HomePod's silicone bottom is causing rings on some finished wood surfaces [u]

123457»

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 134
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,799member
    rogifan_new said:
    did Apple come across this in their QA/employee experience testing? 
    It's not like Apple doesn't own more wood tables than anyone else on the planet.
  • Reply 122 of 134
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,305member
    So it's almost sounds like another Apple, You're using it Wrong excuse!!! So now you have to think about where you place your speaker? Is this table safe? To me, that seems a little silly. I see another Class Action coming Apple's way!!! If Apple for example, put a Rubber bottom on the unit, you wouldn't have these issues. Doesn't Apple test these things out of the LAB, in the real world. No one came across this issue?
  • Reply 123 of 134
    anomeanome Posts: 1,533member
    volcan said:
    rogifan_new said:
    did Apple come across this in their QA/employee experience testing? 
    It's not like Apple doesn't own more wood tables than anyone else on the planet.

    I had a look at my local Apple Store last night, and there wasn't any noticeable ring under the HomePod on their polished wood bench.

    This could be for either of two reasons - the benches used by Apple aren't polished with the silicone based oil that causes the problem, or the cleaning staff pick the thing up and clean underneath it each night.

    In my opinion (humble or otherwise, I'm not the one to judge) this does fall more under "Care of wooden furniture" than "Correct installation of electronic equipment". Given the weight of the HomePod, and how speakers are normally put in one place and left there, in all probability anything they used for the base of the unit was going to leave a mark. Maybe we might expect it to take slightly longer than a week, but that might mean we're having this argument in June rather than now.

    I expect Apple will fix this, possibly not before HomePod 2.0, but at some point they'll put a felt layer under the silicone, or possibly tweak the composition. In the meantime, do what your mother told you to do, and use a coaster when you put something on the good furniture.

    tmay
  • Reply 124 of 134
    anome said:

    I had a look at my local Apple Store last night, and there wasn't any noticeable ring under the HomePod on their polished wood bench.

    This could be for either of two reasons - the benches used by Apple aren't polished with the silicone based oil that causes the problem, or the cleaning staff pick the thing up and clean underneath it each night.

    More likely, it's a polymer / urethane-type surface. Impermeable.
  • Reply 125 of 134
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    tmay said:
    It's just a specific formulation, and I'm quite aware that all materials aren't the same, and yet you haven't made mention of what alternate material is appropriate.
    Anything that would prevent the ring from forming on surfaces commonly found where you'd place a small speaker. Do you honestly believe there's one right answer? It's like if I mentioned that Samsung dropped the ball on properly testing batteries that caused damage and you chimed back with "EXPLAIN ME TO THE EXACT CHEMICAL FORMUA FOR THE BATTERY THEY SHOULD'VE USED!1!" It's irreverent and you'd sound like a Samsung zealot if you said that… just as you sound like an Apple zealot because I said it's an oversight by Apple.
    The Galaxy Note 7 battery fires were found to be due to some specific errors in the design and implementation of those batteries. “Chemical formula” is probably not the right question, but I think ultimately Samsung themselves were pretty specific in naming the issues that were at the root of that problem.

