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 3

post #81 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.

As an American, I totally agree with your first sentence. Civil litigation has been the name of the game for lawyers trying to pay back their student loans for years.

However, and this observation is subject to scrutiny, the old lady in the McD case actually was quite badly scalded when the lid of her coffee popped open at the drivethru window. It turns out that McD pinches every penny and in this case, passes steam & water (over 212°) through coffee grounds since it is well known that the hotter the water & vapor, the less coffee is needed to get roughly the same case. That coffee was not what you get from a coffee urn at Denny's (or at home) and she deserved something more than a simply "sorry 'bout that, lady" from the drivethru drone.
post #82 of 303
Being that this is taking place in Cali, he will more than likely win. California is on a mission to eliminate all possible self responsibility. It's ALWAYS someone else's fault.
post #83 of 303
Does anyone know how to get in touch with these folks. I'm getting ready to file a class action lawsuit against Ford, as the Focus just crumpled when I hit a tree - by accident of course.

In any case, I'm asking Ford to replace my focus with a Mercedes as it supposedly is better in high speed crashes, and damn it, I'm worth it.

And rumor has it, if I'm successful, the folks from some damn Green group, want Ford to replace the tree I hit, and ALL other trees every hit by Fords, and any other cars Ford has anything to do with.

Damn it - I've had enough. When I dropped my Gold Fish bowl leaving the Pet Store, they said "Sucks being you", next time you'll hold on to it better - won't you.

I'm sure suing Apple is much easier then dealing with his daughter, who I'm sure was just beside herself after dropping daddy's F%$#^king iPhone.

I guess I'm wondering how long after purchasing a smart phone, before the manufacture is not responsible for an ACCIDENT.

One man's 3 feet is another man's 6 feet.

S
post #84 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecphorizer View Post

As an American, I totally agree with your first sentence. Civil litigation has been the name of the game for lawyers trying to pay back their student loans for years.

However, and this observation is subject to scrutiny, the old lady in the McD case actually was quite badly scalded when the lid of her coffee popped open at the drivethru window. It turns out that McD pinches every penny and in this case, passes steam & water (over 212°) through coffee grounds since it is well known that the hotter the water & vapor, the less coffee is needed to get roughly the same case. That coffee was not what you get from a coffee urn at Denny's (or at home) and she deserved something more than a simply "sorry 'bout that, lady" from the drivethru drone.

I still dont know what a dosh is.

Do you?
post #85 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by delany View Post

Is suing Apple the right answer? Maybe not. But until someone in the US does something about silly advertising claims, what else can people do.

They have. Ever see all the 6pt disclaimers at the bottom of the screen of drugs (and other things that aren't moron-proof)? I actually go in the opposite direction and think that all that warning stuff is a bunch of BS. We are human beings - intelligent reasoning human beings. We do not need to blame everyone else for our own carelessness and stupidity. And why is this suit-mania only in the US? Are we less intelligent than citizens of other countries? (please don't come across with a catty answer; you know what I mean!)
post #86 of 303

deleted


Edited by kellya74u - 7/24/13 at 10:23am
post #87 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.

you are right. america is a land of spoiled, never my fault, whining, lazy, i know better than you, liars, cheats and frauds. well, not everyone here, but a lot of us!
i am guilty of a few of those things from time to time too....
post #88 of 303
I think Apple already covered themselves on this issue. Steve Jobs said "You're holding it wrong."
post #89 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecphorizer View Post

They have. Ever see all the 6pt disclaimers at the bottom of the screen of drugs (and other things that aren't moron-proof)? I actually go in the opposite direction and think that all that warning stuff is a bunch of BS. We are human beings - intelligent reasoning human beings. We do not need to blame everyone else for our own carelessness and stupidity. And why is this suit-mania only in the US? Are we less intelligent than citizens of other countries? (please don't come across with a catty answer; you know what I mean!)

Because the laws here allow such silliness and the cost is not too high. If we had a "loser pays" system in the US, you would not likely see this kind of suit.

We need some serious tort reform in this country.
post #90 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.

The woman won her suit because it was prove that they were making their coffee way hot and it was hazardous.

