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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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).
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.
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".
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.
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.
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.
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
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?
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".
Comments
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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".
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.
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.
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.
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
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".
I'm not American. I'm Canadian and proud of it. We don't sue anybody.
Ha-ha. Right.
A foreign automaker is trying to kill their American customers, and that's OK..... Where's the justice?
This is so off-base at so many different levels, I don't know where to begin.