    Unlike battery design and manufacturing that can and should be controlled to a point where there aren’t very many variables that haven’t been considered, it’s about impossible for a manufacturer to anticipate and eliminate all problems that could result from the wide variety of finishes and cleaning products that are used for home furniture. So your second sentence above kind of undermines the insistence in the first sentence. I think Apple probably did make the HomePod out of materials that won’t cause a ring “on surfaces commonly found where you’d place a small speaker.” It’s a much taller order to insist that they use materials that won’t interact in any way with any surface. Apple has a core principle of controlling variables within their products. It’s not really possible to control all the variables that exist outside but proximate to their products. Nobody can do that.
    That doesn't affect my comment since that's in quotes. It's an example of someone trying to discredit someone's opinion by looking for ridiculous specifics. We can move that example to the design of the battery, which can include its chemical composition but let's ignore that aspect. I've read that it was too large, but how? Too tall? Too wide? Too thick? Even if you get some sort of specific answer to that question you have to know by how much. Then you have the chips that control how the battery. Perhaps it was an impurity in the construction of the battery (which may also have affected Apple batteries in many stories). Could the battery have been punctured? Dendrites may have formed for a variety or reasons, a micro puncture could have occurred which eventually let moisture in. Perhaps that's what caused the recent AirPod issue we saw in the news. Unfortunately, batteries are one of the hardest things to test for in the longterm, yet are one of the most dangerous, but how a material reacts to common surfaces like a table or skin is pretty damn common. To claim that Apple can't be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and FitBit are is just asinine.
    See my comment right above. Nobody is claiming that Apple can’t be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and Fitbit are. I’m certainly not. Nonetheless, you and others seem to be up in arms about an issue that has not thus far been demonstrated to be widespread. Getting battery design right is a high stakes game, because of the fires and all, and Apple is just as on the hook for that as are any of the other manufacturers. So far, they’ve kept that issue largely at bay. Surface rings aren’t going to kill anyone, so the stakes are lower. Still, if it was a widespread issue, that could be a problem. So far, though, it does not appear to be, so maybe it would be o.k. to throttle back on the furor about it.
    You can't apply "widespread" to this situation because it's not like the battery issue where x-percentage have a y-likelohood of catching fire under z-conditions. From what I've read, every HomePod will have the same result—not just a small percentage because of a production or component supply issue—if placed on a range of common wood surfaces. This is inline with FitBit's issue. I never had an issue a skin rash but for me to say it didn't happen to me so it's not a big deal would be ridiculous, just as its ridiculous to tell people it's their fault for putting it on any wood surface. This issue falls squarely on Apple's shoulders.
    Oh, good grief. You are incorrect when you say “...every HomePod will have the same result...” Every HomePod is made of the same materials, yes. Not every wood surface in a home is made of the same materials. The HomePod leaves a ring only on certain materials, not every wood surface. Therefore, every HomePod will not have the same result. It appears, based on a distinct lack of photographic evidence, that very few people who have HomePods have placed them on surfaces that are made of materials that react with the HomePod’s materials. The issue is therefore, by friggin’ definition, not widespread. This is not hard. Let it go.
    As previously stated, "HomePod will have the same result if placed on a range of common wood surfaces." You trying to excuse Apple's shortcoming by saying that because not every customer will place their product on these surfaces is fanatical. It reminds me of the old joke where a guy goes into the doctor and says, "Doc, everything I do this it hurts" and the Doc replies,"then don't do that."

    Bottom line: This shouldn’t  be happening on any common surfaces and this has a simple and cheap resolution.
    You haven't even vaguely come close to showing that it's a "common surface".
    AppleZulu
  • Reply 126 of 134
    nht said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    tmay said:
    It's just a specific formulation, and I'm quite aware that all materials aren't the same, and yet you haven't made mention of what alternate material is appropriate.
    Anything that would prevent the ring from forming on surfaces commonly found where you'd place a small speaker. Do you honestly believe there's one right answer? It's like if I mentioned that Samsung dropped the ball on properly testing batteries that caused damage and you chimed back with "EXPLAIN ME TO THE EXACT CHEMICAL FORMUA FOR THE BATTERY THEY SHOULD'VE USED!1!" It's irreverent and you'd sound like a Samsung zealot if you said that… just as you sound like an Apple zealot because I said it's an oversight by Apple.
    The Galaxy Note 7 battery fires were found to be due to some specific errors in the design and implementation of those batteries. “Chemical formula” is probably not the right question, but I think ultimately Samsung themselves were pretty specific in naming the issues that were at the root of that problem.

