So Apple will replace or fix Mac's with a bit of discoloration.
Meanwhile, over 50,000 people are screaming because their iShuffle's blow up a day or two after the warranty expires.
Apple's response to that... "Really, we've never heard of that before".
They must be hiring new staff every few minutes to not have heard of this problem.
I guess it goes to show it's all about image with them. Can't have people looking at discolored macs... but don't have to worry about people packing around, showing friends their iPod's that don't work.
What kind of redress is typical for issues like this within the manufacturing industry? Will Apple get a truckload of new cases with the correct chemical formulation for use as replacements at little or no charge? Certainly the manufacturing contract had language about meeting specs, no?
Meanwhile, over 50,000 people are screaming because their iShuffle's blow up a day or two after the warranty expires.
...
I guess it goes to show it's all about image with them.
While I'm unfamiliar with the iShuffle (and its habit of exploding?), I'm curious to know more. Where does your 50,000 figure come from?
Also, the reason for not fixing something once the warranty has passed could be related, not to image, but rather to the warranty having passed. Still a real shame if your iShuffle (is that a case?) is one that detonates, but how many manufacturers fix things outside of warranty?
Actually, one I know of is Apple. They have repeatedly given warranty extentions in the past when a bad component has been found to fail late on a large scale.
So if the iShuffle is an Apple product, and if your 50,000 number is not a fiction, then you may still have hope of getting a new one out of Apple eventually even though your warranty is over.
If not, then however bad Apple is, they're still better than the rest. Which is NO excuse--Apple should not be let off the hook.
You'd be better off just reading what I quoted, and then read my post in the context of that. This way, you understand what I said before going on on a crusade.
Quote:
If the issue is not covered by warranty (like this cosmetic issue) then Apple STILL has the discretion to fix it--and they did for some people even before a formal policy developed.
The fact that Apple is repairing them tells us nothing about the number of people affected.
This is not a cosmetic issue. I expect my newly purchased, $1200 computer to not lose its color within 2 weeks of using it. It's like buying a pair of pants for $100 dollars, and having the pants just completely lose their color within 2 weeks (and no, you didn't wash them!).
So long as you insist that it's a cosmetic issue when it quite clearly isn't (as evidenced by Apple fixing "cosmetic" issues) then you're not the messenger. You're arguing that it is. A messenger doesn't argue. He only relays what others have told him, and since Apple appears to tell a different story...
So long as you insist that it's a cosmetic issue when it quite clearly isn't (as evidenced by Apple fixing "cosmetic" issues) then you're not the messenger. You're arguing that it is. A messenger doesn't argue. He only relays what others have told him, and since Apple appears to tell a different story...
well, it really depends upon in what sense people are using the word "cosmetic". One definition of the word is: "lacking depth or significance; superficial", another is: "serving an aesthetic rather than a useful purpose".
So, if someone were to say that this discolouration problem is a "cosmetic issue" meaning that it is not important, then I would disagree.
However, if they meant that it is an issue with the machines' cosmetics, then, duh, that's exactly what it is: a problem with the aesthetic (appearance) of the computers, not their function.
However, if they meant that it is an issue with the machines' cosmetics, then, duh, that's exactly what it is: a problem with the aesthetic (appearance) of the computers, not their function.
With the difference that this problem does not develop naturally under normal use for some reasonable time span (in which case the adjective "cosmetic" would be justified), but very abruptly in a matter of days, showing thus a construction or material defect.
While I'm unfamiliar with the iShuffle (and its habit of exploding?), I'm curious to know more. Where does your 50,000 figure come from?
Also, the reason for not fixing something once the warranty has passed could be related, not to image, but rather to the warranty having passed. Still a real shame if your iShuffle (is that a case?) is one that detonates, but how many manufacturers fix things outside of warranty?
Actually, one I know of is Apple. They have repeatedly given warranty extentions in the past when a bad component has been found to fail late on a large scale.
So if the iShuffle is an Apple product, and if your 50,000 number is not a fiction, then you may still have hope of getting a new one out of Apple eventually even though your warranty is over.
If not, then however bad Apple is, they're still better than the rest. Which is NO excuse--Apple should not be let off the hook.
Ok, I'm not sure if the number is exactly 50,000 at this moment, but it soon will be.
EVERY SINGLE ISHUFFLE is disposable. Do a search on google for "blinking green and orange lights" or iShuffle wont connect.
You will find thousands of forums with hundreds of post's of how it just stops working one day. (won't connect to computer, just blinks green and orange).
Ok, I'm not sure if the number is exactly 50,000 at this moment, but it soon will be.
