A petition asking Apple to consider discounts for people with disabilities.

I could get behind a nonprofit organization handling something like this, whether they bought old stock in bulk, directly from Apple, or from a 3rd-party vendor, and distributed them as needed to those who in fact, needed them. Old stock could be sold at a discounted price because, it's literally just sitting around, collecting dust. Also to note, these devices are designed to last a while. Never mind the trend that persists where everybody absolutely must have a brand new phone, every single year, like it's some kind of fire sale. Just for an example, I am using a three year-old model, though I only bought it last year, and granted it was brand new, but I imagine a used or refurbished device Could have been purchased for as little as $100, this is considering that I only paid about $400, give or take a few dollars. Also, to support my point about the longevity of these devices, I have a 5year-old device, an iPhone SE 2nd GEN, that currently is running the latest public build of iOS 26. Bugs aside, it runs really well, for such an old device.

TLDR,
I believe a nonprofit organization could do this, especially when considering used and/or refurbished older devices.

Thanks for reading. 🙂

When I was working as a social worker, I tended to get the iPhone the next year. I went from the 4, 4s, 5, 7, xs, 11 pro max, 12 pro, 13 pro and 16 pro max.Since I do not work any more, I make sure get deals from Verizon, the 13 pro and 16 pro max were nice deal. Long live cats.

But not jobs, no. If they can't pay their own way, how could we trust them at work? sighted people are clearly superior when it comes to employment. Hmm. when it comes to equal rights, too, for that matter. Special treatment and equal rights aren't exactly compatible, are they? sure. give them their freebee iPhone, Pat them on their poor little heads and send them back to their corner with their little tin cups selling pencils. Smile. And they'll have their charity iPhones to keep them quiet!

Hello,

Most importantly, Apple is not obligated to support the visually impaired and blind community at all. The fact that they do at tremendous cost to their bottom line is already a cost benefit to the blind. Microsoft has taken a different approach to supporting the blind community, and have allowed after market options such as JAWS--very expensive, or NVDA--virtually free to fill in the gap here. Microsoft is making small incremental improvements to Narrator, but it is not really ready for prime time. So I commend Apple for including accessibility right in the OS be it iOS, TVOS, or MacOS. One can look at it like this. The fact that you do not have to purchase additional software to make your stuff accessible is already a discount.

So i would stop complaining.

feofil

Secondly, Ap

I mean, in some ways, sure. But you don't need those assumptions. Apple is getting more money than it would if J. Random BLindy never buys a phone, or has a phone bought for them. Again, whether that's enough to justify such a program is another matter entirely. I'm not arguing that it does, or that we should have a discount. It may be entirely the case that it's just not enough money in the end.

I'm just saying, what Apple gets out of it is really pretty straightforward, even if what they get ends up at three dollar per phone, and that's nowhere near enough to make the discount a sensible option. Let's assume they get $3 per phone and a thousand people a year get phones who wouldn't normally.

Now let's assume they lose a third of that to overhead and people taking advantage of the program. $2K a year wouldn't be enough to justify such a program. But it's a simple fact that it would be $2K a year more than Apple had without the program.

Really my only assumption is that the discount would allow people to get phones who wouldn't otherwise get phones. Assuming that, it readily follows that this means more money for Apple, however much that turns out to be. But as can be seen above, there are all sorts of considerations that could mean this doesn't really turn out to be a viable strategy for Apple to implement. That's all I'm saying. I'm not arguing for anything other than establishing that basic idea.

In fact, we *know* it would be taken advantage of, and we don't even have to make any assumptions about human nature or whatever. We have the test case of Microsoft offering a free upgrade to Windows 10 I believe, if you were using assistive tech. That got taken advantage of by people, I clearly recall getting into debates with them where they insisted it was no big deal because MS knew that would happen and had taken it into account. I argued, naturally enough, that it was to help people who couldn't afford upgrades and that they'd end up ruining the program for people who really needed it.