    Unlike battery design and manufacturing that can and should be controlled to a point where there aren’t very many variables that haven’t been considered, it’s about impossible for a manufacturer to anticipate and eliminate all problems that could result from the wide variety of finishes and cleaning products that are used for home furniture. So your second sentence above kind of undermines the insistence in the first sentence. I think Apple probably did make the HomePod out of materials that won’t cause a ring “on surfaces commonly found where you’d place a small speaker.” It’s a much taller order to insist that they use materials that won’t interact in any way with any surface. Apple has a core principle of controlling variables within their products. It’s not really possible to control all the variables that exist outside but proximate to their products. Nobody can do that.
    That doesn't affect my comment since that's in quotes. It's an example of someone trying to discredit someone's opinion by looking for ridiculous specifics. We can move that example to the design of the battery, which can include its chemical composition but let's ignore that aspect. I've read that it was too large, but how? Too tall? Too wide? Too thick? Even if you get some sort of specific answer to that question you have to know by how much. Then you have the chips that control how the battery. Perhaps it was an impurity in the construction of the battery (which may also have affected Apple batteries in many stories). Could the battery have been punctured? Dendrites may have formed for a variety or reasons, a micro puncture could have occurred which eventually let moisture in. Perhaps that's what caused the recent AirPod issue we saw in the news. Unfortunately, batteries are one of the hardest things to test for in the longterm, yet are one of the most dangerous, but how a material reacts to common surfaces like a table or skin is pretty damn common. To claim that Apple can't be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and FitBit are is just asinine.
    See my comment right above. Nobody is claiming that Apple can’t be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and Fitbit are. I’m certainly not. Nonetheless, you and others seem to be up in arms about an issue that has not thus far been demonstrated to be widespread. Getting battery design right is a high stakes game, because of the fires and all, and Apple is just as on the hook for that as are any of the other manufacturers. So far, they’ve kept that issue largely at bay. Surface rings aren’t going to kill anyone, so the stakes are lower. Still, if it was a widespread issue, that could be a problem. So far, though, it does not appear to be, so maybe it would be o.k. to throttle back on the furor about it.
    You can't apply "widespread" to this situation because it's not like the battery issue where x-percentage have a y-likelohood of catching fire under z-conditions. From what I've read, every HomePod will have the same result—not just a small percentage because of a production or component supply issue—if placed on a range of common wood surfaces. This is inline with FitBit's issue. I never had an issue a skin rash but for me to say it didn't happen to me so it's not a big deal would be ridiculous, just as its ridiculous to tell people it's their fault for putting it on any wood surface. This issue falls squarely on Apple's shoulders.
    Oh, good grief. You are incorrect when you say “...every HomePod will have the same result...” Every HomePod is made of the same materials, yes. Not every wood surface in a home is made of the same materials. The HomePod leaves a ring only on certain materials, not every wood surface. Therefore, every HomePod will not have the same result. It appears, based on a distinct lack of photographic evidence, that very few people who have HomePods have placed them on surfaces that are made of materials that react with the HomePod’s materials. The issue is therefore, by friggin’ definition, not widespread. This is not hard. Let it go.
    As previously stated, "HomePod will have the same result if placed on a range of common wood surfaces." You trying to excuse Apple's shortcoming by saying that because not every customer will place their product on these surfaces is fanatical. It reminds me of the old joke where a guy goes into the doctor and says, "Doc, everything I do this it hurts" and the Doc replies,"then don't do that."

    Bottom line: This shouldn’t  be happening on any common surfaces and this has a simple and cheap resolution.
    You haven't even vaguely come close to showing that it's a "common surface".
    Indeed. A day later, and I just did another image search for HomePod rings, and there’s still not much out there, which there would be by now  if there was anything “common” about this. Until there is evidence to prove otherwise, this is just one more tempest in a teapot. 
  • Reply 127 of 134
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    nht said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    tmay said:
    It's just a specific formulation, and I'm quite aware that all materials aren't the same, and yet you haven't made mention of what alternate material is appropriate.
    Anything that would prevent the ring from forming on surfaces commonly found where you'd place a small speaker. Do you honestly believe there's one right answer? It's like if I mentioned that Samsung dropped the ball on properly testing batteries that caused damage and you chimed back with "EXPLAIN ME TO THE EXACT CHEMICAL FORMUA FOR THE BATTERY THEY SHOULD'VE USED!1!" It's irreverent and you'd sound like a Samsung zealot if you said that… just as you sound like an Apple zealot because I said it's an oversight by Apple.
    The Galaxy Note 7 battery fires were found to be due to some specific errors in the design and implementation of those batteries. “Chemical formula” is probably not the right question, but I think ultimately Samsung themselves were pretty specific in naming the issues that were at the root of that problem.