EVERY SINGLE ISHUFFLE is disposable. Do a search on google for "blinking green and orange lights" or iShuffle wont connect.
You will find thousands of forums with hundreds of post's of how it just stops working one day. (won't connect to computer, just blinks green and orange).
Ok, I'm not sure if the number is exactly 50,000 at this moment, but it soon will be.
EVERY SINGLE ISHUFFLE is disposable. Do a search on google for "blinking green and orange lights" or iShuffle wont connect.
You will find thousands of forums with hundreds of post's of how it just stops working one day. (won't connect to computer, just blinks green and orange).
And the discussion board on Apple's own site has thousands of threads as well. (yet they still state that they are "unaware" of the problem.
Some people reported that they have had 4 of them just die on them, and they just keep sending them back to Apple.
The two I owned both died... both a few weeks after the warranty ran out, as thousands of others have also posted.
Several sites are already gathering names for a class action lawsuit.
I guess when the problem is large enough, Apple waits for the big nasty law suits, and is forced to action, rather then opting to deal with it.
I don't have time to go and spend days gathering links and exact numbers, but this will be the next class action suit against Apple.
If it matters that much to you, research it for youself.
Oh... and don't buy an iShuffle.
Using your figure of 50,000 failures (which is not confirmed) and the article you linked to which states Apple sell around a million iPod Shuffles a month, that means the failure rate is very low.
It works out at a 0.27% failure rate which for electronic items is low.
Now if we take what is a more realistic view i.e some of these failures are actually caused by user misuse and that the number os actually more like 10,000 then it comes down to a tiny 0.05%
"The internet community has continued to question durability of Apple's iPod line, leaving some consumers to question whether the popular portable media players are built well enough to withstand the normal everyday wear and tear. Apple has acknowledged some issues in the recent past, offering battery replacements to some and free Nano replacements to those customers who purchased the tiny players with easily-cracked or scratched LCDs. Other problems remain, however, according to a report from the Chicago Tribune, and its virtually impossible to determine how widespread the problems actually are, as Apple is the only reliable source for data; however, Apple spokesperson Natalie Kerris says that iPods have a failure rate of less than 5 percent, which is "fairly low" compared to other consumer electronics. "The vast majority of our customers are extremely happy with their iPods," Kerris said, noting that iPods are designed to last four years.
Rob Enderle, principal analyst for Enderle Group in San Jose estimates that 15 percent of iPods will fail within one year. The analyst noted that a 15 percent failure rate is roughly comparable to other small electronic devices.
One online survey suggests that Apple's iPod failure rate is around 14 percent--half of which were battery related and half of which were related to the hard drive found in Apple's larger-size iPods. Some industry watchers, however, believe that sheer numbers--which are quite large as Apple has sold over 40 million units total--are responsible for most reported iPod troubles.
"Any time you have that many of anything," some will fail to function properly, according to Bob O'Donnell, vice president at IDC.
As you can see at a 15% failure rate which is the industry norm there would be over 2.7 million faulty iPod shuffles, which is clearly not the case. So your 50,000 looks very very small.
However, if they meant that it is an issue with the machines' cosmetics, then, duh, that's exactly what it is: a problem with the aesthetic (appearance) of the computers, not their function.
Well, duh, if you followed the discussion, you would know that that's not the way they meant it. They said that it was a 'cosmetic' issue that 'Apple doesn't fix anyway', meaning that it's unimportant and rather insignificant to users of said product.
Comments
Meanwhile, over 50,000 people are screaming because their iShuffle's blow up a day or two after the warranty expires.
Apple's response to that... "Really, we've never heard of that before".
They must be hiring new staff every few minutes to not have heard of this problem.
I guess it goes to show it's all about image with them. Can't have people looking at discolored macs... but don't have to worry about people packing around, showing friends their iPod's that don't work.
gc
Originally posted by rain
Meanwhile, over 50,000 people are screaming because their iShuffle's blow up a day or two after the warranty expires.
Really, I've never heard of that before.
No.....really.
Originally posted by rain
Meanwhile, over 50,000 people are screaming because their iShuffle's blow up a day or two after the warranty expires.
...
I guess it goes to show it's all about image with them.
While I'm unfamiliar with the iShuffle (and its habit of exploding?), I'm curious to know more. Where does your 50,000 figure come from?
Also, the reason for not fixing something once the warranty has passed could be related, not to image, but rather to the warranty having passed. Still a real shame if your iShuffle (is that a case?) is one that detonates, but how many manufacturers fix things outside of warranty?
Actually, one I know of is Apple. They have repeatedly given warranty extentions in the past when a bad component has been found to fail late on a large scale.
