Apple's behaviour has been a little strange recently.
Of course it is! Apple were set to change computing on the 25th anniversary of the last time they changed computing then someone stole a tablet (sorry 'iPhone') prototype and their patents won't stand up. Why would they act normal?
"The trouble began when Liverpool's Ken Stanborough dropped his 11-year-old daughter's iPod touch. The device hissed, then popped and allegedly shot 10 feet into the air."
Seriously?!? 10ft?!? Yeah--right. With all the free touches out there--(and who hasn't dropped theirs at least once) if they could launch 10ft in the air, we would have seen this on youtube long ago.
Have any physics boffins worked out whether a fully-charged iPod Touch stores enough energy for it to defy gravity for 10 feet?
10 ft my.... that how far it bounce when he through it because it daughter was drowned out him yelling at her.
Yes, this happens all the time, a company agrees to do something for you which is out side the norm and they expect you to keep your mouth shut since they do not plan to do this for others.
i am sorry there is no expectation that a product not do something that was not intended when you miss handle a product which this guy obviously admitted too.
However, in the UK they look at this stuff different, Manufactures are expect to protect people from being stupid, or using a product which it was never intended to used as, like using the door of stove of washing machine as step stool. There are well documented cases in the UK where people tried using the open door on the stove or washing machine only to get hurt. So now those product sold in the UK must protect against this unintended use.
You and the others that are blaming this consumer because you are Apple fanboys and defend Apple no matter what should be ashamed of yourselves. A product like this is not suppose to explode even if mishandled and it does not excuse Apple's behavior.
Her Royal subjects appear to be want the product that lasting longer than her Palace. Even after drops. Sadly, some of not to be her Royal subjects agree. At least one good thing comes out of the story: they didn't take the money, so they could showcase their superior (or imperial?) logic to the world.
Yes, you're right. I think when most people see "settlement" in legal terms, they equate it with one party giving another party a large sum of money to keep quiet. In Apple's case, you just get the original value of the device back, nothing more. Not sure why these people didn't accept the offer from Apple, no one was harmed and no property was damaged other than the iPod itself. Just take the new iPod and call it a day.
It is in legal terms, if the document is signed. That's how settlements work. You agree to my offer, agree not to ask for anything else, agree not to sue, agree not to discuss with others what we agreed to. Not a big deal. Granted, it might seem like overkill in a situation like this, but then again, look at what Apple is dealing with in these people. I'm sure it gets even worse.
We'll just have to agree to disagree. Tax has a specific meaning. What you're describing may sound nice in a populist sense but it definitely not a tax to my mind.
You see, there's a different feeling about taxes here in the States. Many people here feel that whatever government does to force a service on us that would also increase prices is a hidden tax.
There's a difference in philosophy. Here, people would prefer to keep taxes, and prices low, and to worry about their own problems, if they have them.
There, you would prefer government to tax and take care of those problems. If you gave people here a choice, they would prefer warrantee service the way it is here, and not pay a dime extra for what they would see as a problematic chance of getting relief anyway.
Quote:
That comes from a perspective that is different from mine. You think it nice, but in a lot of places, in the right circumstances, such behaviour is legally expected.
Yes, that's what I've been saying. There is a different perspective. But from what MR. H and another here has said, you seem to have not much more of a chance of getting relief than we do.
How do you know? Its unlikely Apple would have made the offer if this was a bogus claim. It's not like they do this for every broken iPod. They only do this when they've been able to substantiate the claim. I've been through this process myself.
You know, this goes back to lithium battery problems again. If Apple doesn't make them, or design them, they could just do what was done before with the laptop batteries, which was the same every other company did, which is to out the manufacturer of those batteries.
It isn't the iPod so much as it is the battery. If the battery was defective, and it was dropped, then it could likely short.
The problem with lithium batteries is that they develop "whiskers" from miniscule impurities, that short out the cells.
If there are short whiskers, then a drop might cause that battery to distort just a few thousandths of an inch, causing a short. Once that happens, it cascades through the battery. We know the rest.