In this case, the guy's claim is bobo because dropping the phone is NOT 'normal usage'

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #91 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jcoz View Post

I still dont know what a dosh is.

Do you?

Just in case you' re serious.

Dosh is money.
post #92 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecphorizer View Post

They have. Ever see all the 6pt disclaimers at the bottom of the screen of drugs (and other things that aren't moron-proof)? I actually go in the opposite direction and think that all that warning stuff is a bunch of BS. We are human beings - intelligent reasoning human beings. We do not need to blame everyone else for our own carelessness and stupidity. And why is this suit-mania only in the US? Are we less intelligent than citizens of other countries? (please don't come across with a catty answer; you know what I mean!)

I'I would say that warnings on drugs of all products are unquestionably a good thing. How on earth is the average person able to tell without a warning that the drug intended to cure their overactive bladder will also cause them to bleed from the anus and loose their sense of smell? I say put those warnings in a larger font!

I'm not quite sure where you're coming from in terms of your views on government - but a huge quantity of products produced in our advanced tech age require some sort of regulation in production and advertising if we are going to live safely. With common items like consumer electronics, drugs, genetically modified food etc it is not a question of 'common sense'. They require huge amounts of knowledge and understanding to know what the full effects can be.

Without regulation about what they can produce and what they can say about their products, companies would be quite happy do whatever was most profitable ... and nobody without a complete set of Phds would be able to tell why their head had swelled up to five times its normal size or their cat exploded.
post #93 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabberattack View Post

What a retard! I can't believe America is no.1 economy while it looks dumbies like this guy are multiplying here.

My house window glass broke after my neighbour's kid accidently kicked the ball in it. I am gonna class action sue window maker because when I had the old window it did not break after I kicked the ball few yeara ago.

What a moron, OMG.

Believe it or not America does not have a corner on the moron market.
There are plenty of morons all over the world.

We just have a surplus of lawyers trying to make money by using the morons....
Ummm... About that market cornering thingy... I guess I take it back.
post #94 of 303
this sounds like the person that called 911 when mcdonalds had no mcnuggets to give to her
post #95 of 303
Christ. I assume he didn't even try to let Apple help him out. They certainly consider replacing after accidents like this.
post #96 of 303
I'm amazed at the lack of fair-mindendness in the comments on this. Of course we should all accept responsibility for our actions but this isn't what this plaintiff is arguing against. He is saying that the iPhone 4, in not withstanding a perfectly ordinary drop from 3 feet, is not fit for purpose. He is saying that the claims Apple have made about the durability of the glass used are misleading.

Why did Apple mention the hardness etc. of the glass? Because it left an impression to consumers that this was a device less likely to break if dropped, something people have always criticised iPhones for. I smashed the screen of my iPhone 3G in a freak accident (it also dropped just 3 feet onto concrete, I swear it took 30 seconds to fall, at least in my mind ). I continued to use the phone for the rest of its life-cycle as its functionality was not impaired but when I took it to the Apple Store to see what my options were they said my huge, eye-watering, crack down the centre of the screen was 'nothing'. They said they were usually much worse! They dealt with smashed screens daily. I am not a moron as so many have claimed one must be to drop something. I am one of millions of users worldwide who take my iPhone out of my carpeted home each day and expose it to the real world. Accidents happen.

By mentioning the newer, harder glass used in the iPhone 4 Apple implied this was a more durable phone, and it is quite clear that this is not the case. I LOVE my iPhone 4, I am more than prepared to look after it rather than have it made out of some garish plastic, but Apple shouldn't have tried to give the impression this was a tougher phone when it simply is not. As much as I love it, I certainly don't feel it could take the punishment my iPhone 3G could have; absolutely not.

This gentleman is angry that his phone smashed so easily, and I can see why it has upset him. A phone is an everyday use item and as such should be able to withstand reasonable knocks, like a child dropping it. This is not unusual in law. Apple love to sell their products as family-friendly. Passing his iPhone to his young daughter is something right out of a FaceTime commercial; he shouldn't have to feel nervous when he does it.

