or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Smoking may void Applecare warranty
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Smoking may void Applecare warranty

post #1 of 332
Thread Starter 
Apple owners claim that their Applecare warranties have been refused due to "health risks of second hand smoke."

The Consumerist has reported that two separate readers have sent in accounts of being refused computer repair service due to the presence of damage related to smoking. The readers were reportedly told that computers with evidence of smoke damage could not be worked on because Apple considers them to be health hazards, and to have workers repair the computer would be an OSHA violation.

Employees at one Apple store reportedly told a customer that her computer was "beyond economical repair due to tar from cigarette smoke."

Both customers sent letters directly to Steve Jobs' office and both were declined service even though they had active Applecare warranties. One reader received a response advising that "nicotine is on OSHA's list of hazardous substances and Apple would not require an employee to repair anything deemed hazardous to their health."

Apple has not officially responded to any inquiries about this policy and it is unclear if it is a blanket policy or if there is a workable threshold for the amount of smoke damage present.
post #2 of 332
post #3 of 332
I can understand this is His Steveness himself was doing all the repairs.
post #4 of 332
just another big corporation trying to screw its customers out of costly warranties...

Ever since the inception of the warranty, companies have been finding ways any way they can to not honor them.

This is a nice and simple way of voiding your warranty even if there is no proof of anything. Next up...if you ever sneeze around your computer the warranty is null! Afterall...it might be a flu hazard...
post #5 of 332
This ought to be good reading.
post #6 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisTheXIV View Post

just another big corporation trying to screw its customers out of costly warranties...

Ever since the inception of the warranty, companies have been finding ways any way they can to not honor them.

This is a nice and simple way of voiding your warranty even if there is no proof of anything. Next up...if you ever sneeze around your computer the warranty is null! Afterall...it might be a flu hazard...

I totally understand where Apple is coming from. I work on PC's at work and I have had to work on users notebooks that looked, and smelled like they were using it as an ash tray. Its disgusting! I smell and feel dirty after working on it.
post #7 of 332
Well this is great - I can't remember how many times I would open a laptop and find the grossest shit inside the chassis.
post #8 of 332
This is truly mind-boggling, if true! Corporatism at its worst. Can't they wear some gloves and a mask?! Where are we heading next? Apple campus is going to be sealed off in an antiseptic bubble?

At the least, I hope Apple refunded their money.
post #9 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisTheXIV View Post

just another big corporation trying to screw its customers out of costly warranties...

Ever since the inception of the warranty, companies have been finding ways any way they can to not honor them.

This is a nice and simple way of voiding your warranty even if there is no proof of anything. Next up...if you ever sneeze around your computer the warranty is null! Afterall...it might be a flu hazard...

Not likely. They didn't ask whether the customer smoked. The damage from the tar was severe enough to warrant refusal. That means visible evidence was discovered.

If nicotine is on the list of health hazards, then Apple has a case. A proper reply to Apple's position is to discover whether the amount of nicotine found on the PC is sufficient enough to cause harm.

I understand that second hand smoke is a health hazard, but Apple's position on finding evidence of nicotine may be jumping the gun as trace amounts may not pose a risk of injury. Radiation is a health hazard, but all our devices output some amount of the stuff. Nicotine cannot be an "all or none" case.

This is not a case to blatantly refuse service, this is a case whether tar found from second hand smoke is sufficient to hurt a technician. I am sure there exist cases where the customer smokes but their PC was repaired. It seems likely that the PCs refused had large amounts of tar.
post #10 of 332
ZZzzzzz . . .

Another installment of Strange But True.

If cigarette smoke residue has rendered the unit unsafe as per regulations, then that's that.
post #11 of 332
Just quit smoking, it's that simple. Smoking does not do anything for the smoker, so why should anyone who does not smoke work for hours on a product that is potentially hazardous to his or her health.
If you have asthma or in any way allergic to smoking, even buying and reading a used book from a smoking home, can cause you serious health problem. I know a car dealership that charges extra to work on any smoker vehicle.