That is the question. I see more people becoming entitle for some reason. At the end of the day, the discussion can go on to the end of the universe and apple will not do so. Bella the cat has a better chance of coming back from heaven than apple doing so. PS if someone does not like my comment feel free to move on, so I will not get an email from Michael about negative views. Long live cats.

this is a horable idea, yes iphones are expensive but you can just get one through your carier if you really want one that badly, or just use android

people should helping us get jobs then we can buy our own stuff like everyone else

I want to be honest here. From reading through the thread, the only thing it has shown me is that, sadly, we as a community are often very selfish and individualistic — and we lack empathy and perspective. Many of the voices dominating this conversation are coming from privileged countries, countries where people already have access to services that are deeply embedded into their daily lives and infrastructure. They can sign up for independent living programs, trade in devices, and benefit from systems that simply don’t exist for many of us living in developing countries. Yes, many avenues have been mentioned — the iPhone Upgrade Program, discounted phone offers, trade-ins, carrier deals — but those ideas don’t exist where I live. That’s why a lot of the people speaking so boldly here don’t feel the full effects of being blind. From where they stand, blindness is just a quirk — a personality trait anyone can “overcome.” Or, at the very least, it’s “not that bad,” because they’re not feeling the full impact of the inaccessibility that exists elsewhere. As someone else pointed out, even if Apple wanted to give away iPhones to blind individuals — say, upgrading every two or three years, or maybe providing a model a few years back — that’s still fair. They wouldn’t need to give away the latest or greatest or the one with the most storage. Apple is a company that makes billions of dollars, and I promise you that even if they gave away some older or even new iPhones, they would not go broke. In another comment, someone said, “Well, if Apple’s going to give away iPhones, should others also give away clothes, food, or furniture?” My answer is: why not? Maybe I’m idealistic or naïve, but I’d rather my money — and leftover stock — go to individuals in need, or to communities altogether, than to some greedy corporation padding its own profits. Do I know if Apple should do this? Not exactly. I'm sorry, but the specific answer to this question is well above my pay grade, but even if they did, nobody is forcing you to participate. I’m far more concerned about the attitudes I’ve seen here. It’s disheartening to see how we think as a community — or as people, really. I don’t expect everyone to agree, but many here need to step out of their bubbles and look at the situation from the perspective of those who aren’t half as privileged.
Many of the people talking here, I assume, once had their eyesight before they lost it. That’s difficult — no doubt about it. But they never earned their eyesight any more than I earned my blindness. I’ve been blind from birth, but that doesn’t make my reality any easier. There’s no handbook for parents or caretakers on how to raise a blind child. If you don’t have people around you who are willing to invest in your education, mobility, and technology — the basic resources that give you quality of life and purpose — you’re not going to make it. When they make the wrong choices, or they don't make any choices whatsoever, you're the one who is going to suffer, and unlike someone who is able to see who is able to move around a bit easier, you don't necessarily have that agency. None of my problems Were easier because I was born blind. A baby can’t feed themselves, change their own diapers, or enroll themselves in school. If your parents or caregivers don’t see the need to invest in you, it won’t happen.

Now, let’s talk about the cost of an iPhone. The latest iPhone, even with the lowest storage, would cost me around $150,000 to $200,000 in my local currency — at best . While it might be difficult for someone in the U.S. to find $1,300 or $1,500, there is no way on Earth I could afford an iPhone that costs the equivalent of $150,000. Even a refurbished or secondhand iPhone here costs around $80,000 to $100,000. Take away the screen readers, the accessible transportation, the Social Security, the housing programs, and all the other safety nets you have in America — and then tell me how “fortunate” you are. None of the people on this thread are smarter than I am. None of you are more curious, motivated, or determined. The only difference is that you were lucky enough to be born in the right country, at the right time, and to be helped by the right people. What I’m hearing from this thread — intentionally or not — sounds like, “Those of you in developing countries didn’t work hard enough,” or “You’re not advocating to your government.” That’s far from true. Some governments will never prioritize individuals like us. And again, I’d rather be poor with my eyesight than blind. Because blindness often comes with poverty, lack of education, and lack of access to resources. Many blind people live in rural areas — they can’t pick up and move. They don’t live that “American lifestyle” where you can drive at sixteen and own a car. They’ll likely never afford one, not at eighteen, not even at twenty-one. There are no after-school jobs at Starbucks or McDonald’s to save money for college. Those systems simply don’t exist. So when I hear people from privileged backgrounds saying, “Just relocate,” or “Go apply for assistance,” I wonder if they have any idea what they’re talking about.