    Unlike battery design and manufacturing that can and should be controlled to a point where there aren’t very many variables that haven’t been considered, it’s about impossible for a manufacturer to anticipate and eliminate all problems that could result from the wide variety of finishes and cleaning products that are used for home furniture. So your second sentence above kind of undermines the insistence in the first sentence. I think Apple probably did make the HomePod out of materials that won’t cause a ring “on surfaces commonly found where you’d place a small speaker.” It’s a much taller order to insist that they use materials that won’t interact in any way with any surface. Apple has a core principle of controlling variables within their products. It’s not really possible to control all the variables that exist outside but proximate to their products. Nobody can do that.
    That doesn't affect my comment since that's in quotes. It's an example of someone trying to discredit someone's opinion by looking for ridiculous specifics. We can move that example to the design of the battery, which can include its chemical composition but let's ignore that aspect. I've read that it was too large, but how? Too tall? Too wide? Too thick? Even if you get some sort of specific answer to that question you have to know by how much. Then you have the chips that control how the battery. Perhaps it was an impurity in the construction of the battery (which may also have affected Apple batteries in many stories). Could the battery have been punctured? Dendrites may have formed for a variety or reasons, a micro puncture could have occurred which eventually let moisture in. Perhaps that's what caused the recent AirPod issue we saw in the news. Unfortunately, batteries are one of the hardest things to test for in the longterm, yet are one of the most dangerous, but how a material reacts to common surfaces like a table or skin is pretty damn common. To claim that Apple can't be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and FitBit are is just asinine.
    See my comment right above. Nobody is claiming that Apple can’t be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and Fitbit are. I’m certainly not. Nonetheless, you and others seem to be up in arms about an issue that has not thus far been demonstrated to be widespread. Getting battery design right is a high stakes game, because of the fires and all, and Apple is just as on the hook for that as are any of the other manufacturers. So far, they’ve kept that issue largely at bay. Surface rings aren’t going to kill anyone, so the stakes are lower. Still, if it was a widespread issue, that could be a problem. So far, though, it does not appear to be, so maybe it would be o.k. to throttle back on the furor about it.
    You can't apply "widespread" to this situation because it's not like the battery issue where x-percentage have a y-likelohood of catching fire under z-conditions. From what I've read, every HomePod will have the same result—not just a small percentage because of a production or component supply issue—if placed on a range of common wood surfaces. This is inline with FitBit's issue. I never had an issue a skin rash but for me to say it didn't happen to me so it's not a big deal would be ridiculous, just as its ridiculous to tell people it's their fault for putting it on any wood surface. This issue falls squarely on Apple's shoulders.
    Oh, good grief. You are incorrect when you say “...every HomePod will have the same result...” Every HomePod is made of the same materials, yes. Not every wood surface in a home is made of the same materials. The HomePod leaves a ring only on certain materials, not every wood surface. Therefore, every HomePod will not have the same result. It appears, based on a distinct lack of photographic evidence, that very few people who have HomePods have placed them on surfaces that are made of materials that react with the HomePod’s materials. The issue is therefore, by friggin’ definition, not widespread. This is not hard. Let it go.
    As previously stated, "HomePod will have the same result if placed on a range of common wood surfaces." You trying to excuse Apple's shortcoming by saying that because not every customer will place their product on these surfaces is fanatical. It reminds me of the old joke where a guy goes into the doctor and says, "Doc, everything I do this it hurts" and the Doc replies,"then don't do that."

    Bottom line: This shouldn’t  be happening on any common surfaces and this has a simple and cheap resolution.
    You haven't even vaguely come close to showing that it's a "common surface".
    Sure I have. And even the images of the Sonos leaving a Similar marks are showing the same common surface. This notion that stained wood furniture is an obscure material and with an bizarre finish is a ridiculous notion.
  • Reply 128 of 134
    Soli said:
    nht said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    tmay said:
    It's just a specific formulation, and I'm quite aware that all materials aren't the same, and yet you haven't made mention of what alternate material is appropriate.
    Anything that would prevent the ring from forming on surfaces commonly found where you'd place a small speaker. Do you honestly believe there's one right answer? It's like if I mentioned that Samsung dropped the ball on properly testing batteries that caused damage and you chimed back with "EXPLAIN ME TO THE EXACT CHEMICAL FORMUA FOR THE BATTERY THEY SHOULD'VE USED!1!" It's irreverent and you'd sound like a Samsung zealot if you said that… just as you sound like an Apple zealot because I said it's an oversight by Apple.
    The Galaxy Note 7 battery fires were found to be due to some specific errors in the design and implementation of those batteries. “Chemical formula” is probably not the right question, but I think ultimately Samsung themselves were pretty specific in naming the issues that were at the root of that problem.

