or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple hit with class-action suit after girl drops, breaks iPhone 4's glass
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple hit with class-action suit after girl drops, breaks iPhone 4's glass - Page 7

post #241 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Originaldub View Post

A majority of the posts in here with the exception of a few border on asinine because they make the basic assumption that anyone who drops their phone is an idiot and deserves it if it breaks. No one drops their phone on purpose you do know that right?

It is not stated that the device will not break. That people are not taking the responsibility for dropping it once it happens is the issue.
post #242 of 303
My God has everyone in this country turned into the proverbial bull in a china shop? Spilled coffee, broken phones, and the list goes on. For Christ's sakes pay attention to what your doing and shit like this won't happen! No, I am not perfect but come on.
post #243 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Oh, and, BTW, now you're changing your story about what it was we were discussing? Better go back and edit your posts to eliminate your self-contradictions.

I'll take your recommendation under advisement. In the mean time I'll finish my cup of ES-1 and move on to another topic. Thanks for your input.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #244 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post

My God has everyone in this country turned into the proverbial bull in a china shop? Spilled coffee, broken phones, and the list goes on. For Christ's sakes pay attention to what your doing and shit like this won't happen! No, I am not perfect but come on.

Exactly.

Put this complaint under the same as...

"I wasn't getting enough hot water in the morning, so I turned up the thermostat and now I've been scalded. I'm suing!"

or

"I don't understand why I'm being cited for hitting the other car! They moved into the lane I was changing into and besides, it was a really important call!"

Ad nauseam. I do not have to drive more than one quarter of a mile from my home without seeing at least three instances of people "Driving While Moron".
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
post #245 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

I'm pretty sure the winners get costs as well, so I'm also pretty sure you wish for nothing.

You'd be wrong there. The only way to recover is through countersuit. So i'm pretty sure that you need to check your facts.
post #246 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmvsm View Post

You'd be wrong there. The only way to recover is through countersuit. So i'm pretty sure that you need to check your facts.

Nope. The courts can award costs to the winners. The attorneys file a motion requesting that the plaintiffs pay costs, and the judge decides whether awarding costs is warranted.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #247 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmvsm View Post

You'd be wrong there. The only way to recover is through countersuit. So i'm pretty sure that you need to check your facts.

Costs orders here typically run that way. Clearly not there. Depends where you are.
post #248 of 303
This is why the U.S has so many millionaires, sue and get rich. Not only should he lose but him and his lawyers should be charged with stupidity for wasting everyones time. No wonder our country is so messed up.
post #249 of 303
Lets see - an early iPhone had a metal back. People complained because it scratched. The range sucked because the metal helped shield the internal antenna. The iPhone 3G had a plastic back - it also scratched. The antenna probably worked better though. So Apple spent millions designing a new external wrap-around antenna. It probably works better than previous designs (if you don't deliberately death-grip it and use a case or bumper. To make the back scratch resistant and transparent to RF - they used the strongest glass used in cellphones - Corning's Gorilla Glass. Now people complain because if they drop it - there's a risk the glass might break. People should treat these devices like $600 marvels of miniaturization and really take care of them better. Accidents happen - but people are too blasé about tossing these devices around. It's not a toy.
post #250 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoboomafoo View Post

The phone is a fairly expensive piece of equipment. So, while a dropped wineglass results in maybe 3/4 dollars out of pocket ... this could be over $500.

So, should Waterford be held responsible for someone dropping a $70 crystal wine glass which breaks? Cost should not be a factor, only whether the design is flawed relative to any claims made by the manufacturer or general safety issues.

Quote:
I guess one would expect that the phone be able to sustain a couple foot drop and not sustain horribly catastrophic damage, because dropping it has to be considered a reasonable event. I've dropped my phone a number of times, on cement, and it's still pretty much ok. The case it's in maybe not so much. So it's unfortunate for him if he hasn't put it in a case. It's a reasonable extension (but one could argue that you shouldn't advertise a phone costing $200 that destroys itself when you drop it, you should advertise a $220 phone (+ $20 for the case), that survives reasonable drops.