Quit smoking. The only thing that will happen to you is that you will live longer with less health-related problems. And someone else do not have to suffer because you chose to suffocate your life.
post #12 of 332
It’s one thing to refuse service because excessive tar actually caused the failure (I’ve seen some disgusting stained walls in smokers’ homes). Maybe that can happen, hard as it is to believe.

It’s another to say that no safety gear exists which allows workers to repair the machine safely. I feel certain that a properly-equipped repair tech could work on tobacco-slimed hardware for many years without taking in any of the toxins.

I suppose Apple could say that supplying such gear (and the extra time involved) makes the repair too expensive to cover. That would be weird, though. Does Apple tell you when you buy the AppleCare plan that heavy smoking without ventilation may render your hardware impractical to repair? If not, then Apple shouldn’t be deciding AFTER the fact that it’s a problem. Smoking, sad to say, is still common, so it’s not an issue Apple should have overlooked. Apple should pay whatever it takes to repair the systems safely—or simply replace them—unless they’re going to give more fair warning about this issue.
post #13 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

Its one thing to refuse service because excessive tar actually caused the failure (Ive seen some disgusting stained walls in smokers homes). Maybe that can happen, hard as it is to believe.

Its another to say that no safety gear exists which allows workers to repair the machine safely. I feel certain that a properly-equipped repair tech could work on tobacco-slimed hardware for many years without taking in any of the toxins.

I suppose Apple could say that supplying such gear (and the extra time involved) makes the repair too expensive to cover. That would be weird, though. Does Apple tell you when you buy the AppleCare plan that heavy smoking without ventilation may render your hardware impractical to repair? If not, then Apple shouldnt be deciding AFTER the fact that its a problem. Smoking, sad to say, is still common, so its not an issue Apple should have overlooked. Apple should pay whatever it takes to repair the systems safelyor simply replace themunless theyre going to give more fair warning about this issue.

If the latter point exists then I dont see how the first point couldnt exist. In other words, if you machine is so fooled up and visually coated with nicotine tar inside and out within the 1yr or 3 yr plans then the warranty shouldnt cover this.

If I use my notebook at the pool and it gets wet or if I spill Coke on it then I dont expect the warranty to cover this sort of damage. This is not a problem with the machine, but how the machine has been treated.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #14 of 332
If the cigarette smoke residue was blatently evident, I'm not sure I understand why Apple chose to take the health hazard stance. The gunk that builds up from cigarette smoke is more than capable of jamming up fans and other mechanical devices in a PC. That alone would be enough to deny warranty - similar reasoning as to why they will deny warranty if they see that moisture sensors have been activated, regardless if the issue is really water related or not.
post #15 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

Its one thing to refuse service because excessive tar actually caused the failure (Ive seen some disgusting stained walls in smokers homes). Maybe that can happen, hard as it is to believe.

Its another to say that no safety gear exists which allows workers to repair the machine safely. I feel certain that a properly-equipped repair tech could work on tobacco-slimed hardware for many years without taking in any of the toxins.

I suppose Apple could say that supplying such gear (and the extra time involved) makes the repair too expensive to cover. That would be weird, though. Does Apple tell you when you buy the AppleCare plan that heavy smoking without ventilation may render your hardware impractical to repair? If not, then Apple shouldnt be deciding AFTER the fact that its a problem. Smoking, sad to say, is still common, so its not an issue Apple should have overlooked. Apple should pay whatever it takes to repair the systems safelyor simply replace themunless theyre going to give more fair warning about this issue.