So if the iShuffle is an Apple product, and if your 50,000 number is not a fiction, then you may still have hope of getting a new one out of Apple eventually even though your warranty is over.
If not, then however bad Apple is, they're still better than the rest. Which is NO excuse--Apple should not be let off the hook.
Originally posted by rain
Meanwhile, over 50,000 people are screaming because their iShuffle's blow up a day or two after the warranty expires.
ishuffle? that must have had something to do with those iShoes that Richard Reid couldn't get to blow up on Flight 63
Originally posted by nagromme
And Apple wouldn't?
You'd be better off just reading what I quoted, and then read my post in the context of that. This way, you understand what I said before going on on a crusade.
If the issue is not covered by warranty (like this cosmetic issue) then Apple STILL has the discretion to fix it--and they did for some people even before a formal policy developed.
The fact that Apple is repairing them tells us nothing about the number of people affected.
This is not a cosmetic issue. I expect my newly purchased, $1200 computer to not lose its color within 2 weeks of using it. It's like buying a pair of pants for $100 dollars, and having the pants just completely lose their color within 2 weeks (and no, you didn't wash them!).
What, is that a cosmetic issue as well? Please.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
This is not a cosmetic issue. I expect my newly purchased, $1200 computer to not lose its color within 2 weeks of using it.
I expect the same, and Apple agrees, but yes, it IS a cosmetic issue
Originally posted by Gene Clean
So long as you insist that it's a cosmetic issue when it quite clearly isn't (as evidenced by Apple fixing "cosmetic" issues) then you're not the messenger. You're arguing that it is. A messenger doesn't argue. He only relays what others have told him, and since Apple appears to tell a different story...
well, it really depends upon in what sense people are using the word "cosmetic". One definition of the word is: "lacking depth or significance; superficial", another is: "serving an aesthetic rather than a useful purpose".
So, if someone were to say that this discolouration problem is a "cosmetic issue" meaning that it is not important, then I would disagree.
However, if they meant that it is an issue with the machines' cosmetics, then, duh, that's exactly what it is: a problem with the aesthetic (appearance) of the computers, not their function.
Originally posted by Elixir
are they replacing or fixign the black macbook's as well?
I'm curious how this problem looks on the black Macbooks?
From AppleInsider's article (emphasis mine):
"Some white MacBook computers may exhibit discoloration on the top case after some use,"
Originally posted by Mr. H
However, if they meant that it is an issue with the machines' cosmetics, then, duh, that's exactly what it is: a problem with the aesthetic (appearance) of the computers, not their function.
With the difference that this problem does not develop naturally under normal use for some reasonable time span (in which case the adjective "cosmetic" would be justified), but very abruptly in a matter of days, showing thus a construction or material defect.
Originally posted by nagromme
While I'm unfamiliar with the iShuffle (and its habit of exploding?), I'm curious to know more. Where does your 50,000 figure come from?
Also, the reason for not fixing something once the warranty has passed could be related, not to image, but rather to the warranty having passed. Still a real shame if your iShuffle (is that a case?) is one that detonates, but how many manufacturers fix things outside of warranty?
Actually, one I know of is Apple. They have repeatedly given warranty extentions in the past when a bad component has been found to fail late on a large scale.
So if the iShuffle is an Apple product, and if your 50,000 number is not a fiction, then you may still have hope of getting a new one out of Apple eventually even though your warranty is over.
If not, then however bad Apple is, they're still better than the rest. Which is NO excuse--Apple should not be let off the hook.
Ok, I'm not sure if the number is exactly 50,000 at this moment, but it soon will be.
EVERY SINGLE ISHUFFLE is disposable. Do a search on google for "blinking green and orange lights" or iShuffle wont connect.
You will find thousands of forums with hundreds of post's of how it just stops working one day. (won't connect to computer, just blinks green and orange).
There has been a lot of media coverage on this as well. MSN, CNN, MacAddict, ... the list goes on and on.http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/...46,pg,1,00.asp
*for one example*
And the discussion board on Apple's own site has thousands of threads as well. (yet they still state that they are "unaware" of the problem.
Some people reported that they have had 4 of them just die on them, and they just keep sending them back to Apple.
The two I owned both died... both a few weeks after the warranty ran out, as thousands of others have also posted.
Several sites are already gathering names for a class action lawsuit.
I guess when the problem is large enough, Apple waits for the big nasty law suits, and is forced to action, rather then opting to deal with it.
I don't have time to go and spend days gathering links and exact numbers, but this will be the next class action suit against Apple.
If it matters that much to you, research it for youself.
Oh... and don't buy an iShuffle.
Originally posted by rain
Ok, I'm not sure if the number is exactly 50,000 at this moment, but it soon will be.
