> When you first enroll in Apple Upgrade, you can trade in an eligible device you own to lower your monthly payments for your initial lease term. Your trade-in credit will be applied by Klarna across your payments for the length of your initial lease term. If your trade-in isn't returned or isn't in good working condition, your monthly lease payment will be updated by Klarna to reflect the adjusted value.
Your trade-in credit will only apply to your initial lease term. You cannot trade-in a device when you upgrade.
It all depends on the trade in value whether or not this is a something I would consider, but a klarna powered service is general is very not interesting to me. Klarna has been a big part of very real financial damage for the younger generations.
What I really want is a trade-in system that pays out closer to what I'd get selling my Macbook on Craigslist or something. I want to stay within Apple's ecosystem and upgrade regularly, but I'd end up having to shell out nearly full price every time to do so, so I don't upgrade and no money changes hands at all. If they weren't quite so greedy with it, they could easily extract hundreds from me per year.
It seems like this might be what you're looking for then, depending on how the prices shake out.
What's interesting is that it somewhat reduces the pressure on Apple to have compelling new devices, if a large chunk of customers are constantly returning leased devices and getting new ones.
what is interesting is if this code for restriction for leased devices is also contained for regular phones so they could do the same to those with regular phones....
Are you concerned that they are going to do this to purchased devices? That would seem to be a PR disaster if it happened by accident, and a catastrophe if they ever did it on purpose. I assume there would be many safeguards in place to ensure that it cannot happen on purchased devices (though devices purchased on a payment plan could be subject to it).
I would be more worried about a company doing things that could be done surreptitiously, like spying on users. That could happen for years without the user knowing.
Nerfing a device, OTOH, is very obvious and would create a huge backlash. The safeguards would not be in place solely for the benefit of the user, but also for the benefit of the company.
What an interesting analogy. What would Apple stand to gain by nerfing phones that customers had already fully paid for? Is the theory that Apple would hold the devices hostage until more payments were made? That would seem to be an unmitigated disaster for the company.
With batterygate, there was a plausible reason for Apple to do what it did, but also self-interest that could have caused it. Here, there is no remotely discernible self-interest that would lead Apple to nuke its reputation by holding fully-paid devices hostage.
You missed the most important part: what Apple fanbois would not just tolerate it but would invent a way to rationalize it and sell it to themselves under 'it's actually good for us'. Just like they did during with Batterygate and a charging port on a mouse' bottom.
AppleInsider
https://appleinsider.com › articles › 24 › 10 › 29 › apples-magic-mouse-charging-port-design-has-never-been-a-big-deal
Keeping the Magic Mouse charging port on the base is fine
Oct 29, 2024 The newly updated Apple Magic Mouse now has a USB-C charging port, but it's still on the bottom — *and that still doesn't matter.*
EDIT: I don't know if Apple would find a way to actually use it but regarding "PR disaster if it happened by accident, and a catastrophe if they ever did it on purpose" - it would be not.
OK cool, well LMK what the reason would be for Apple to ever do that, and I'll be happy to walk through your thought experiment about how fanboys would love to have their devices nerfed.
I don't know if you have seen the EDIT in my previous comment.
> what the reason would be for Apple to ever do that
There is one glaring reason - money. I don't know if they would do it but there is no question what they would at least think about it, especially considering they do/would have the knobs to do it.
the M5 Ultra will not have the 1.5TB RAM since they are not making any interposers for combining M5 Ultra Chips like the did for the M3, also there will be no M6 Ultra Chips
> When you first enroll in Apple Upgrade, you can trade in an eligible device you own to lower your monthly payments for your initial lease term. Your trade-in credit will be applied by Klarna across your payments for the length of your initial lease term. If your trade-in isn't returned or isn't in good working condition, your monthly lease payment will be updated by Klarna to reflect the adjusted value. Your trade-in credit will only apply to your initial lease term. You cannot trade-in a device when you upgrade.
It all depends on the trade in value whether or not this is a something I would consider, but a klarna powered service is general is very not interesting to me. Klarna has been a big part of very real financial damage for the younger generations.
What I really want is a trade-in system that pays out closer to what I'd get selling my Macbook on Craigslist or something. I want to stay within Apple's ecosystem and upgrade regularly, but I'd end up having to shell out nearly full price every time to do so, so I don't upgrade and no money changes hands at all. If they weren't quite so greedy with it, they could easily extract hundreds from me per year.
It seems like this might be what you're looking for then, depending on how the prices shake out.
What's interesting is that it somewhat reduces the pressure on Apple to have compelling new devices, if a large chunk of customers are constantly returning leased devices and getting new ones.
Notably, Apple seems to be poised to nerf devices after a number of missed payments. [1]
1: https://9to5mac.com/2026/07/21/ios-27-code-suggests-apple-co...
what is interesting is if this code for restriction for leased devices is also contained for regular phones so they could do the same to those with regular phones....
Are you concerned that they are going to do this to purchased devices? That would seem to be a PR disaster if it happened by accident, and a catastrophe if they ever did it on purpose. I assume there would be many safeguards in place to ensure that it cannot happen on purchased devices (though devices purchased on a payment plan could be subject to it).
We don’t live in a time of safeguards my friend
I would be more worried about a company doing things that could be done surreptitiously, like spying on users. That could happen for years without the user knowing.
Nerfing a device, OTOH, is very obvious and would create a huge backlash. The safeguards would not be in place solely for the benefit of the user, but also for the benefit of the company.
Did you forgot Batterygate already?
What an interesting analogy. What would Apple stand to gain by nerfing phones that customers had already fully paid for? Is the theory that Apple would hold the devices hostage until more payments were made? That would seem to be an unmitigated disaster for the company.
With batterygate, there was a plausible reason for Apple to do what it did, but also self-interest that could have caused it. Here, there is no remotely discernible self-interest that would lead Apple to nuke its reputation by holding fully-paid devices hostage.
You missed the most important part: what Apple fanbois would not just tolerate it but would invent a way to rationalize it and sell it to themselves under 'it's actually good for us'. Just like they did during with Batterygate and a charging port on a mouse' bottom.
Just did a little test: https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=apple+mouse+charging+port+b...
And the first result is:
EDIT: I don't know if Apple would find a way to actually use it but regarding "PR disaster if it happened by accident, and a catastrophe if they ever did it on purpose" - it would be not.OK cool, well LMK what the reason would be for Apple to ever do that, and I'll be happy to walk through your thought experiment about how fanboys would love to have their devices nerfed.
> would love to have their devices nerfed
I provided an article on how they would love it.
I don't know if you have seen the EDIT in my previous comment.
> what the reason would be for Apple to ever do that
There is one glaring reason - money. I don't know if they would do it but there is no question what they would at least think about it, especially considering they do/would have the knobs to do it.
It is going to be quite interesting when Apple introduces Mac Studio with M5 Ultra chip and 1.5TB RAM.
the M5 Ultra will not have the 1.5TB RAM since they are not making any interposers for combining M5 Ultra Chips like the did for the M3, also there will be no M6 Ultra Chips