I wouldn't be surprised if this is the result of a lawsuit (or settlement) that Apple has already been involved in. Or another company in the industry. It seems unlikely Apple would come up with this on their own without some sort of prior stimulus. Also, I have had a ridiculous number of Apple repairs done on Apple's dime. Apple is VERY good about warranty repairs and very frequently makes repairs even if Applecare has expired, the unit appears to have been damaged through neglect, or the piece isn't covered under Applecare because it is considered a wear and tear item. Apple rarely even bats an eye at these repair requests. Unlike many other companies, don't think this is an example of Apple coming up with a reason just so they don't have to cover something that would otherwise be covered. I could be wrong, but I would be surprised, based on my personal experiences with them, if this were the case.

Just my $0.02.
post #16 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by OC4Theo View Post

Just quit smoking, it's that simple. Smoking does not do anything for the smoker, so why should anyone who does not smoke work for hours on a product that is potentially hazardous to his or her health.

I don't smoke, but I find your attitude quite unbelievable. Last I checked, it is a perfectly legal activity. If smoking did "nothing" for the smoker -- e.g., give them pleasure -- why would they smoke in the first place? And 'hazardous to health?' People lie around in the sun, eat too much red meat, put too much salt in their food, drive above the speed limit, drive after they've had a drink or two, have unprotected/unsafe sex, don't wash hands enough, etc etc. Would you ban all such activity?

Quote:
Originally Posted by OC4Theo View Post

I know a car dealership that charges extra to work on any smoker vehicle.

That's a silly analogy. If so, Apple should state upfront that either that a person in that situation would not qualify for Applecare, or they should charge extra. They do neither.

I can see this going to court.
post #17 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisTheXIV View Post

just another big corporation trying to screw its customers out of costly warranties.

Really? You don't see any culpability here on the part of the owner? REALLY?!?
post #18 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisTheXIV View Post

just another big corporation trying to screw its customers out of costly warranties ...

This is an idiotic theory at best.

Apple provides a warranty, and they are going to actively deny it on a few seriously smoke damaged computers, just so they can "screw" people over? Paranoid nonsense.

I guess you think health care is a plot to kill old people too.
post #19 of 332
Smoking Kills!...applecare
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
post #20 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Last I checked, (smoking) is a perfectly legal activity.

I can see this going to court.

Pouring Pepsi into your computer is a perfectly legal activity. But it's just as legal for Apple to say "Nope, we're not fixing that under warranty." Same thing for a coating of tar.

Apple isn't saying owners can't smoke. If they were, you'd be correct. But since they're not, your argument falls flat. If this goes to court, the owner will lose.
post #21 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wehrwolf View Post

If the cigarette smoke residue was blatently evident, I'm not sure I understand why Apple chose to take the health hazard stance. The gunk that builds up from cigarette smoke is more than capable of jamming up fans and other mechanical devices in a PC. That alone would be enough to deny warranty - similar reasoning as to why they will deny warranty if they see that moisture sensors have been activated, regardless if the issue is really water related or not.

Best comment in the thread so far!
I agree, of course.

1) If Apple is denying coverage due to the user causing the problem, that's fine.

2) If Apple is denying coverage as it's unhealthy for their workers - then give their workers safety gear or provide a refurb machine.
post #22 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe View Post

Pouring Pepsi into your computer is a perfectly legal activity. But it's just as legal for Apple to say "Nope, we're not fixing that under warranty." Same thing for a coating of tar.

Apple isn't saying owners can't smoke. If they were, you'd be correct. But since they're not, your argument falls flat. If this goes to court, the owner will lose.

I see. Your comment first read to me that they shouldnt smoke at all but it now it sounds like you are saying they shouldnt smoke around electronics, especially without proper ventilation. That makes sense.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #23 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

Its one thing to refuse service because excessive tar actually caused the failure (Ive seen some disgusting stained walls in smokers homes). Maybe that can happen, hard as it is to believe.

The tar also helps collect dust, clogging vents and reducing heat transfer effectiveness on heat sinks.

My only concern with this is where do you draw the line on an "abusive atmosphere" that would void a warranty. Would high humidity, sea air, dramatic temperature swings, etc also fall into the same category? Are you allowed to take your laptop outside? Do you need to seal it somehow if someone is sanding drywall in the office next door?