This is nonsense. You want the handset manufacturer to basically insure you because you are not particularly careful with your gear. The design of the device should be considered when purchasing - especially for people who are accident-prone. It's not like there are no other options available to the buyer.
post #251 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Originaldub View Post

I am not for lawsuits especially this kind and no where did I say that the phone should be indestructible or any phone for that matter. Al I said was that using glass as a material the way Apple has makes this phone more vulnerable to sustaining damage. If you HAVE to buy a case for your phone then that in itself speaks to the problem. A phone should be durable enough to withstand drops etc. Drops from 5 feet maybe not but I can't think of a lot of other phones that suffer the same carnage that these have. No one person is perfect - accidents do happen.

Perhaps you think the government should mandate how high a fall a phone should be required to take without incurring significant damage. Of course, it would be different in varying countries. How about instead just taking care of your gear? If you are concerned, then get the item insured.

Quote:
Using a class action lawsuit is a way of bringing attention to a problem that may or may not exist. If evidence supports that the iPhone 4 is more susceptible then maybe it will have legs. Does anyone know for a fact that these new phones are better than the previous models when it comes to sustaining damage? I would be interested to know.My old 3Gs held up just fine and it was dropped a few times. Those of you without kids wouldn't know anything about the risk they pose to precious handheld devices.

The Square Trade report said that iPhone 4 sustained 82% more damage than the iPhone 3GS. Since the iPhone 4 has twice the glass surface area, one might expect that the damage would increase 100%. That 82% figure might suggest that the glass is, in fact, more durable than what was previously used.
post #252 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Originaldub View Post

I never said anything about multiple drops anywhere in my post. I just said that phones get dropped for a multitude of reasons and that Apple should take that fact into consideration. The phone is not that durable regardless of what people say, I have seen it for myself at the Apple Store and there are plenty of reports that support this fact.The glass surface is more susceptible because they have mounted it directly on top of the frame of the phone unlike their previous design where the glass was inset.

Then that should be factored into the purchase decision. It's not like the iPhone is the only option. And part of that decision would be to buy a warranty policy from the likes of Square Trade.
post #253 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbene12 View Post

<SIGH> this is all probably very accurate...the problem is stiffness and hardness are NOT properties you want in something that isnt supposed to break...you want TOUGHNESS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toughness

Often as a material because harder it is MORE likely to shatter not less.

If he actually wrote this into his suit, he completely invalidated his case.

Exactly, the same way with steel in fasteners. Something with a higher grade that is harder such as a grade 8 bolt is actually more brittle than a lower carbon bolt. A lot of people don't understand this concept. They think if it's harder its gotta be stronger in every aspect which isn't the case it depends on the implementation.
post #254 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

The worst part is that the glass sticks out from the edge of the band. They could at least have carved the metal band with a diagonal lip and done the same with the glass in the opposite direction with a rubber layer between so that flat surfaces don't contact the glass and the rubber layer absorbs the impact. They could even use the rubber they use on the base of the unibody Macbook for the back. That way they can finally make the white one and it's easy gripped. It's going to get dirty more easily but dirt lets you know when you need a new one.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/AP...co=MTM3NjU0NTk

Problem solved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Originaldub View Post

I am not for lawsuits especially this kind and no where did I say that the phone should be indestructible or any phone for that matter. Al I said was that using glass as a material the way Apple has makes this phone more vulnerable to sustaining damage.

So you believe that the people who bought the iPhone didn't know it was made of glass? That's pretty foolish. People saw the phone and knew it was made of glass, yet bought it anyway. If they didn't think they could own one without drop-kicking it, they shouldn't buy one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Originaldub View Post

If you HAVE to buy a case for your phone then that in itself speaks to the problem. A phone should be durable enough to withstand drops etc. Drops from 5 feet maybe not but I can't think of a lot of other phones that suffer the same carnage that these have. No one person is perfect - accidents do happen.

Where is the rule that says that phones have to be able to withstand a drop?

And I'd love to see your evidence from a neutral source that suggests that the iPhone is any worse than any other phone out there.