Even walking on the road here is dangerous. We don’t have proper sidewalks. We walk in the streets — where there are potholes, gullies, construction zones, animal waste, motorbikes parked in the way, and other hazards. And yet, some people seem to think that with “proper orientation and mobility training,” blind people here could navigate that. Imagine, I don't shop at the supermarket. I go downtown in a crowded open market. It's often messy and very noisy, with individuals calling out $50 per pound or $100 for a dozen green bananas.

I’m not saying it’s easy to go blind later in life. Transitioning is hard — but just as you didn’t earn your eyesight, I didn’t choose my blindness. A baby doesn’t have agency. If you don’t have educated, supportive people to advocate for you from birth — to relocate if necessary, to enroll you in proper programs, to expose you to technology — then your life path is severely limited. It's not only ignorance or apathy — sometimes it’s language barriers, bureaucracy, or lack of options. And for those who think relocation is easy: it isn’t. Getting a visa to the U.S. is nearly impossible without a large bank balance. The process is long and expensive, and if you get rejected, you lose that money. Even if I could move, where would I go? Another Caribbean country? Who would I stay with? Many of us don’t have family abroad. And without support, you risk ending up in abusive or unsafe situations — just to survive. You keep saying, “Go to your government, demand better.” Do you realize how disconnected that sounds? The only thing you did differently was being born in a country that cared about accessibility and human rights. It’s not for lack of trying. Many of us are barely making enough to eat. Some don’t have access to clean water. There’s no Starbucks, no McDonald’s, no Target, no Walmart where we can grab a bottle of clean water. When I read these comments — dismissive, privileged, and self-satisfied — it makes me incredibly sad. Because it means a lot of people are ignorant of how the world works. We are angry, we are tired, and we are unkind — even to our own community. If a company has leftover stock, whether it’s food, clothing, furniture, or phones, and they throw it away rather than give it to someone in need — that’s a moral failure. Companies lose millions every year to wasted inventory. Why not redirect that to people who need it? You cannot materialize services that do not exist — and may never exist in your lifetime. Even if every person with a disability who could work had a job, there would still never be enough jobs for everyone. The world is dynamic and ever-changing, and those of us living in poverty simply cannot keep up. So yes, I’ll say it again: I would rather be poor with my eyesight than blind, every single day of the week. Because blindness, especially in the developing world — and especially for women — compounds poverty, neglect, and vulnerability.
Listen, I don’t know whether or not this is Apple’s responsibility — but I don’t think that matters. Humanity is everybody’s responsibility. Yes, Apple is not a charity, but I also support the idea of humanitarian organizations buying Apple’s products in bulk and then reselling them at a lower cost. Where I think things went wrong is that when the topic of disabilities came up, it suddenly meant every single disability. But I can’t take on the fight for every single disability. So I’m going to be selfish here for a hot second and say, let’s prioritize the blind community. And if any other community wants to fight for their own inclusion or access, then they are free to do so. If they think they want or need an iPhone more or less, then fine — let’s leave it at that. I’m not here to debate whether Apple should or shouldn’t do this. But even if there’s no direct benefit to Apple — let’s say, for the sake of argument, there’s absolutely no benefit other than simply doing good — why are you all against it ? That’s what I’m trying to understand. Because everything I’ve read in the thread — and please don’t tell me otherwise, because I’ve seen it — basically points to this attitude: “If I don’t want or need a service, then nobody else should get access to it either.” And that’s a deeply troubling mindset. The fact is, there were legitimate contracts and legitimate programs in place that people were taking advantage of — and yes, some of those programs gave away free or discounted products. But that doesn’t mean accessibility shouldn’t be prioritized. I highly doubt Apple would ever “take accessibility away” because of this. Whether or not you’re paying into their system, I don’t think they’d drop accessibility — they haven’t done that yet, and I don’t believe they will. Maybe I think differently from most people here, but my priority isn’t feelings or emotions. Even if Apple — or any other company — was pressured or “bullied” into providing these tools, or even furniture or other essential resources, my only concern is that they do the right thing. Sometimes you have to force people to do what is morally right — even if they’re not doing it for the right reasons. Millionaires, billionaires, and even everyday sighted people take advantage of systems every single day — simply because they can. And that’s the power imbalance. They have access and we don’t. They have power and we don’t. I might never step foot in America, or even on a plane. So what? Am I supposed to be okay with not having access to opportunities — like being able to travel at least once in my life — simply because I was born in the wrong country?