Have any physics boffins worked out whether a fully-charged iPod Touch stores enough energy for it to defy gravity for 10 feet?
McD
If the battery were fully charged, it would pack a wallop. There are gasses emitted when the thing shorts. The battery would burst, and depending on how the case was damaged, could come out in one direction, aided, perhaps by the bounce from the initial impact.
A 38 doesn't carry more charge than the average music player battery, less.
This has nothing to do with a "settlement," there was no lawsuit here. They asked for a refund. An NDA for a refund. Absurd.
You didn't read the article, like most others here as well. They filed a claim against Apple for negligence because the iPod was out of warranty and these boneheads tried to blame Apple for a defective product when they DROPPED IT! Dumbasses!
When you file a claim for negligence/liability against a person or company, and there is a settlement, a RELEASE IN FULL is always signed. Any settlement can have a non-disclosure statement attached to it. There is nothing wrong with that.
When you leave a company, either on your own will or if discharged, the employer will ask you to sign a confidentiality statement barring you from disclosing trade-secrets that you acquired during your employment. Nothing illegal or deceitful about that either.
How do you know? Its unlikely Apple would have made the offer if this was a bogus claim. It's not like they do this for every broken iPod. They only do this when they've been able to substantiate the claim. I've been through this process myself.
I have too and they have never batted an eye at replacing an iPod that was still under warranty for me, and while at the Genius bar I have seen them agree to replace equipment out of warranty too.
It's not an accident they get consistently high marks for customer service. Stories like this get magnified and sensationalized through the internet echo chamber and blown way out of proportion. Besides, the mere fact he didn't want to return the broken iPod immediately makes me suspicious and not very sympathetic.
You and the others that are blaming this consumer because you are Apple fanboys and defend Apple no matter what should be ashamed of yourselves. A product like this is not suppose to explode even if mishandled and it does not excuse Apple's behavior.
How do you know it exploded? Were you there? Was the reporter there? No.
And the guy refused to surrender it to get the refund. Now why is that? Seems like you are giving a lot of credibility to a guy you don't know and a newspaper that is known for sensationalism.
Just because it's on the Internet (or in a newspaper) doesn't mean it's instantly true. How about before you start throwing around the fanboi label we all just apply a little levity and common sense?
Some of these comments are so funny. Thanks for posting. :-)
"However, in the UK they look at this stuff different, Manufactures are expect to protect people from being stupid, or using a product which it was never intended to used as, like using the door of stove of washing machine as step stool. "
I can see it now. UK Apple iPods now come in a huge case so people cannot stick them up their bums.... :-) Hey we are trying to do the same thing here in the USA. :-(
A car catches fire every 96 seconds according to wiki. Guess that means that we need to ban cars in the USA cause, well..... you never know when that could happen.... And tires, they go flat while driving....... OMG this is such a dangerous world. LOL JPF LOL
A car catches fire every 96 seconds according to wiki. Guess that means that we need to ban cars in the USA cause, well..... you never know when that could happen.... And tires, they go flat while driving....... OMG this is such a dangerous world. LOL JPF LOL
Just a thought.
en
One time, my engine over heated while I was cooking a hamburger on it. I'm never buying another ford again!
Some of these comments are so funny. Thanks for posting. :-)
"However, in the UK they look at this stuff different, Manufactures are expect to protect people from being stupid, or using a product which it was never intended to used as, like using the door of stove of washing machine as step stool. "
It's interesting that you interpret a law requiring products to be of "satisfactory quality" like this.
You can read the Act here. If you'd care to point to the parts that support your interpretation, I'm all ears.
You and the others that are blaming this consumer because you are Apple fanboys and defend Apple no matter what should be ashamed of yourselves. A product like this is not suppose to explode even if mishandled and it does not excuse Apple's behavior.