You see, most people are intelligent enough to realize that a $600 device made of glass and containing sensitive electronics inside shouldn't be dropped. What's your excuse?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #255 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnhcky911 View Post

This is why the U.S has so many millionaires, sue and get rich

Yup, this is why.

It has nothing to do with the opportunities provided by the US social, political and economic environment coupled with people willing to work their ass off and thus be rewarded with success.

Nope, it's all frivolous lawsuits
post #256 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Yup, this is why.

It has nothing to do with the opportunities provided by the US social, political and economic environment coupled with people willing to work their ass off and thus be rewarded with success.

Nope, it's all frivolous lawsuits

Indeed. I made my first two million suing Mohawk Paper Inc. for the many, MANY cuts inflicted on my hands during the use of their product.
post #257 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ravedog View Post

Last night I went to bar, had a few too many, dropped my rocks glass, it hit the counter, shattered, went to the floor and cut my foot (I was wearing sandals). Ambulance came, took me to the hostpital and got 10 stitches, not before I punched out the nurse for cutting my Calvin Klein jeans off.

I'm suing the bartender for not cutting me off, the bar for hiring such an inept employee, the bar again for using glass that doesn't break, the counter manufacturer for not adding rubberized raiils to protect from such mishaps (after all, it IS a bar), the liquor manufacturer for making a product that KNOWINGLY causes an altered state of consciousness... and it burned when it hit my open wound. I'm suing the ambulance for such an expensive trip, and that friggin nurse, for destroying my jeans (seriously, they aren't onesies with built in booties... It was just a foot). Oh yeah, and the damn cops for arresting me on TWO charges: Public Intoxication and assault. Oh, and I'm sure I can name Apple for something that happened that night too.

Show me the money. I'm proud to be American.

You forgot the sandal maker.

Send my 20% finder fee to...

Proud to help Americans.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #258 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Not really, if you have a phone worth over $500, you're likely going to try and look after it regardless of what it's made of. In much the same way you walk carefully through department stores full of expensive china. If someone left an expensive vase in a precarious situation, you can say don't go in the store or you can say it wasn't the smartest thing to do creating the situation in the first place.



I would hazard a guess that a large majority of people would dislike the idea of anything designed to be used in a mobile scenario being built primarily of glass. Vehicle windows are made of glass by necessity not by choice.



The worst part is that the glass sticks out from the edge of the band. They could at least have carved the metal band with a diagonal lip and done the same with the glass in the opposite direction with a rubber layer between so that flat surfaces don't contact the glass and the rubber layer absorbs the impact. They could even use the rubber they use on the base of the unibody Macbook for the back. That way they can finally make the white one and it's easy gripped. It's going to get dirty more easily but dirt lets you know when you need a new one.

Auto glass and any other electronics glass is a composite of glass silicate and plastic polymers.
post #259 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I don't know how often, but judges can award costs already when the circumstances justify it. Forcing them to do so by law only makes it more difficult for less affluent plaintiffs to bring lawsuits, which I suspect some people think is a good result. Maybe they should just come out and admit it.

I posted this link the other day which addresses a lot of the issues regarding loser pays. The article is 16 years old but still relevant. From the article:
Quote:
A closer look shows that the actual practice of loser-pays abroad bears little resemblance to the bogey version used to frighten Americans around campfires. No system is perfect, and all litigation carries risks for the innocent, which is one of many reasons for society to discourage it. But as millions of well-informed Europeans see it, loser-pays isn't nearly as terrifying as the way we sue in this country, where lawyers can lay your life to waste and the system will leave you no recourse at all.

Loser-pays is the standard in England, so it is sometimes known as the "English Rule." It is thus often spoken of as if it were some Beefeaters-and-warm-beer eccentricity of the Sceptered Isle. But it has no special connection with England. It has prevailed for millennia in Europe, developing early in Roman law and spreading from there to the civil law systems that evolved all over the continent and became codified in France, Germany, and elsewhere around the time of Napoleon. It even developed in the church courts. Scandinavia, like England, does not trace its civil procedure to the Romans but nonetheless has loser-pays.