    Unlike battery design and manufacturing that can and should be controlled to a point where there aren’t very many variables that haven’t been considered, it’s about impossible for a manufacturer to anticipate and eliminate all problems that could result from the wide variety of finishes and cleaning products that are used for home furniture. So your second sentence above kind of undermines the insistence in the first sentence. I think Apple probably did make the HomePod out of materials that won’t cause a ring “on surfaces commonly found where you’d place a small speaker.” It’s a much taller order to insist that they use materials that won’t interact in any way with any surface. Apple has a core principle of controlling variables within their products. It’s not really possible to control all the variables that exist outside but proximate to their products. Nobody can do that.
    That doesn't affect my comment since that's in quotes. It's an example of someone trying to discredit someone's opinion by looking for ridiculous specifics. We can move that example to the design of the battery, which can include its chemical composition but let's ignore that aspect. I've read that it was too large, but how? Too tall? Too wide? Too thick? Even if you get some sort of specific answer to that question you have to know by how much. Then you have the chips that control how the battery. Perhaps it was an impurity in the construction of the battery (which may also have affected Apple batteries in many stories). Could the battery have been punctured? Dendrites may have formed for a variety or reasons, a micro puncture could have occurred which eventually let moisture in. Perhaps that's what caused the recent AirPod issue we saw in the news. Unfortunately, batteries are one of the hardest things to test for in the longterm, yet are one of the most dangerous, but how a material reacts to common surfaces like a table or skin is pretty damn common. To claim that Apple can't be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and FitBit are is just asinine.
    See my comment right above. Nobody is claiming that Apple can’t be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and Fitbit are. I’m certainly not. Nonetheless, you and others seem to be up in arms about an issue that has not thus far been demonstrated to be widespread. Getting battery design right is a high stakes game, because of the fires and all, and Apple is just as on the hook for that as are any of the other manufacturers. So far, they’ve kept that issue largely at bay. Surface rings aren’t going to kill anyone, so the stakes are lower. Still, if it was a widespread issue, that could be a problem. So far, though, it does not appear to be, so maybe it would be o.k. to throttle back on the furor about it.
    You can't apply "widespread" to this situation because it's not like the battery issue where x-percentage have a y-likelohood of catching fire under z-conditions. From what I've read, every HomePod will have the same result—not just a small percentage because of a production or component supply issue—if placed on a range of common wood surfaces. This is inline with FitBit's issue. I never had an issue a skin rash but for me to say it didn't happen to me so it's not a big deal would be ridiculous, just as its ridiculous to tell people it's their fault for putting it on any wood surface. This issue falls squarely on Apple's shoulders.
    Oh, good grief. You are incorrect when you say “...every HomePod will have the same result...” Every HomePod is made of the same materials, yes. Not every wood surface in a home is made of the same materials. The HomePod leaves a ring only on certain materials, not every wood surface. Therefore, every HomePod will not have the same result. It appears, based on a distinct lack of photographic evidence, that very few people who have HomePods have placed them on surfaces that are made of materials that react with the HomePod’s materials. The issue is therefore, by friggin’ definition, not widespread. This is not hard. Let it go.
    As previously stated, "HomePod will have the same result if placed on a range of common wood surfaces." You trying to excuse Apple's shortcoming by saying that because not every customer will place their product on these surfaces is fanatical. It reminds me of the old joke where a guy goes into the doctor and says, "Doc, everything I do this it hurts" and the Doc replies,"then don't do that."