"Not suppose to explode even if mishandled....", Dear Sir, please identify the source of the statement. I would really appreciate to know what kind of the Li ion battery was used that would prevent the danger of explosion upon damage. Here are my understanding of the Li battery limitation (at least based on the current technology on the market):
"Do not apply any heavy impact to the battery, throw or drop it. Otherwise the battery may be shorted and result in heat generation, explosion or fire."
You and the others that are blaming this consumer because you are Apple fanboys and defend Apple no matter what should be ashamed of yourselves. A product like this is not suppose to explode even if mishandled and it does not excuse Apple's behavior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1st
"Not suppose to explode even if mishandled....", Dear Sir, please identify the source of the statement. I would really appreciate to know what kind of the Li ion battery was used that would prevent the danger of explosion upon damage. Here are my understanding of the Li battery limitation (at least based on the current technology on the market):
"Do not apply any heavy impact to the battery, throw or drop it. Otherwise the battery may be shorted and result in heat generation, explosion or fire."
Please educate me. Many thanks in advance.
The BEST post ever! Proves how stupid Bizwarrior is! Every battery has a warning about possible explosion or fire if mishandled. The dumbass claimant DROPPED the iPod and there was no evidence to prove it exploded. Just another idiot that thinks he should get something for free when he broke it!
I have too and they have never batted an eye at replacing an iPod that was still under warranty for me, and while at the Genius bar I have seen them agree to replace equipment out of warranty too.
It's not an accident they get consistently high marks for customer service. Stories like this get magnified and sensationalized through the internet echo chamber and blown way out of proportion. Besides, the mere fact he didn't want to return the broken iPod immediately makes me suspicious and not very sympathetic.
I had the same thing happen to my friends' daughter. I went with her to the SoHo Apple store, because I needed to get something, and she had to bring in her 3 year old 2nd gen iPod for repair.
They just exchanged it for another 4th gen model, as they didn't have any more 2nd gen ones left. They even asked her if that was ok. They didn't charge either.
Comments
Apple's behaviour has been a little strange recently.
Of course it is! Apple were set to change computing on the 25th anniversary of the last time they changed computing then someone stole a tablet (sorry 'iPhone') prototype and their patents won't stand up. Why would they act normal?
McD
"The trouble began when Liverpool's Ken Stanborough dropped his 11-year-old daughter's iPod touch. The device hissed, then popped and allegedly shot 10 feet into the air."
Seriously?!? 10ft?!? Yeah--right.
Have any physics boffins worked out whether a fully-charged iPod Touch stores enough energy for it to defy gravity for 10 feet?
McD
10 ft my.... that how far it bounce when he through it because it daughter was drowned out him yelling at her.
Yes, this happens all the time, a company agrees to do something for you which is out side the norm and they expect you to keep your mouth shut since they do not plan to do this for others.
i am sorry there is no expectation that a product not do something that was not intended when you miss handle a product which this guy obviously admitted too.
However, in the UK they look at this stuff different, Manufactures are expect to protect people from being stupid, or using a product which it was never intended to used as, like using the door of stove of washing machine as step stool. There are well documented cases in the UK where people tried using the open door on the stove or washing machine only to get hurt. So now those product sold in the UK must protect against this unintended use.
You and the others that are blaming this consumer because you are Apple fanboys and defend Apple no matter what should be ashamed of yourselves. A product like this is not suppose to explode even if mishandled and it does not excuse Apple's behavior.
It's "We Americans,".
Her Royal subjects appear to be want the product that lasting longer than her Palace. Even after drops. Sadly, some of not to be her Royal subjects agree. At least one good thing comes out of the story: they didn't take the money, so they could showcase their superior (or imperial?) logic to the world.
Yes, you're right. I think when most people see "settlement" in legal terms, they equate it with one party giving another party a large sum of money to keep quiet. In Apple's case, you just get the original value of the device back, nothing more. Not sure why these people didn't accept the offer from Apple, no one was harmed and no property was damaged other than the iPod itself. Just take the new iPod and call it a day.