Quote:
Few critics of loser-pays really hew to the so-called American Rule. For years Congress has blithely enacted hundreds of laws incorporating one-way fee-shifting: Defendants pay plaintiffs' legal fees when they lose, but they do not collect payment for their legal fees when they win. This heads-I-win, tails-we're-even idea indeed penalizes people for asserting their legal rights even with the utmost good faith in the closest of cases. Yet it has by now been installed in countless laws with a civil rights or environmental label. And you guessed it: With scarcely an exception, the same lawyers, legal academics, and bar officials who profess horror at two-way loser-pays are fans of the one-way version. The inconsistency glares. If the fluke chance of losing will scare middle-class litigants out of a good case and into a bad settlement, then it must do so when they get sued, and not only when they sue.

The American public itself seems not to be as terrified of full loser-pays as its lawyers. Even when U.S. News and World Report asked the question in its more menacing form--"If you sue someone and lose the case, should you pay his costs?"--a far-from-shabby 44 percent of those polled agreed that they should. And with sides reversed, nearly everyone saw the idea's fairness. "If someone sues you and you win the case, should he pay your legal costs?" Eighty-five percent said yes to that one.

http://reason.com/archives/1995/06/01/civil-suits
post #260 of 303
I have dropped my iphone 4 many times, and from about 4+ feet onto tile floors to boot. It never had a problem because: I KEPT THE CASE APPLE GAVE ME ON THE PHONE!!! The iPhone4 is an amazing feat of engineering.

I also bought a 2011 Nissan Sentra SL that has had nothing but issues. When it was one week old, it wouldn't start because Nissan used defective battery cables. Normally I'd say, "New designs have issues" but this affected the 2010's as well. So this was a known issue. Since I live in the desert (Las Vegas, NV) a car not starting can endanger your life. That's why I only buy new cars, from what I think are quality brands. Now here comes the kicker: I haven't found a lawyer here in Las Vegas that will take this case. A foreign automaker is trying to kill their American customers, and that's OK, but a piece of glass breaks, and the case goes class-action? Where's the justice?
post #261 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by penchanted View Post

I posted this link the other day which addresses a lot of the issues regarding loser pays. The article is 16 years old but still relevant. From the article:

I see an opinion, bolstered by few facts. It's also obviously closed knitted to a political position, the notion that any measure which reduces litigation is automatically a good thing. I question the presumption. It's also worth keeping in mind that the working definition of "frivolous lawsuit" for most people is one not filed by me.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #262 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPhone Mega-Nerd View Post

All I have to say is that I have been an iPhone owner since the price drop of the original model in 2007 and I own the iPhone 4. In 3 and a half years I have NEVER DROPPED MY IPHONE NO MATTER THE MODEL!!!! What a moron!!!!


i've dropped both a 3g and a iPhone 4 numerous times. Other than minor cosmetic damage, I've never had a problem. This guy is a retard. His kid drops it and he sues. Jesus.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #263 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabberattack View Post

WTH is industrial standard temperature for coffee? I like my coffee colder, my wife warmer. When one is lazy and won't put the cup into the cupholder in the car when adding the cream and is holding it between the legs, then that person deserves being burned. Another candidate for a "moron of the century".

And btw I would never buy the coffee at fastfood place - it's disgusting garbage.

I believe the standard is around 175 degrees F. Most home brewers are between 170 to 185 degrees.

Here's the details of the famous McDonald's lawsuit.

http://www.vanosteen.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm
post #264 of 303
After reading most of these entries a couple of things really stand out.

1. Most poster's on this thread have absolutely no clue what a class action lawsuit really is. Totally amazing when it is so easy to find out. Do a bit of research - learn something instead of "assuming".

2. If you take the time to go back and read Apple's marketing of the i4, the perceived intent is that even though the front and back are glass, it is more durable than the previous model - 3GS. Use has shown us all that this is not the case; warning on using slider cases, warranty claims increased significantly, pressure push back from Genius Bar on glass breakage. All documented.