If I buy a car and the brakes fail if I go over a speed bump below the speed limit, that car isn't fit for purpose. I should slow right down for speed bumps and take extra care, but that's not the point. The point is the car should be able to take reasonable punishment that might very well come its way without catastrophic failure. It's my fault I wasn't cautious, but the car should take it as long as I don't make a habit of it and I am obeying the speed limit.

If this guy had dropped his iPhone off a ski lift and it had smashed, I don't think he'd be suing Apple.
post #97 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Actually, the capuccinos and espressos served in McDonalds (in the newer McDs that serve them) are surprisingly good.

Better than the bitter nonsense you get at Starbucks, as far as my palate is concerned.

Well, Starbucks does have pretty much the worst coffee anyway, roasted to charcoal, but they made their fortune selling heavily sweetened, coffee-flavored milk drinks.
post #98 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post

"20 times stiffer and 30 times harder than plastic," and is "ultradurable" having been made from the same material as the "glass used in helicopters and high-speed trains."

If Apple actually claims this, then they are in trouble.

They do and they are not..If you drop a helicopter on concrete, the glass will break too. People drop and shatter plastic phone cases every day of the week.
post #99 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by doyourownthing View Post

this sounds like the person that called 911 when mcdonalds had no mcnuggets to give to her

I have to think the bigger moron is the cop that calls 911 on himself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrZLc9lqQM0
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 #100 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac View Post

I'm amazed at the lack of fair-mindendness in the comments on this. Of course we should all accept responsibility for our actions but this isn't what this plaintiff is arguing against. He is saying that the iPhone 4, in not withstanding a perfectly ordinary drop from 3 feet, is not fit for purpose. He is saying that the claims Apple have made about the durability of the glass used are misleading.

Why did Apple mention the hardness etc. of the glass? Because it left an impression to consumers that this was a device less likely to break if dropped, something people have always criticised iPhones for. I smashed the screen of my iPhone 3G in a freak accident (it also dropped just 3 feet onto concrete, I swear it took 30 seconds to fall, at least in my mind ). I continued to use the phone for the rest of its life-cycle as its functionality was not impaired but when I took it to the Apple Store to see what my options were they said my huge, eye-watering, crack down the centre of the screen was 'nothing'. They said they were usually much worse! They dealt with smashed screens daily. I am not a moron as so many have claimed one must be to drop something. I am one of millions of users worldwide who take my iPhone out of my carpeted home each day and expose it to the real world. Accidents happen.

By mentioning the newer, harder glass used in the iPhone 4 Apple implied this was a more durable phone, and it is quite clear that this is not the case. I LOVE my iPhone 4, I am more than prepared to look after it rather than have it made out of some garish plastic, but Apple shouldn't have tried to give the impression this was a tougher phone when it simply is not. As much as I love it, I certainly don't feel it could take the punishment my iPhone 3G could have; absolutely not.

This gentleman is angry that his phone smashed so easily, and I can see why it has upset him. A phone is an everyday use item and as such should be able to withstand reasonable knocks, like a child dropping it. This is not unusual in law. Apple love to sell their products as family-friendly. Passing his iPhone to his young daughter is something right out of a FaceTime commercial; he shouldn't have to feel nervous when he does it.

If I buy a car and the brakes fail if I go over a speed bump below the speed limit, that car isn't fit for purpose. I should slow right down for speed bumps and take extra care, but that's not the point. The point is the car should be able to take reasonable punishment that might very well come its way without catastrophic failure. It's my fault I wasn't cautious, but the car should take it as long as I don't make a habit of it and I am obeying the speed limit.

If this guy had dropped his iPhone off a ski lift and it had smashed, I don't think he'd be suing Apple.


Actually you are making a lot of assumptions based on the words of a nut job out to make a buck. You say it is "quite clear" it is not more durable than the screen on the iPhone 3. Clear to who? Not to me, or any other reasonable person on the planet.

What is reasonable? What did she drop it on? How was it dropped? Was it thrown at the ground? I dropped a plastic blackberry on concrete from 4 feet and the case cracked and I never imagined suing anyone. Is 4 feet too high and 3 feet to low? Does he have any non conflicted witnesses to the "accident"?
post #101 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gromit View Post

I dropped my iPhone and it I was annoyed, but with myself.