What about ants that are attracted to the heat... do they void the warranty?

It is one thing with the factory warranty, but if you pay for AppleCare, you should have a higher threshold. My MacBookPro has been through hell... but if an unrelated problem voided my (now expired) AppleCare I would be pretty pissed.
post #24 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I don't smoke, but I find your attitude quite unbelievable. Last I checked, it is a perfectly legal activity. If smoking did "nothing" for the smoker -- e.g., give them pleasure -- why would they smoke in the first place? And 'hazardous to health?' People lie around in the sun, eat too much red meat, put too much salt in their food, drive above the speed limit, drive after they've had a drink or two, have unprotected/unsafe sex, don't wash hands enough, etc etc. Would you ban all such activity?...

This is nonsense.

In the first place just because it isn't illegal now in your country, doesn't mean it won't be soon, or isn't be already in more civilised places. In the second place, your argument about why a smoker smokes is based on the idea of free will when in fact smoking is a simple drug addiction. It has nothing to do with making rational choices or free will.

Smokers are drug addicts. That's just a simple fact. They have no more control over smoking than a crackhead does over doing crack or a wino has over drinking.

Third, all your analogies are junk in that laying around in the sun, eating red meat etc., are not only a choice, they are choices that don't affect anyone else.

Smoke is poison (another fact). Second hand smoke has been proven many times over to be just as bad as firsthand smoke, and third hand smoke is implicated in the latest research as well. No one has the right to poison those around them. They never did. We just weren't sufficiently aware of how dangerous smoking was before.

Drug addicts don't have the same rights as normal people and there is no "inalienable right" to do drugs. Even if there were, a person's human rights end where another's begin. A person may have the right to shoot a gun, but they don't have the right to shoot it at someone else. Even if a smoker had some kind of "right" to smoke, they don't have the right to do it around anyone else.

Smoking will be illegal in public in your lifetime probably. Get used to it.
post #25 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post

.. If Apple is denying coverage as it's unhealthy for their workers - then give their workers safety gear or provide a refurb machine.

they should provide spacesuits for their repair workers just because some smoker can't quit?
post #26 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Both customers sent letters directly to Steve Job's office

Please retire from writing and do something else instead.
post #27 of 332
Why is Apple surprised by computers contaminated with smoke? Clearly Apple just needs to protect its workers from such normal hazards, as per OSHA guidelines. By the way, it's not the nicotine people need to be so concerned about in tobacco smoke, compared to the combustion by-products. Nicotine can be toxic, but there is actually very little evidence for nicotine being a carcinogen. I expect OSHA's guidelines for nicotine have everything to do with toxicity levels and nothing to do with carcinogenicity. And I expect the amount of nicotine spewed even from a heavily smoke-contaminated computer would not be very high--nowhere near toxic levels--particularly in a properly ventilated room.
post #28 of 332
I smell a class action lawsuit in Texas!

TechnoMinds

We are a Montreal based technology company that offers a variety of tech services such as tech support for Apple products, Drupal based website development, computer training and iCloud...

Reply

TechnoMinds

We are a Montreal based technology company that offers a variety of tech services such as tech support for Apple products, Drupal based website development, computer training and iCloud...

Reply
post #29 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

Why is Apple surprised by computers contaminated with smoke? Clearly Apple just needs to protect its workers from such normal hazards, as per OSHA guidelines. By the way, it's not the nicotine people need to be so concerned about in tobacco smoke, compared to the combustion by-products. Nicotine can be toxic, but there is actually very little evidence for nicotine being a carcinogen. I expect OSHA's guidelines for nicotine have everything to do with toxicity levels and nothing to do with carcinogenicity. And I expect the amount of nicotine spewed even from a heavily smoke-contaminated computer would not be very high--nowhere near toxic levels--particularly in a properly ventilated room.