    Bottom line: This shouldn’t  be happening on any common surfaces and this has a simple and cheap resolution.
    You haven't even vaguely come close to showing that it's a "common surface".
    Sure I have. And even the images of the Sonos leaving a Similar marks are showing the same common surface. This notion that stained wood furniture is an obscure material and with an bizarre finish is a ridiculous notion.
    Many people on twitter reported they got no ring on their wood, more than reports that have. 
  • Reply 129 of 134
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    matrix077 said:
    Soli said:
    nht said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    tmay said:
    It's just a specific formulation, and I'm quite aware that all materials aren't the same, and yet you haven't made mention of what alternate material is appropriate.
    Anything that would prevent the ring from forming on surfaces commonly found where you'd place a small speaker. Do you honestly believe there's one right answer? It's like if I mentioned that Samsung dropped the ball on properly testing batteries that caused damage and you chimed back with "EXPLAIN ME TO THE EXACT CHEMICAL FORMUA FOR THE BATTERY THEY SHOULD'VE USED!1!" It's irreverent and you'd sound like a Samsung zealot if you said that… just as you sound like an Apple zealot because I said it's an oversight by Apple.
    The Galaxy Note 7 battery fires were found to be due to some specific errors in the design and implementation of those batteries. “Chemical formula” is probably not the right question, but I think ultimately Samsung themselves were pretty specific in naming the issues that were at the root of that problem.

    Unlike battery design and manufacturing that can and should be controlled to a point where there aren’t very many variables that haven’t been considered, it’s about impossible for a manufacturer to anticipate and eliminate all problems that could result from the wide variety of finishes and cleaning products that are used for home furniture. So your second sentence above kind of undermines the insistence in the first sentence. I think Apple probably did make the HomePod out of materials that won’t cause a ring “on surfaces commonly found where you’d place a small speaker.” It’s a much taller order to insist that they use materials that won’t interact in any way with any surface. Apple has a core principle of controlling variables within their products. It’s not really possible to control all the variables that exist outside but proximate to their products. Nobody can do that.
    That doesn't affect my comment since that's in quotes. It's an example of someone trying to discredit someone's opinion by looking for ridiculous specifics. We can move that example to the design of the battery, which can include its chemical composition but let's ignore that aspect. I've read that it was too large, but how? Too tall? Too wide? Too thick? Even if you get some sort of specific answer to that question you have to know by how much. Then you have the chips that control how the battery. Perhaps it was an impurity in the construction of the battery (which may also have affected Apple batteries in many stories). Could the battery have been punctured? Dendrites may have formed for a variety or reasons, a micro puncture could have occurred which eventually let moisture in. Perhaps that's what caused the recent AirPod issue we saw in the news. Unfortunately, batteries are one of the hardest things to test for in the longterm, yet are one of the most dangerous, but how a material reacts to common surfaces like a table or skin is pretty damn common. To claim that Apple can't be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and FitBit are is just asinine.
    See my comment right above. Nobody is claiming that Apple can’t be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and Fitbit are. I’m certainly not. Nonetheless, you and others seem to be up in arms about an issue that has not thus far been demonstrated to be widespread. Getting battery design right is a high stakes game, because of the fires and all, and Apple is just as on the hook for that as are any of the other manufacturers. So far, they’ve kept that issue largely at bay. Surface rings aren’t going to kill anyone, so the stakes are lower. Still, if it was a widespread issue, that could be a problem. So far, though, it does not appear to be, so maybe it would be o.k. to throttle back on the furor about it.
    You can't apply "widespread" to this situation because it's not like the battery issue where x-percentage have a y-likelohood of catching fire under z-conditions. From what I've read, every HomePod will have the same result—not just a small percentage because of a production or component supply issue—if placed on a range of common wood surfaces. This is inline with FitBit's issue. I never had an issue a skin rash but for me to say it didn't happen to me so it's not a big deal would be ridiculous, just as its ridiculous to tell people it's their fault for putting it on any wood surface. This issue falls squarely on Apple's shoulders.
    Oh, good grief. You are incorrect when you say “...every HomePod will have the same result...” Every HomePod is made of the same materials, yes. Not every wood surface in a home is made of the same materials. The HomePod leaves a ring only on certain materials, not every wood surface. Therefore, every HomePod will not have the same result. It appears, based on a distinct lack of photographic evidence, that very few people who have HomePods have placed them on surfaces that are made of materials that react with the HomePod’s materials. The issue is therefore, by friggin’ definition, not widespread. This is not hard. Let it go.
    As previously stated, "HomePod will have the same result if placed on a range of common wood surfaces." You trying to excuse Apple's shortcoming by saying that because not every customer will place their product on these surfaces is fanatical. It reminds me of the old joke where a guy goes into the doctor and says, "Doc, everything I do this it hurts" and the Doc replies,"then don't do that."