I don’t have all the answers, and please don’t come for me. I don’t have any special loyalty to Apple or any other company. But what’s concerning is how everyone seems to be bashing the entire idea — simply because Apple supposedly “doesn’t get anything” from it. But they don’t need to get anything. That’s literally the point. They already have the money. If this proposal had been made and Apple said, “No, we’re not doing a discount program because we’re already doing too much,” then fine — that would be one thing. But I don’t see any harm in people having access to a program like this, even if the iPhones were given away every five years or so. I’m not more entitled than anyone else, and I don’t see myself as a charity case either. I don’t care whether people call it entitlement or employment or whatever — just give me what I need, let me live my life, and stop making it harder than it already is. If any of the top executives at Apple, Microsoft, Google, or any other major company heard that they were going blind tomorrow morning, and the only way to keep their eyesight was to donate money or give away their stock, I guarantee that many of them would empty their entire bank accounts in a heartbeat. If these individuals were blind, they would never have half of what they do today, and that's the truth. Your eyesight is priceless. I’m using this as a hypothetical example, but you get the idea. These same people would give anything to keep their sight. So why act like investing in the blind community is such an unreasonable concept? I’m not saying that sighted people can’t live without their vision, but let’s not kid ourselves — losing your sight is one of the hardest disabilities to live with. Believe me, it can be a massive challenge. Even with support, it’s hard. Without support, it’s nearly impossible.

I’m not saying it’s easy to get help. I know it’s not. Even in countries with programs and services, people still fall through the cracks. There are blind people in America, Canada, the UK, and Europe who still can’t access what they need — I know that. It’s not about pretending that everyone has access. I understand that resources, technology, and time are limited. Some people will get help, and others won’t. Some will benefit from these systems, and some will never even see a fraction of that support. So I’m not sitting here thinking, “Oh my God, everyone in America has it easy.” What I am asking is that you consider another perspective. Even if there’s no benefit to these companies — no profit, no incentive — just the fact that they can help should be reason enough to do so. I’m not saying they’re a charity. I’m saying people need to survive. And even as a blind person, you can’t take me out of my Caribbean country and drop me in America and expect me to start working the next week or even the next month. It takes time — time that I probably don’t have, and patience that others probably don’t have for me. I’m not saying I have all the right answers, but honestly, maybe it would be simpler for companies to pay blind individuals directly via sponsorships — maybe twice the amount they’d normally earn — because life is unfair. I know this is a big idea, but what I’m saying is: if 70% of the blind community is unemployed in America, what is happening? I don’t believe 70% of the blind community is unemployed because they are not trying, but the underlying point stands: no matter how much technology or resources exist, if employers won’t hire or accommodate you, how is anyone supposed to improve their situation? If you sit at home for years with no opportunities, what are you supposed to do? You can’t keep training for jobs that may never come. If the job doesn’t appear until you’re 35 or 40, will you be able to assimilate into workplace culture then? I need to survive right now. If a blind person has been isolated for years and never practiced problem-solving or workplace skills, how are they expected to adapt quickly? Maybe such a program can’t solve everything, but I’m 100% for prioritizing access and employment for blind people so they can afford independence and pay back into the system. If that isn’t happening, then why not put money directly into people’s hands and let them live their lives? Anyone who wants to re-enter the system later can do so. To the people from developing countries: how do we get infrastructure into your hands? How do you tell a 20- or 30-year-old to rebuild their whole identity when they never had support from day one? If your parents couldn’t invest in your education or mobility early on, how do you suddenly uproot and relocate somewhere else to start over? It’s not simple. How do you prioritize learning Excel or job skills when you can’t reliably find food or clean water? People need to live and have some enjoyment — it’s not all work, all the time. The commentary I’m seeing basically says, “If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.” That’s a cruel mindset.