Now do I agree with his filing? No.
He has filed. Will it be a class action? Wait and see - class action has to approved by a judge to be Class Action. The original filing is seeking Class action status.

For once, read and comment. Leave the judging till we get some real facts.

post #265 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhonin View Post


For once, read and comment. Leave the judging till we get some real facts.



It's a forum, not a court of law. Don't come here looking for anything but a little fun and a lotta opinion.
post #266 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

After taking an engineering law course, I think the coffee one was rather legitimate.

It wasn't a guy, it was an old lady traveling with her grandson. The car was parked and the lady tried to add cream to her coffee, but the cup slipped and and spilled on her. Her grandson immediately got out of the car and pulled her out and dropped her sweat pants to prevent any more burning, but by that time she already had 2nd and 3rd degree burns to her legs and crotch area.

McDonald's instructed their franchises to serve coffee at a higher than industry standard temperature knowing that it could cause 3rd degree burns in under 10 seconds, while (going from memory here) a 3 degree drop in temperature (it might of been higher, but it was definitely less than 10 degrees) would increase the required exposure time to about a minute. The reason they served coffee at a higher temperature was to save money on coffee beans. They had basically determined that it was cheaper to pay for the occasional lawsuit than to lower the temperature the coffee was served at. The lady was only suing for her medical bills, but was awarded much more because of the deplorable practices McDonald's was engaged in as a corporation.

There are a lot of frivolous lawsuits out there, like the iPhone one, but I'd have to say that the McDonald's coffee one wasn't one of them. Had McDonald's served coffee at the industry standard temperature, that lady would not have been burned nearly as severely. McDonald's knew the risks but corporate greed overruled the safety of its customers.

I don't buy it as legitimate cause.

1: She opened the coffee in the car while it was moving
2: She did not place cup in the car cup holder
3: If it did not have a cup holder then she should have opened the cup when the car was stationary
4: She did not factor in the coffee was hot before carrying out any actions

There were a number of things that she could have done to prevent this injury NONE of which she did. Of all things she should have realised that the contents were hot. This in any rational person's mind should have caused her to be more careful regardless of whether or not the temperature was hotter than other coffees.

Common sense still plays a part no matter what. Ignoring common sense does not give you a license to sue because you are a moron.

As to the helicopter and high speed train comment does this guy know that if a helicopter falls out of the sky at three feet the glass can break as well? A train crashing at 10m3 (speed of gravity) will also incur a glass breaking.
post #267 of 303
Experts, answer me this. Why does Apple still use highly breakable glass in its mobile products, when they could achieve the same look and feel with the much more durable and scratch resistant and cost effective Lexan DMX 2415?

http://www.fist.si/db/fist/File/Sabi..._DMX_resin.pdf

And with a silicon hard coat applied, the strength skyrockets, allowing companies like GM to use it in roof panels on the Corvette:

http://kbam.geampod.com/KBAM/Reflect...il/18503_2.pdf
post #268 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by penchanted View Post

Perhaps you think the government should mandate how high a fall a phone should be required to take without incurring significant damage. Of course, it would be different in varying countries. How about instead just taking care of your gear? If you are concerned, then get the item insured.


The Square Trade report said that iPhone 4 sustained 82% more damage than the iPhone 3GS. Since the iPhone 4 has twice the glass surface area, one might expect that the damage would increase 100%. That 82% figure might suggest that the glass is, in fact, more durable than what was previously used.

Perhaps you are making too many assumptions. You make me laugh dude.
post #269 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDW View Post

Experts, answer me this. Why does Apple still use highly breakable glass in its mobile products, when they could achieve the same look and feel with the much more durable and scratch resistant and cost effective Lexan DMX 2415?

http://www.fist.si/db/fist/File/Sabi..._DMX_resin.pdf

And with a silicon hard coat applied, the strength skyrockets, allowing companies like GM to use it in roof panels on the Corvette:

http://kbam.geampod.com/KBAM/Reflect...il/18503_2.pdf

Sorry to disappoint you but there are no experts here. Just a bunch of guys who love Apple so much ; ) that they will defend them at all cost no matter what the issue is.
post #270 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

http://store.apple.com/us/product/AP...co=MTM3NjU0NTk

Problem solved.