    Bottom line: This shouldn’t  be happening on any common surfaces and this has a simple and cheap resolution.
    You haven't even vaguely come close to showing that it's a "common surface".
    Sure I have. And even the images of the Sonos leaving a Similar marks are showing the same common surface. This notion that stained wood furniture is an obscure material and with an bizarre finish is a ridiculous notion.
    Many people on twitter reported they got no ring on their wood, more than reports that have. 
    And what does that prove in your mind? That everyone else lying? Do you understand that not all wood finishes are the same? Even I’ve stated that I have no ring on my table. I checked, even through I was certain there wouldn’t be because of the sealed finish that it’s pourous.

    Maybe you’ll have to look it up, but Apple once shipped 5W PSUs that had a potential issue. It was a big enough concern that they replaced them with ones with a green dot on the plug side, and kept using those 5W PSUs with green dots for many years to come. For those that love to believe that Apple is infallible, how do they reconcile the fact that they shipped a potentially dangerous PSU? I don’t recall a single incident from that potentially faulty PSU that Apple aggressively wanted to replace, which, based on your quotes comment, means that it wasn’t a real issue. Do you think it would be reasonable for me to proclaim that Apple, their component supplier, or manufacturer didn’t make a mistake simply because I never read about a single incident of fire, shock, or death resulting from those PSUs? I think that would be foolish of me if I did.
  • Reply 130 of 134
    Soli said:
    matrix077 said:
    Soli said:
    nht said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    AppleZulu said:
    Soli said:
    tmay said:
    It's just a specific formulation, and I'm quite aware that all materials aren't the same, and yet you haven't made mention of what alternate material is appropriate.
    Anything that would prevent the ring from forming on surfaces commonly found where you'd place a small speaker. Do you honestly believe there's one right answer? It's like if I mentioned that Samsung dropped the ball on properly testing batteries that caused damage and you chimed back with "EXPLAIN ME TO THE EXACT CHEMICAL FORMUA FOR THE BATTERY THEY SHOULD'VE USED!1!" It's irreverent and you'd sound like a Samsung zealot if you said that… just as you sound like an Apple zealot because I said it's an oversight by Apple.
    The Galaxy Note 7 battery fires were found to be due to some specific errors in the design and implementation of those batteries. “Chemical formula” is probably not the right question, but I think ultimately Samsung themselves were pretty specific in naming the issues that were at the root of that problem.