EVERY SINGLE ISHUFFLE is disposable. Do a search on google for "blinking green and orange lights" or iShuffle wont connect.
You will find thousands of forums with hundreds of post's of how it just stops working one day. (won't connect to computer, just blinks green and orange).
There has been a lot of media coverage on this as well. MSN, CNN, MacAddict, ... the list goes on and on.http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/...46,pg,1,00.asp
*for one example*
And the discussion board on Apple's own site has thousands of threads as well. (yet they still state that they are "unaware" of the problem.
Some people reported that they have had 4 of them just die on them, and they just keep sending them back to Apple.
The two I owned both died... both a few weeks after the warranty ran out, as thousands of others have also posted.
Several sites are already gathering names for a class action lawsuit.
I guess when the problem is large enough, Apple waits for the big nasty law suits, and is forced to action, rather then opting to deal with it.
I don't have time to go and spend days gathering links and exact numbers, but this will be the next class action suit against Apple.
If it matters that much to you, research it for youself.
Oh... and don't buy an iShuffle.
If you are going to complain about a product then at least get the name right.
It is not called an iShuffle it is called an iPod Shuffle.
Ian
Originally posted by rain
Ok, I'm not sure if the number is exactly 50,000 at this moment, but it soon will be.
EVERY SINGLE ISHUFFLE is disposable. Do a search on google for "blinking green and orange lights" or iShuffle wont connect.
You will find thousands of forums with hundreds of post's of how it just stops working one day. (won't connect to computer, just blinks green and orange).
There has been a lot of media coverage on this as well. MSN, CNN, MacAddict, ... the list goes on and on.http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/...46,pg,1,00.asp
*for one example*
And the discussion board on Apple's own site has thousands of threads as well. (yet they still state that they are "unaware" of the problem.
Some people reported that they have had 4 of them just die on them, and they just keep sending them back to Apple.
The two I owned both died... both a few weeks after the warranty ran out, as thousands of others have also posted.
Several sites are already gathering names for a class action lawsuit.
I guess when the problem is large enough, Apple waits for the big nasty law suits, and is forced to action, rather then opting to deal with it.
I don't have time to go and spend days gathering links and exact numbers, but this will be the next class action suit against Apple.
If it matters that much to you, research it for youself.
Oh... and don't buy an iShuffle.
Using your figure of 50,000 failures (which is not confirmed) and the article you linked to which states Apple sell around a million iPod Shuffles a month, that means the failure rate is very low.
It works out at a 0.27% failure rate which for electronic items is low.
Now if we take what is a more realistic view i.e some of these failures are actually caused by user misuse and that the number os actually more like 10,000 then it comes down to a tiny 0.05%
Ian
From MacNN :-
"The internet community has continued to question durability of Apple's iPod line, leaving some consumers to question whether the popular portable media players are built well enough to withstand the normal everyday wear and tear. Apple has acknowledged some issues in the recent past, offering battery replacements to some and free Nano replacements to those customers who purchased the tiny players with easily-cracked or scratched LCDs. Other problems remain, however, according to a report from the Chicago Tribune, and its virtually impossible to determine how widespread the problems actually are, as Apple is the only reliable source for data; however, Apple spokesperson Natalie Kerris says that iPods have a failure rate of less than 5 percent, which is "fairly low" compared to other consumer electronics. "The vast majority of our customers are extremely happy with their iPods," Kerris said, noting that iPods are designed to last four years.
Rob Enderle, principal analyst for Enderle Group in San Jose estimates that 15 percent of iPods will fail within one year. The analyst noted that a 15 percent failure rate is roughly comparable to other small electronic devices.
One online survey suggests that Apple's iPod failure rate is around 14 percent--half of which were battery related and half of which were related to the hard drive found in Apple's larger-size iPods. Some industry watchers, however, believe that sheer numbers--which are quite large as Apple has sold over 40 million units total--are responsible for most reported iPod troubles.
"Any time you have that many of anything," some will fail to function properly, according to Bob O'Donnell, vice president at IDC.
As you can see at a 15% failure rate which is the industry norm there would be over 2.7 million faulty iPod shuffles, which is clearly not the case. So your 50,000 looks very very small.
Ian
Originally posted by Mr. H
However, if they meant that it is an issue with the machines' cosmetics, then, duh, that's exactly what it is: a problem with the aesthetic (appearance) of the computers, not their function.
Well, duh, if you followed the discussion, you would know that that's not the way they meant it. They said that it was a 'cosmetic' issue that 'Apple doesn't fix anyway', meaning that it's unimportant and rather insignificant to users of said product.
The users, however, disagree.