It is glass, it is fragile.

LOL you muppets. Apple told us all it's super strong nearly indestructible. It's the same glass used in the windshield of military helicopters.

Either Apple is bullshitting about the type of glass used or their phone design is defective because his type of glass can can withstand impact severity far exceeding anything any consumer is able to expose the phone to.
post #102 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.

She placed the coffee in her crotch first, then proceeded to spill it. Sorry no sympathy for anyone who places any warm or hot liquid in their crotch regardless of the reason.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply
post #103 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltcompuser View Post

Just in case you' re serious.

Dosh is money.

I figured using the context, its just I've heard seemingly 1000 phases for money, never heard that one...was just effing around mostly.
post #104 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targon View Post

LOL you muppets. Apple told us all it's super strong nearly indestructible. It's the same glass used in the windshield of military helicopters.

Either Apple is bullshitting about the type of glass used or their phone design is defective because his type of glass can can withstand impact severity far exceeding anything any consumer is able to expose the phone to.

What may be an issue is the failure to protect the edges. It could be exactly the same glass as helicopters, but how likely is that glass' edge going to hit pavement?

Not bloody likely.
post #105 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac View Post

I'm amazed at the lack of fair-mindendness in the comments on this. Of course we should all accept responsibility for our actions but this isn't what this plaintiff is arguing against. He is saying that the iPhone 4, in not withstanding a perfectly ordinary drop from 3 feet, is not fit for purpose. He is saying that the claims Apple have made about the durability of the glass used are misleading.

I'll agree with you when you show me where Apple has stated that the iPhone would survive a drop from 3 feet.

Yes, Apple made marketing claims which you (and this person suing) interpreted to mean something which they do not. They are technical claims that I bet can be backed up both scientifically (in the hardness case) and verifying the type of glass used (in the helicopter glass claim).

I don't see this suit going very far.
post #106 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targon View Post

LOL you muppets. Apple told us all it's super strong nearly indestructible. It's the same glass used in the windshield of military helicopters.

And as has been said, if I drop a helicopter, the windshield will shatter. Silence this foolishness.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #107 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targon View Post

LOL you muppets. Apple told us all it's super strong nearly indestructible. It's the same glass used in the windshield of military helicopters.

Either Apple is bullshitting about the type of glass used or their phone design is defective because his type of glass can can withstand impact severity far exceeding anything any consumer is able to expose the phone to.

It could be 2x as strong as the glass in the 3GS, but the edges and corners of glass are ALWAYS weak points, not just weak points, but failure points.

The difference would be the coverage of the edges/corners
post #108 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targon View Post

LOL you muppets. Apple told us all it's super strong nearly indestructible. It's the same glass used in the windshield of military helicopters.

Please show me where Apple said that the glass is "super strong nearly indestructible".

Quote:
Either Apple is bullshitting about the type of glass used or their phone design is defective because his type of glass can can withstand impact severity far exceeding anything any consumer is able to expose the phone to.

Can you back up your claim? Please provide your credentials demonstrating your expertise on this subject matter.
post #109 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift View Post

Thank you for the restatement of the facts. The "it's crazy!" version, sans facts, was started, I believe, by Rush Limbaugh. It's a question of belief. Facts are not relevant in his case.

In fact, I once spilled McDonald's coffee in my lap, before this case. I found out in an instant that it was very unusually hot. I rapidly stood up and held my pants away from my legs until it cooled, so I avoided the scalding I could feel starting during the first touch of the very hot coffee. It would be quite a different thing if I was a little old lady likely strapped into her seatbelt when the hot stuff hit her thighs and crotch.

Commercial drip coffee brewers have a water temp of between 205-210 degrees F pre brew chamber and 190-195 degrees F post brew, this temperature has been proven historically to provide the best tasting brew. If you happen to get a cup that has been poured from a just brewed pot then 190 or so is what the temp will be. McDonald's doesn't tell the franchisee how hot to hold coffee at, the local board of health does and the rules vary by location. Of the locations/standards I have seen it appears that somewhere between 130-140 is the desired temp. This is for sanitation/safety purposes BTW. Note that new water heaters caution you about setting water temps above 120 to protect from scalding....this is how lawsuits happen.
post #110 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jcoz View Post

It could be 2x as strong as the glass in the 3GS, but the edges and corners of glass are ALWAYS weak points, not just weak points, but failure points.

