentionally sabotaged the phones. I'm saying that if you were under pressure to deliver as many phones as possible, and you knew relaxing the limits on your production process by a small percentage might increase the yield significantly, would you do it? Or, would you keep your process controls tight and risk having a massive shortage of product that would cause you to miss revenue for the quarter? My guess is most companies would ship the phones anyway and worry about taking them back later if someone complains, especially if the penalty from Apple is lower for defects than not shipping the phones at all <cough GTAT>. The fact is the return rate on smartphones across the industry is high. People return their phones for all kinds of reasons, including iPhones.

In any case, there is obviously some kind of problem, or there wouldn't be so many complaints. I'm just trying to present ideas about what the root cause may be, rather than blame the users and hope it will go away. I would actually like to buy an iPhone 6 Plus, but I prefer to hear what the guinea pigs who took the plunge early have to say before I buy.

Snake MD wrote:

I'm not saying anyone intentionally sabotaged the phones. I'm saying that if you were under pressure to deliver as many phones as possible, and you knew relaxing the limits on your production process by a small percentage might increase the yield significantly, would you do it? Or, would you keep your process controls tight and risk having a massive shortage of product that would cause you to miss revenue for the quarter? My guess is most companies would ship the phones anyway and worry about taking them back later if someone complains, especially if the penalty from Apple is lower for defects than not shipping the phones at all <cough GTAT>. The fact is the return rate on smartphones across the industry is high. People return their phones for all kinds of reasons, including iPhones.

In any case, there is obviously some kind of problem, or there wouldn't be so many complaints. I'm just trying to present ideas about what the root cause may be, rather than blame the users and hope it will go away. I would actually like to buy an iPhone 6 Plus, but I prefer to hear what the guinea pigs who took the plunge early have to say before I buy.

That is the definition of sabotaging the screen deliberately. And the manufacturer knows that if they do that, then it'll come back to bite them and they'll have to not only remake those specific screens later, but it'll cost them time and materials. Increase yield for a lost of profits? Bad decision, whoever makes that will end up fired.

The issue is a real one, there is something going on. I'm thinking it's an accident and a bad batch... It happens.

From what I was told by the rep I chatted with online, they'll have their engineers look at it and determine whether or not it's defective. If it is, then they'll replace it at no cost. If it isn't, they'll replace it for a fee (109 for the iPhone 6, 129 for the iPhone 6 Plus and other models). I elected to bring it in store, they replaced it with little hesitation (your mileage may vary).

Nobody would ever increase yield for a loss of profit. That would be stupid. On the other hand, most companies would absolutely increase the yield for an increase in profits, especially if he cost of replacing the defects is already built into the calculation. For example, if you knew you could increase your profits by shipping an extra million phones at the risk of an additional 500 coming back, would you do it? It all comes down to risk vs. reward.

Where do you get that arbitrary 500 number? You automatically assume that you're going to only replace 0.05% of these that you will deliberately sabotage? You can't do a risk assessment on this as you know all phones going out here are defective and can come back. If Apple finds that it is an issue, they'll track it down and you'll replace all million displays. It's a stupid decision to do, and it'll cost.

Snake MD wrote:

Consider there were 40,000 users whose phones were bricked by an iOS update that wasn't thoroughly checked, and it is not hard to imagine there are just as many phones out there with screens that are not of the highest quality.

First, cite your source for those numbers.

Then, explain how a hardware manufacturing issue is in any way related to a software development issue.

I just made up the 500 defects for the purposes of the argument. You don't think Apple would agree if Foxconn said they could ship a huge additional number of phones on launch day relative to the number of users who might complain about it? After all, what did Apple say when Foxconn told them they could make a 7.1mm thick phone at the expense of a protruding camera lens? If Apple said OK to that, why is it so hard to believe they would say OK to a few additional users getting a screen that scratches easily, especially if Apple is willing to replace the phone as many posters have claimed? The truth is people get over these kinds of problems, and the number of defects goes down with time.

Snake MD wrote:

I just made up the 500 defects for the purposes of the argument. You don't think Apple would agree if Foxconn said they could ship a huge additional number of phones on launch day relative to the number of users who might complain about it? After all, what did Apple say when Foxconn told them they could make a 7.1mm thick phone at the expense of a protruding camera lens? If Apple said OK to that, why is it so hard to believe they would say OK to a few additional users getting a screen that scratches easily, especially if Apple is willing to replace the phone as many posters have claimed? The truth is people get over these kinds of problems, and the number of defects goes down with time.

You really need to stop making stuff up as it doesn't help any argument. Also, Foxconn didn't tell Apple they could make it 7.1 mm thick at the expense of a protruding lens. Someone else inside of Apple already made that decision. The designer of the phone, Ive, tells Foxconn (indirectly through Apple) what to make and how to make it. Not the other way around. Your arguments are fallacious at this point.

People get over the problems, yes, but if they put out 1 million defect phones, they have to replace a certain percentage of them at some point (it costs manpower and raw material cost, not cheap).

It was widely reported that "fewer than 40,000 users" were affected by the iOS 8.01 problem, whatever that means. Maybe it was only 39,500 users but I doubt it was less than 30,000, or they would have said that Here are some links:

http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/25/6841455/ios-8-0-2-available-to-fix-iphone-6-mo dels

http://mashable.com/2014/09/25/apple-fixes-ios-8-update/

http://www.macrumors.com/2014/09/25/apple-releases-ios-8-0-2/

I'm not implying there is a link between HW and SW defects. I'm pointing out a general trend in complaints about the quality of Apple phones across the board.

OK boss. I'll shut up now and wait for the conclusion to this saga.

Few notes, phones were not bricked... Cellular service and fingerprint sensors were what stopped working. Also, they were still signing 8.0.1 at the time, users could find an IPA and restore quickly to that OS. The second 8.0.1 was withdrawn, they could have restored to 8.0.1 without finding an IPA. So 40000 phones were not bricked, they were affected. There is a difference unfortunately since the phones still had some functionality. A bricked phone has no functionality and generally isn't responsive.

8.0.1 was a screw up on Apple's part, it was a mistake, it never should have happened. Few people had their phones bricked.

Also, if you aren't assuming a link between SW and HW issues, why bring it up?