It is in legal terms, if the document is signed. That's how settlements work. You agree to my offer, agree not to ask for anything else, agree not to sue, agree not to discuss with others what we agreed to. Not a big deal. Granted, it might seem like overkill in a situation like this, but then again, look at what Apple is dealing with in these people. I'm sure it gets even worse.
We'll just have to agree to disagree. Tax has a specific meaning. What you're describing may sound nice in a populist sense but it definitely not a tax to my mind.
You see, there's a different feeling about taxes here in the States. Many people here feel that whatever government does to force a service on us that would also increase prices is a hidden tax.
There's a difference in philosophy. Here, people would prefer to keep taxes, and prices low, and to worry about their own problems, if they have them.
There, you would prefer government to tax and take care of those problems. If you gave people here a choice, they would prefer warrantee service the way it is here, and not pay a dime extra for what they would see as a problematic chance of getting relief anyway.
That comes from a perspective that is different from mine. You think it nice, but in a lot of places, in the right circumstances, such behaviour is legally expected.
Yes, that's what I've been saying. There is a different perspective. But from what MR. H and another here has said, you seem to have not much more of a chance of getting relief than we do.
How do you know? Its unlikely Apple would have made the offer if this was a bogus claim. It's not like they do this for every broken iPod. They only do this when they've been able to substantiate the claim. I've been through this process myself.
You know, this goes back to lithium battery problems again. If Apple doesn't make them, or design them, they could just do what was done before with the laptop batteries, which was the same every other company did, which is to out the manufacturer of those batteries.
It isn't the iPod so much as it is the battery. If the battery was defective, and it was dropped, then it could likely short.
The problem with lithium batteries is that they develop "whiskers" from miniscule impurities, that short out the cells.
If there are short whiskers, then a drop might cause that battery to distort just a few thousandths of an inch, causing a short. Once that happens, it cascades through the battery. We know the rest.
Have any physics boffins worked out whether a fully-charged iPod Touch stores enough energy for it to defy gravity for 10 feet?
McD
If the battery were fully charged, it would pack a wallop. There are gasses emitted when the thing shorts. The battery would burst, and depending on how the case was damaged, could come out in one direction, aided, perhaps by the bounce from the initial impact.
A 38 doesn't carry more charge than the average music player battery, less.
Apple = News magnet
+1!
This has nothing to do with a "settlement," there was no lawsuit here. They asked for a refund. An NDA for a refund. Absurd.
You didn't read the article, like most others here as well. They filed a claim against Apple for negligence because the iPod was out of warranty and these boneheads tried to blame Apple for a defective product when they DROPPED IT! Dumbasses!
When you file a claim for negligence/liability against a person or company, and there is a settlement, a RELEASE IN FULL is always signed. Any settlement can have a non-disclosure statement attached to it. There is nothing wrong with that.
When you leave a company, either on your own will or if discharged, the employer will ask you to sign a confidentiality statement barring you from disclosing trade-secrets that you acquired during your employment. Nothing illegal or deceitful about that either.
How do you know? Its unlikely Apple would have made the offer if this was a bogus claim. It's not like they do this for every broken iPod. They only do this when they've been able to substantiate the claim. I've been through this process myself.
I have too and they have never batted an eye at replacing an iPod that was still under warranty for me, and while at the Genius bar I have seen them agree to replace equipment out of warranty too.
It's not an accident they get consistently high marks for customer service. Stories like this get magnified and sensationalized through the internet echo chamber and blown way out of proportion. Besides, the mere fact he didn't want to return the broken iPod immediately makes me suspicious and not very sympathetic.
You and the others that are blaming this consumer because you are Apple fanboys and defend Apple no matter what should be ashamed of yourselves. A product like this is not suppose to explode even if mishandled and it does not excuse Apple's behavior.
How do you know it exploded? Were you there? Was the reporter there? No.
And the guy refused to surrender it to get the refund. Now why is that? Seems like you are giving a lot of credibility to a guy you don't know and a newspaper that is known for sensationalism.