It's still something that should be avoided.

------------------------------

"Nicotine itself is not carcinogenic, according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer, but is implicated in heart disease."
(quoted from http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/c.../full/91/6/502 )

"Nicotine is not in itself carcinogenic, but has been shown to be co-carcinogenic
with benzo(a)pyrene [also found in tobacco smoke] in causing skin cancer in mice"
(quoted from http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/....020186.000321 )

In conclusion, while nicotine itself is not carcinogenic it is shown to be co-carcinogenic with other chemicals, including those found in cigarette smoke. Once a person has lung cancer, nicotine can interfere with body's natural ability (as well as the ability of cancer fighting drugs) to get rid of the cancer.
(See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7848904 )

http://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi...nt/full/79/1/1

http://www.smoke-free.ca/SL/TSNAfactsheet.PDF

http://www.treatobacco.net/en/page_62.html
post #30 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

This is nonsense.

As you will see below, you are the one spouting nonsense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

In the first place just because it isn't illegal now in your country, doesn't mean it won't be soon, or isn't be already in more civilised places.

Name one country where it's illegal -- it's certainly not illegal in the US, where I live. The fact that something could be, some day, illegal is not a basis to act and think like it is. A lot of the other examples I mentioned could be 'illegal' some day, but that doesn't make them illegal now. Nor should it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

In the second place, your argument about why a smoker smokes is based on the idea of free will when in fact smoking is a simple drug addiction. It has nothing to do with making rational choices or free will.

You are out of your intellectual league here. Addiction can be, and is often rational. Theories of 'rational addiction' are well-understood. (See for instance, a Nobel laureate economist, Gary Becker, on this issue: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_addiction). Incidentally, if it was so irreversibly addictive, people would not be giving it up in droves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Third, all your analogies are junk in that laying around in the sun, eating red meat etc., are not only a choice, they are choices that don't affect anyone else.

Nah, I pay for your skin cancer, your obesity, your health consequences from unsafe sex, etc. -- more generally, a lot of your lifestyle choices -- through my taxes and through the social compact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Smoke is poison (another fact). etc etc

No one disagrees that smoke is poison -- I certainly didn't, and don't. Stop hyperventilating.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Smoking will be illegal in public in your lifetime probably. Get used to it.

The fact that it might be illegal in public does not make it illegal (indeed, people don't use their Apple computers mostly in public places).

It's no wonder that some people on the Right think that people with views like yours are one step away from celebrating fascism in the name of 'social good.'
post #31 of 332
Just say no! Your computer will thank you!


post #32 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


That's a silly analogy. If so, Apple should state upfront that either that a person in that situation would not qualify for Applecare, or they should charge extra. They do neither.

I can see this going to court.

I think that's what Apple's goal is. Take us t court. If you can tar the hell out of your machine in the lousy, at most, three years that you've owned it...you won't live long enough to fight through a lengthy trial

It's apparent they smoke in their home, which is gross. Take it outside if you want to smoke. Hopefully these people don't have children living with them.
post #33 of 332
[QUOTE=Quadra 610;1524460][re: nicotine] It's still something that should be avoided.

I completely agree, but let's be rational. Apple's response, although not reported in any great detail, sounds quite uninformed.
post #34 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

...accounts of being refused computer repair service due to the presence of damage related to smoking. ...would be an OSHA violation.

And that's just OSHA my friends. Wait until Obamacare is shoved down our throats what with all it's "shalls" and "wills" obey the government or else the government will fine and/or incarcerate!

Quote:
Employees at one Apple store reportedly told a customer that her computer was "beyond economical repair due to tar from cigarette smoke."

Forget the "Intel Inside" or "Nvidia" graphics card labels cluttering up the aesthetic look of an Apple product, I'd sue Apple for failure to have a warning label in plain view on their computers and laptops stating, "Warning: Smoking is not only hazardous to your health, our repair technician's health but smoking will also void the Apple Care warranty you just plopped 349.00 bucks down for extra care for your 15" Macbook Pro or 169.00 bucks for extra iMac care! Kiss that hard earn money good-bye if you smoke! You have been duly warned."