So you believe that the people who bought the iPhone didn't know it was made of glass? That's pretty foolish. People saw the phone and knew it was made of glass, yet bought it anyway. If they didn't think they could own one without drop-kicking it, they shouldn't buy one.



Where is the rule that says that phones have to be able to withstand a drop?

And I'd love to see your evidence from a neutral source that suggests that the iPhone is any worse than any other phone out there.

You see, most people are intelligent enough to realize that a $600 device made of glass and containing sensitive electronics inside shouldn't be dropped. What's your excuse?

Apparently you can't read either. Did I say that people didn't know it was made of glass? No. I said it's a poor choice of material considering the inherent nature of glass and that a phone more than any other devise has a greater chance of being dropped. Yeah for sure it looks great. But ultimately you are missing the point of what I said. And as to my excuse I don't need one. I haven't dropped my phone. But unfortunately reality happens and phones get dropped and almost always by accident.

Question? Does it make you feel better about yourself when you're a dick in your replies? I don't need to make any snide comments to make my point (other than a few friendly jabs at people's loyalty to Apple).
post #271 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhonin View Post

after reading most of these entries a couple of things really stand out.

1. Most poster's on this thread have absolutely no clue what a class action lawsuit really is. Totally amazing when it is so easy to find out. Do a bit of research - learn something instead of "assuming".

2. If you take the time to go back and read apple's marketing of the i4, the perceived intent is that even though the front and back are glass, it is more durable than the previous model - 3gs. Use has shown us all that this is not the case; warning on using slider cases, warranty claims increased significantly, pressure push back from genius bar on glass breakage. All documented.

now do i agree with his filing? No.
he has filed. Will it be a class action? Wait and see - class action has to approved by a judge to be class action. The original filing is seeking class action status.

For once, read and comment. Leave the judging till we get some real facts.



THANK YOU! So refreshing.
post #272 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

I don't buy it as legitimate cause.

1: She opened the coffee in the car while it was moving
2: She did not place cup in the car cup holder
3: If it did not have a cup holder then she should have opened the cup when the car was stationary
4: She did not factor in the coffee was hot before carrying out any actions

There were a number of things that she could have done to prevent this injury NONE of which she did. Of all things she should have realised that the contents were hot. This in any rational person's mind should have caused her to be more careful regardless of whether or not the temperature was hotter than other coffees.

Common sense still plays a part no matter what. Ignoring common sense does not give you a license to sue because you are a moron.

Common sense works in two directions, too. Where is the common sense in selling hot coffee to someone in a moving vehicle? As to your numbered points above, the wikipedia article addresses most of them.

Quote:
As to the helicopter and high speed train comment does this guy know that if a helicopter falls out of the sky at three feet the glass can break as well? A train crashing at 10m3 (speed of gravity) will also incur a glass breaking.

I only have high school physics and even I know gravity doesn't have a speed. This makes me question the rest of your assertion.

It's a ridiculous comparison anyway. Yes, a helicopter might fall out of the sky but what is the likelihood of that? Is it something that is reasonably foreseeable? What about a phone? Is a phone more likely to fall from three feet than a helicopter? The only common sense answer to that question is "yes".
post #273 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Originaldub View Post

Perhaps you are making too many assumptions. You make me laugh dude.

The bottom line is that Apple has made certain claims that appear defensible either scientifically or by virtue of the materials used. The courts will need to determine if there is a design flaw and I don't know what criteria they can use other than Apple's claims or safety issues.

I am not sure what assumptions you are talking about - perhaps my trying to extrapolate the 82% greater breakage relative to the 100% increase in glass surface area. This is not a perfect metric but it makes a whole lot more sense than saying Apple should do something because some unknown number of people drop their iPhones which then break.

Glad I could make you laugh. You just make me sad that, like so many Americans, you want to eliminate personal responsibility.
post #274 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by penchanted View Post

Glad I could make you laugh. You just make me sad that, like so many Americans, you want to eliminate personal responsibility.

