iPhone的防水性到底如何？
近几年，苹果公司一直自称iPhone可以抗水，但它说的话到底是真是假呢？
意大利反垄断机构AGCM近期指出苹果的抗水性能其实言过其实。11月30日，旨在保护消费者的AGCM向苹果公司开出了一张1000万欧元（约1200万美元）的罚单。该机构认为苹果对消费者存有误导，苹果用户依然存在因为进水而导致手机受损的案例，但苹果也并没有为其提供保修服务。
从2016年iPhone 7上市起，苹果便宣称自己为iPhone手机提供了“IP67”级别的防护。（I代表抗尘，P代表抗水。）
据苹果宣称资料，具有“IP67”级别防护的iPhone能够持续30分钟浸泡在深达1米的水中。2018年上市的iPhone XS及后续型号被其顺势定义为“IP68”，据宣传可以承受2米水深。到了今年的iPhone 12，苹果更是官宣其抗水性能能够达到6米深。
文字游戏
如今也有很多的网上说法在为苹果申辩，称其所谓的“抗水性能”是“理论意义上的”而不是“实际意义上的”，并指出苹果本身从未用“waterproof”（防水）一词描述过iPhone，只是说“water resistance”（抗水）,甚至对可以游泳携带的Apple Watch也用的是“抗水”而不是“防水”。
但意大利监管机构AGCM仍然认为苹果的描述用词不够谨慎。AGCM指出，苹果违反了相关法规，并没有向消费者解释清楚所谓的“抗水性能”到底可以实现到何种地步。
iPhone 8理论上的确能够在水下待上半小时而毫发无伤，但前提是水要完全静止且纯净，一切都要符合实验室条件。
苹果也确实做出了免责声明，称iPhone并不可以完全保证不受进水损伤，但AGCM认为苹果自卖自夸式的抗水广告明显算的上是对消费者的一种欺骗。
此外，AGCM还表示，苹果拒绝维修进水手机的行为也侵犯了用户的合法保修权利。该机构此番要求苹果为其违规行为支付1000万欧元，并希望苹果在其意大利官网上的iPhone界面中贴上关于本次裁决的声明。
而苹果官方却对此次裁决不予置评。（财富中文网）
编译：陈怡轩
近几年，苹果公司一直自称iPhone可以抗水，但它说的话到底是真是假呢？
意大利反垄断机构AGCM近期指出苹果的抗水性能其实言过其实。11月30日，旨在保护消费者的AGCM向苹果公司开出了一张1000万欧元（约1200万美元）的罚单。该机构认为苹果对消费者存有误导，苹果用户依然存在因为进水而导致手机受损的案例，但苹果也并没有为其提供保修服务。
从2016年iPhone 7上市起，苹果便宣称自己为iPhone手机提供了“IP67”级别的防护。（I代表抗尘，P代表抗水。）
据苹果宣称资料，具有“IP67”级别防护的iPhone能够持续30分钟浸泡在深达1米的水中。2018年上市的iPhone XS及后续型号被其顺势定义为“IP68”，据宣传可以承受2米水深。到了今年的iPhone 12，苹果更是官宣其抗水性能能够达到6米深。
文字游戏
如今也有很多的网上说法在为苹果申辩，称其所谓的“抗水性能”是“理论意义上的”而不是“实际意义上的”，并指出苹果本身从未用“waterproof”（防水）一词描述过iPhone，只是说“water resistance”（抗水）,甚至对可以游泳携带的Apple Watch也用的是“抗水”而不是“防水”。
但意大利监管机构AGCM仍然认为苹果的描述用词不够谨慎。AGCM指出，苹果违反了相关法规，并没有向消费者解释清楚所谓的“抗水性能”到底可以实现到何种地步。
iPhone 8理论上的确能够在水下待上半小时而毫发无伤，但前提是水要完全静止且纯净，一切都要符合实验室条件。
苹果也确实做出了免责声明，称iPhone并不可以完全保证不受进水损伤，但AGCM认为苹果自卖自夸式的抗水广告明显算的上是对消费者的一种欺骗。
此外，AGCM还表示，苹果拒绝维修进水手机的行为也侵犯了用户的合法保修权利。该机构此番要求苹果为其违规行为支付1000万欧元，并希望苹果在其意大利官网上的iPhone界面中贴上关于本次裁决的声明。
而苹果官方却对此次裁决不予置评。（财富中文网）
编译：陈怡轩
Apple has been offering water-resistant iPhones for several years now, but are its protection claims actually justified?
The Italian Antitrust Authority (AGCM) thinks Cupertino has been overstating the handsets' water resistance. The agency, which is in charge of consumer protection in Italy, on November 30 fined Apple €10 million ($12 million) for misleading its customers—and for not providing standard warranty assistance to customers whose iPhones were damaged by liquids.
Since 2016's iPhone 7 range, Apple's smartphones have been promoted as offering at least "IP67" protection. (The "IP" part stands for "ingress protection," while the first digit refers to dust protection and the second to water protection.)
A phone with IP67 protection can be continually immersed in water of up to 1 meter (3 feet 3 inches) in depth. According to Apple's promotional material, this is fine for up to 30 minutes. For 2018's iPhone XS and subsequent models, the advertised protection is IP68, meaning a maximum depth of over 1 meter—it grades up from the XS's claimed 2-meter water resistance to the new iPhone 12's 6 meters.
Lab conditions
Now, despite what many online sources allege, Apple's water resistance does not equal waterproofness, which is why Apple never claims its iPhones are waterproof—it doesn't even use that word for the Apple Watch, which is meant to be worn while swimming.
But, focusing on the models from the iPhone 8 to last year's iPhone 11, the Italian regulator said Apple still wasn't being cautious enough. It said the tech giant broke the rules by failing to tell its customers that the claimed water resistance is not normally achievable.
So an iPhone 8 can theoretically stay a meter underwater for half an hour and emerge unscathed, but only if the water is entirely still and pure, like in a laboratory setting.
Apple does give a disclaimer that the iPhone's guarantee won't cover damage caused by liquids, but the agency said the company's "emphatic advertising boast of water resistance" still means customers were deceived.
On top of that, the AGCM said Apple was infringing on customers' legal warranty rights by refusing to help them out when their phones were damaged by water or other liquids. It told Apple to pay a total of €10 million for the infringements, and to publish a notice of the ruling on its Italian website's iPhone section.
Apple refused to comment on the fine.