Just because it's on the Internet (or in a newspaper) doesn't mean it's instantly true. How about before you start throwing around the fanboi label we all just apply a little levity and common sense?
"However, in the UK they look at this stuff different, Manufactures are expect to protect people from being stupid, or using a product which it was never intended to used as, like using the door of stove of washing machine as step stool. "
I can see it now. UK Apple iPods now come in a huge case so people cannot stick them up their bums.... :-) Hey we are trying to do the same thing here in the USA. :-(
A car catches fire every 96 seconds according to wiki. Guess that means that we need to ban cars in the USA cause, well..... you never know when that could happen.... And tires, they go flat while driving....... OMG this is such a dangerous world. LOL JPF LOL
Just a thought.
en
A car catches fire every 96 seconds according to wiki. Guess that means that we need to ban cars in the USA cause, well..... you never know when that could happen.... And tires, they go flat while driving....... OMG this is such a dangerous world. LOL JPF LOL
Just a thought.
en
One time, my engine over heated while I was cooking a hamburger on it. I'm never buying another ford again!
Some of these comments are so funny. Thanks for posting. :-)
"However, in the UK they look at this stuff different, Manufactures are expect to protect people from being stupid, or using a product which it was never intended to used as, like using the door of stove of washing machine as step stool. "
It's interesting that you interpret a law requiring products to be of "satisfactory quality" like this.
You can read the Act here. If you'd care to point to the parts that support your interpretation, I'm all ears.
You and the others that are blaming this consumer because you are Apple fanboys and defend Apple no matter what should be ashamed of yourselves. A product like this is not suppose to explode even if mishandled and it does not excuse Apple's behavior.
"Not suppose to explode even if mishandled....", Dear Sir, please identify the source of the statement. I would really appreciate to know what kind of the Li ion battery was used that would prevent the danger of explosion upon damage. Here are my understanding of the Li battery limitation (at least based on the current technology on the market):
http://www.maxell.co.jp/e/products/i...attention.html
"Do not apply any heavy impact to the battery, throw or drop it. Otherwise the battery may be shorted and result in heat generation, explosion or fire."
Please educate me. Many thanks in advance.
You and the others that are blaming this consumer because you are Apple fanboys and defend Apple no matter what should be ashamed of yourselves. A product like this is not suppose to explode even if mishandled and it does not excuse Apple's behavior.
"Not suppose to explode even if mishandled....", Dear Sir, please identify the source of the statement. I would really appreciate to know what kind of the Li ion battery was used that would prevent the danger of explosion upon damage. Here are my understanding of the Li battery limitation (at least based on the current technology on the market):
http://www.maxell.co.jp/e/products/i...attention.html
"Do not apply any heavy impact to the battery, throw or drop it. Otherwise the battery may be shorted and result in heat generation, explosion or fire."
Please educate me. Many thanks in advance.
The BEST post ever! Proves how stupid Bizwarrior is! Every battery has a warning about possible explosion or fire if mishandled. The dumbass claimant DROPPED the iPod and there was no evidence to prove it exploded. Just another idiot that thinks he should get something for free when he broke it!
I have too and they have never batted an eye at replacing an iPod that was still under warranty for me, and while at the Genius bar I have seen them agree to replace equipment out of warranty too.
It's not an accident they get consistently high marks for customer service. Stories like this get magnified and sensationalized through the internet echo chamber and blown way out of proportion. Besides, the mere fact he didn't want to return the broken iPod immediately makes me suspicious and not very sympathetic.
I had the same thing happen to my friends' daughter. I went with her to the SoHo Apple store, because I needed to get something, and she had to bring in her 3 year old 2nd gen iPod for repair.
They just exchanged it for another 4th gen model, as they didn't have any more 2nd gen ones left. They even asked her if that was ok. They didn't charge either.
One time, my engine over heated while I was cooking a hamburger on it. I'm never buying another ford again!
Good one.