Interesting you should put it that way, since torts are all about responsibility. Perhaps your theory is that individuals should be responsible but corporations don't have to worry about such matters.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #275 of 303
The fact that this has made class action status indicates that there is more than one moron out there looking for a free replacement as a result of their own stupidity.

I was using my 3Gs as a 3g modem while my ISP was down and had it on the railing of my apartment's balcony (only place I could get a good signal.) A stiff wind caught it and it fell 11 stories. I totally expected it to be destroyed or at the very least the glass shattered. I did the slow walk of shame down the elevator and searched around for it and eventually found it in a grassy area. I picked it up and hit the top button and the screen lit up and it looked like nothing was wrong. I peeled back the rubber incase case that I actually bought for my iPhone 2G and everything looked fine. I was thoroughly amazed. A few days later on closer inspection I could see a hairline crack around one of the screw holes and a slightly longer crack about a half inch long running vertical up the back starting at the corner of the dock connector.

With the case on no one is the wiser and the phone works fine. However, I think I should sue just for the hell of it. The question is who should I sue? Apple for making an inferior product that can't even withstand an 11 story fall even with the assistance of a third-party case? Incase for not foreseeing the probability that Apple would make phone with a curved plastic back and make the design of their original iPhone case forward thinking enough to anticipate that? My ISP for not providing reliable enough service that required me to use my phone as a modem. My GSM provider for not have good coverage and signal penetration that forced me to locate my phone on the balcony to get a reliable signal? My apartment building developer for installing railing that is too narrow with a surface to slick to properly secure an iPhone in a wind? The building management for not recognizing this oversight and correcting it? Otis elevator company for making elevators safer and thus leading to the construction of taller buildings?....

I guess I could just live with the crack and chalk it up to my own carelessness and move on with my life like any reasonable person would.
post #276 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jingo View Post

Only in America could someone sue another party for a mistake they made and get loads of dosh for it. Reminds me of the person who sued McDonalds because of coffee being hot and won - and countless other such stories. The guy should be ashamed of himself.

Ermm no. Havent you seen all the TV ads over here for personal injury claims for bozos who tripped cos they werent watching where they were going, or fell off the 'wrong type of ladder' they had been given when doing a job they are supposed to be pros at.

Thats why schoolkids over here can no longer play conkers without having to wear safety glasses
post #277 of 303
I don't have kids so I am probably wrong here, but it seems silly at best and possibly like bad parenting to give a child a phone made of glass on both the front and back...I don't know much about kids, but I know they break shit, so why not get the kid a phone that isn't as fragile and nearly as expensive as a Faberge egg?
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #278 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by penchanted View Post

The bottom line is that Apple has made certain claims that appear defensible either scientifically or by virtue of the materials used. The courts will need to determine if there is a design flaw and I don't know what criteria they can use other than Apple's claims or safety issues.

I am not sure what assumptions you are talking about - perhaps my trying to extrapolate the 82% greater breakage relative to the 100% increase in glass surface area. This is not a perfect metric but it makes a whole lot more sense than saying Apple should do something because some unknown number of people drop their iPhones which then break.

Glad I could make you laugh. You just make me sad that, like so many Americans, you want to eliminate personal responsibility.

I'm not American. I'm Canadian and proud of it. We don't sue anybody. I know all about personal responsibility and if I dropped my phone I know who's fault it is - mine. I don't even care what happens with this frivolous suit - I was only making the point that perhaps there is a problem with Apple choice of materials. As to assumptions I was referring to your comment where you said "Perhaps you think the government should mandate how high a fall a phone should be required to take without incurring significant damage".
post #279 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Originaldub View Post

I'm not American. I'm Canadian and proud of it. We don't sue anybody.

Ha-ha. Right.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #280 of 303
Why did they sell him this phone ? Smartphones aren't for stupid people.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple hit with class-action suit after girl drops, breaks iPhone 4's glass
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple hit with class-action suit after girl drops, breaks iPhone 4's glass