Quote:
Apple would not require an employee to repair anything deemed hazardous to their health."

And yet for years, it was perfectly fine to sell toxic computers to customer and to have service technicians repair said products even with items such as... Lead, Cadmium, Hexavalent Chromium (can you say Erin Brockovich), Decabromodiphenyl Ether, Arsenic, Mercury, Polyvinyl Chloride, Brominated flame retardants are the chemicals stated here from a letter by Steve Jobs.

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/agreenerapple/

Grant it all these chemicals were not just now taken out yesterday, but they were in there at a time I bought my first Mac many moons ago and purchased an extended Apple Care warranty with no Health concerns from Apple. Must be a "liberal" philosophy, I guess, and it just depends on who is putting in the poisons!

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #35 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

Just say no! Your computer will thank you!



Now this brings up a few things......
First if the laptop looked like that on the inside then it maybe should have been denied service.
BUT then how would one clean that kind of mess? They can't open the chassis...that would definatley void the warranty.
Smoking is NOT illegal anywhere that I know of. If smoke residue can build up inside of a machine.....especially inside a laptop then one could argue that the machine design was at fault and not the fault of the owner who was doing nothing illegal.
So was the machine design at fault for not providing enough ventilation?
Or was the machine owner at fault for excessive smoking around the computer.....
Very very interesting!!!!

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #36 of 332
This implies that there is nothing in any of Apple's products that is on the OSHA list of hazardous substances. I know they have been removing Mercury and they probably don't use solder with lead in it, but there are still a lot of exotic elements in electronic components. It is quite an accomplishment if there is nothing hazardous in Apple electronics to jeopardize technicians working on them.
post #37 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

.. Name one country where it's illegal -- it's certainly not illegal in the US, where I live. T...

Well this is your mistake, you are assuming that everywhere is like the USA. In Canada it's illegal in most public places, all indoor public places, all restaurants, bars, and public buildings and on all sidewalks within 10 metres of the building. You can smoke in your car, your house, and on a residential sidewalk but that's about it. New laws will be coming into effect banning even more places next year. There are countries with more severe restrictions than us, but I am not going to look them up for you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

... You are out of your intellectual league here. Addiction can be, and is often rational. Theories of 'rational addiction' are well-understood. (See for instance, a Nobel laureate economist, Gary Becker, on this issue: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_addiction). Incidentally, if it was so irreversibly addictive, people would not be giving it up in droves.

No. this is BS "science" nobel laureate or not. BTW, both the main guy behind that "theory" and the "nobel laureate" are economists, not scientists or doctors. Becker's Nobel prize is for economics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

... Nah, I pay for your skin cancer, your obesity, your health consequences from unsafe sex, etc. -- more generally, a lot of your lifestyle choices -- through my taxes and through the social compact.

Come on, that's a reach. I was categorising the activities you mentioned. All the one's you mentioned are voluntary and have no impact on those around them. Smoking is 100% different from that. It's not voluntary, and it has a HUGE impact on those around them. These are simple facts whether you agree or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

... No one disagrees that smoke is poison -- I certainly didn't, and don't. Stop hyperventilating.

Ad hominem attack.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

... The fact that it might be illegal in public does not make it illegal (indeed, people don't use their Apple computers mostly in public places).

The repair centre is a workplace and is subject to basic workplace rules. You can't smoke at work, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

... It's no wonder that some people on the Right think that people with views like yours are one step away from celebrating fascism in the name of 'social good.'

More nonsense. Anyone who thinks anything about "the left" has anything to do with fascism knows nothing about "the left," and nothing about what constitutes fascism. I've never heard anyone even suggest such a thing.