Look: iPhones aren’t a complete solution, but imagine Apple giving a blind person an iPhone every five years. Even if the device isn’t the absolute latest model, the access and tools that come with it would be life-changing. I’m not demanding miracles, I’m asking for practical empathy. If companies can afford to discount or donate a portion of stock or devices, why not do it? You won’t lose your fortune by giving a percentage away. If top executives found out they’d lose their eyesight tomorrow, many would empty bank accounts to save it—so why not act now and help people who already need assistance? I’m not pretending to have all the answers or the logistics sorted. I get that this might not be pragmatic at scale, and fine—if it won’t work pragmatically, say so. But what’s upsetting is that most reactions are reflexively negative, dismissing the idea out of hand. If Apple gave an iPhone to a blind person every five years, who would it hurt? Nobody is being forced to take it. Nobody is losing anything essential. And the benefit—actual, tangible accessibility—would be enormous for the recipient. I can’t pass on my blindness to you, and you can’t pass your sight to me. I can’t hand over my condition like it’s a choice. I can't give you cancer, or bipolar, or ADHD, or autism, and obviously, I'm not saying that these disabilities are any less, but is is very easy to lose your eyesight. If companies can help, even in small, structured ways, we should be pushing for it rather than reflexively shutting the idea down.

First mistake is I do not consider this a community but a group of people who became blind. Just a group of people who share tips, ideas and so on about a device that we use. We do not have much in common with each other beside using apple devices. I am sure someone will indicate that I am negative and will complain about it, Apparently even when I sign out with Long live cats, some object. This is a very interesting topic but of the end of the day, is just talk. Long live cats.

the pospectives raised here are interesting, but I have one question to ask, not out of malice, I’m genuinely seeing an issue here, we’re comparing education discounts and we want something similar to it for disabled, now, some excelant points have been raised about people that could barely get an iphone’s price in a year, my question is, this is troublsome, because while education discounts exist, I’ve used it, it’s barely a thing, for example, for the cheapest ipad it’s not even a $100 discount, maybe if you go higher it increases, but for the iphone it’s going to be $100 or so, so even if apple agreed, I’m doubtful it’ll be a big enough discount that it drasticly improves the lives of the ones that struggle getting a device, and yes, I’m worried about us being considered less because we pay less if this thing happened, but honestly there are so many valid points everywhere I don’t even know who to agree or disagree with anymore lol.

Apple has never been known for discounts, not even for the regular people. Maybe in blue moon. Most discounts you find are in amazon or others stores online in the US. My AirPod pro 2 that I got from amazon was 180$ instead of what it cost. Airtags from amazon.

one form of discounts exists, education discount, directly from apple. Through it, you can only buy an ipad or a macbook, nothing else is included. They made it because they desperately want ipads and macbooks to be used with education that's why they want to make it sound more appieling. But from what I've scene unless if there is a limited time offer like the one I got with my ipad air where it lets you either get a free excessary like an airpods 4 or pencel, or if it was more than $100, it discounts it for you, got the magic keyboard for $120 instead of $250, but if you can't find something like that well the discount is... Lackluster to say the least. Still it's better than nothing if you're studying. From what I can tell it's nearly 10%? Or a bit less. I remember on the ipad air it discounted $80 or so, but when checking macbook prices it was nearly $130.
also, to clarify, you need to show them proof, they asked for a university ID card, and another time they asked for my university email showing mail messages received from the university recently.