The difference would be the coverage of the edges/corners

The difference between a phone surviving or not is most likely related to the impact area and the angle of impact. Most phones probably survive and she was just not one of the lucky ones.
post #111 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac View Post

I'm amazed at the lack of fair-mindendness in the comments on this... He is saying that the iPhone 4, in not withstanding a perfectly ordinary drop from 3 feet, is not fit for purpose. He is saying that the claims Apple have made about the durability of the glass used are misleading....

Where the F--- do you get off being all logical and reasonable???
Take your fair-mindedness over to MacRumors. This is AppleInsider; when Apple is slighted, you circle the wagons and blast away.

Get with the program!
post #112 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Realistic View Post

She placed the coffee in her crotch first, then proceeded to spill it. Sorry no sympathy for anyone who places any warm or hot liquid in their crotch regardless of the reason.

I disagree. They were serving scalding hot coffee, there's no reason for it but to save a few bucks. Liquids as hot as they were selling are dangerous. They're like little thermal grenades with a cheap plastic lid.
post #113 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.

There is no way in physics that a liquid heated to even 10 degrees above standard serving temperature for coffee could cause third degree burns! Third degree burns involve deep tissue destruction and charring, usually requiring skin grafts! Please recheck your sources on that because those temperatures do not make sense, nor the claim of causing third degree burns.
post #114 of 303
Consumer Reports will have its revenge!!!
post #115 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targon View Post

LOL you muppets. Apple told us all it's super strong nearly indestructible. It's the same glass used in the windshield of military helicopters.

Either Apple is bullshitting about the type of glass used or their phone design is defective because his type of glass can can withstand impact severity far exceeding anything any consumer is able to expose the phone to.

It never occurred to you that while it is the same glass treatment used to create the iPhone, the glass used for these other purposes is much thicker now did it? You just blindly assumed that the windows designed to take direct impacts were the same 1mm thick glass on the iPhone now didn't you. Logic fail. Funny how I have had numerous phones of all different constructions that have cracked, broken, shattered and ceased to function when dropped from the usual height, but not once did I assume that I had to sue someone because I was clumsy at the moment. What a tool I've been!! I could be rolling in dough right now from Nokia, Samsung and RIM!!!!!


By the way I toss my iPhone across the room onto a table or shelf a couple of times a day and haven't broken it yet. Maybe just maybe the plaintiff neglected to mention that he STOMPED on it several times before the stupid thing shattered. I don't really care - it may well have been a simple uncased drop. That is immaterial. But you need some serious logic refreshers to regain some sensibility in your postings.
post #116 of 303
There is an applicable statute of limitations for this variety of glass action litigation. Where, as here, the case comes only subsequent in time to Plaintiff's alleged dropping of the iPhone4, it is very obviously tardy. Suit dismissed.
post #117 of 303
Another customer trying to get a free Iphone. No smartphone is breakproof. If he bought the phone for a child perhaps a better case would have helped.
post #118 of 303
Glass action? That's funny!
post #119 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

In the suit, he claims to have owned an iPhone 3GS that fell from a similar height but did not break. As such, he's calling bologna on the Cupertino-based company's marketing claims that the iPhone 4 glass as "20 times stiffer and 30 times harder than plastic," and is "ultradurable" having been made from the same material as the "glass used in helicopters and high-speed trains."

This is another thing that bothers me. It's like he basically admits that he is not careful with his gear.

I've had cell phones since the nineties and I have only dropped a phone once. I guess I am one of those funny people who takes care with my stuff.
post #120 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Actually, the capuccinos and espressos served in McDonalds (in the newer McDs that serve them) are surprisingly good.

Better than the bitter nonsense you get at Starbucks, as far as my palate is concerned.

What a way to save your own hide. Proclaim Starbucks is inferior based upon sound observations of your own opinion.
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