I appreciate I am being a bit intense about my views here, but you just don't have an argument. Nothing you say has made any kind of logical sense. Smokers are drug addicts. People don't like to think about it that way and it's rude of me to keep saying it out loud perhaps, but it's a plain and simple fact. Ask your doctor. Or come up with one single argument as to why smoking *isn't* drug addiction.
post #38 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe View Post

Pouring Pepsi into your computer is a perfectly legal activity.

But Pepsi alone is not on OSHA's list of dangerous chemicals to void a warranty or warrant concerns of a service technicians health. Whereas smoking is?!...

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #39 of 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

This is nonsense.

In the first place just because it isn't illegal now in your country, doesn't mean it won't be soon, or isn't be already in more civilised places. In the second place, your argument about why a smoker smokes is based on the idea of free will when in fact smoking is a simple drug addiction. It has nothing to do with making rational choices or free will.

Smokers are drug addicts. That's just a simple fact. They have no more control over smoking than a crackhead does over doing crack or a wino has over drinking.

Third, all your analogies are junk in that laying around in the sun, eating red meat etc., are not only a choice, they are choices that don't affect anyone else.

Smoke is poison (another fact). Second hand smoke has been proven many times over to be just as bad as firsthand smoke, and third hand smoke is implicated in the latest research as well. No one has the right to poison those around them. They never did. We just weren't sufficiently aware of how dangerous smoking was before.

Drug addicts don't have the same rights as normal people and there is no "inalienable right" to do drugs. Even if there were, a person's human rights end where another's begin. A person may have the right to shoot a gun, but they don't have the right to shoot it at someone else. Even if a smoker had some kind of "right" to smoke, they don't have the right to do it around anyone else.

Smoking will be illegal in public in your lifetime probably. Get used to it.

You are a raving lunatic.
I agree that nicotine is a drug... I don't agree that all drug users are addicts - by that token everyone who has ever had an alcoholic beverage is a drug addict, which I think is quite an overstatement.
And smoking also has no effect on anyone else - so anantksundaram's analogies are quite appropriate. I would only ever smoke alone or with other smokers - the same is true for most people I know.


As for the incident at hand I agree with GregAlexander - if the smoke has caused damage to the machine, that's fine - the user has voided the warranty by causing damage to the machine. If however, Apple are refusing service because of health concerns, they should provide a replacement or a refund - the reasons for the refusal are quite irrelevant - the customer has paid for a service which they have a right to be provided with.
post #40 of 332
You know, I think this is a good move for Apple. Anyone with much experience working on consumer electronics should think this is a good thing for Apple. I've repaired computers and other consumer electronics for about 13 years, and it is really appalling to see what shape the interiors of these things are like. I lived in a dairy county in central texas for awhile, and computers clogged with dairy dust are like magnets for cockroaches. We charged $120 just for containment, extermination and cleaning on these machines. Also, tar from cigarettes, dust and human hair are more than just allergens and irritants to human systems; when they build up in sufficient quantities or in just the right places, they actually can form a path for electrons to migrate across, creating shorts in the hardware. So you've got to discharge all the capacitors and soak the darned piece in pure denatured alcohol (depending on what it is, of course) for long enough to dissolve the tar, and then attempt to put it back together after it is brushed and dried and hope for the best. It's labor intensive, most shops aren't willing to even attempt such an operation (for good reason), and replacement under warranty should not be covered by misuse or abuse. And that's what neglecting your electronics is. Clean your stuff! Put a pair of pantyhose over your vacuum hose and clean that nonsense out every once in awhile. 2 users reporting denial does not constitute corporate greed, it seems to indicate a couple of severe, isolated cases, not a widespread conspiracy.
And for the record, addicted smokers are drug addicts. So are people addicted to caffeine, and every other 'legal' substance added to foods and sundry items. It is what it is, and rose-colored glasses don't change anything. Deal with it.

Peace Out.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Smoking may void Applecare warranty