    Unlike battery design and manufacturing that can and should be controlled to a point where there aren’t very many variables that haven’t been considered, it’s about impossible for a manufacturer to anticipate and eliminate all problems that could result from the wide variety of finishes and cleaning products that are used for home furniture. So your second sentence above kind of undermines the insistence in the first sentence. I think Apple probably did make the HomePod out of materials that won’t cause a ring “on surfaces commonly found where you’d place a small speaker.” It’s a much taller order to insist that they use materials that won’t interact in any way with any surface. Apple has a core principle of controlling variables within their products. It’s not really possible to control all the variables that exist outside but proximate to their products. Nobody can do that.
    That doesn't affect my comment since that's in quotes. It's an example of someone trying to discredit someone's opinion by looking for ridiculous specifics. We can move that example to the design of the battery, which can include its chemical composition but let's ignore that aspect. I've read that it was too large, but how? Too tall? Too wide? Too thick? Even if you get some sort of specific answer to that question you have to know by how much. Then you have the chips that control how the battery. Perhaps it was an impurity in the construction of the battery (which may also have affected Apple batteries in many stories). Could the battery have been punctured? Dendrites may have formed for a variety or reasons, a micro puncture could have occurred which eventually let moisture in. Perhaps that's what caused the recent AirPod issue we saw in the news. Unfortunately, batteries are one of the hardest things to test for in the longterm, yet are one of the most dangerous, but how a material reacts to common surfaces like a table or skin is pretty damn common. To claim that Apple can't be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and FitBit are is just asinine.
    See my comment right above. Nobody is claiming that Apple can’t be held responsible for any issues, but that Samsung and Fitbit are. I’m certainly not. Nonetheless, you and others seem to be up in arms about an issue that has not thus far been demonstrated to be widespread. Getting battery design right is a high stakes game, because of the fires and all, and Apple is just as on the hook for that as are any of the other manufacturers. So far, they’ve kept that issue largely at bay. Surface rings aren’t going to kill anyone, so the stakes are lower. Still, if it was a widespread issue, that could be a problem. So far, though, it does not appear to be, so maybe it would be o.k. to throttle back on the furor about it.
    You can't apply "widespread" to this situation because it's not like the battery issue where x-percentage have a y-likelohood of catching fire under z-conditions. From what I've read, every HomePod will have the same result—not just a small percentage because of a production or component supply issue—if placed on a range of common wood surfaces. This is inline with FitBit's issue. I never had an issue a skin rash but for me to say it didn't happen to me so it's not a big deal would be ridiculous, just as its ridiculous to tell people it's their fault for putting it on any wood surface. This issue falls squarely on Apple's shoulders.
    Oh, good grief. You are incorrect when you say “...every HomePod will have the same result...” Every HomePod is made of the same materials, yes. Not every wood surface in a home is made of the same materials. The HomePod leaves a ring only on certain materials, not every wood surface. Therefore, every HomePod will not have the same result. It appears, based on a distinct lack of photographic evidence, that very few people who have HomePods have placed them on surfaces that are made of materials that react with the HomePod’s materials. The issue is therefore, by friggin’ definition, not widespread. This is not hard. Let it go.
    As previously stated, "HomePod will have the same result if placed on a range of common wood surfaces." You trying to excuse Apple's shortcoming by saying that because not every customer will place their product on these surfaces is fanatical. It reminds me of the old joke where a guy goes into the doctor and says, "Doc, everything I do this it hurts" and the Doc replies,"then don't do that."

    Bottom line: This shouldn’t  be happening on any common surfaces and this has a simple and cheap resolution.
    You haven't even vaguely come close to showing that it's a "common surface".
    Sure I have. And even the images of the Sonos leaving a Similar marks are showing the same common surface. This notion that stained wood furniture is an obscure material and with an bizarre finish is a ridiculous notion.
    Many people on twitter reported they got no ring on their wood, more than reports that have. 
    And what does that prove in your mind? That everyone else lying? Do you understand that not all wood finishes are the same? Even I’ve stated that I have no ring on my table. I checked, even through I was certain there wouldn’t be because of the sealed finish that it’s pourous.
    Ah.. ok. I thought you’re saying it happens on majority of wood top. 
  • Reply 131 of 134
    Redmond Pie has noted the fact that the Sonos One speaker has the same exact issue.  Now imagine if the Homepod had never come out; you can be sure that the Sonos One 'staining' would barely get any attention much less fake outrage and media frothing at the mouth.
  • Reply 132 of 134
    anomeanome Posts: 1,533member
    markbyrn said:
    Redmond Pie has noted the fact that the Sonos One speaker has the same exact issue.  Now imagine if the Homepod had never come out; you can be sure that the Sonos One 'staining' would barely get any attention much less fake outrage and media frothing at the mouth.
    Indeed. It's almost like, in the case of Sonos, no-one bothered checking, but when Apple releases something, they have to find a problem to complain about.
  • Reply 133 of 134
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member
    anome said:
    markbyrn said:
    Redmond Pie has noted the fact that the Sonos One speaker has the same exact issue.  Now imagine if the Homepod had never come out; you can be sure that the Sonos One 'staining' would barely get any attention much less fake outrage and media frothing at the mouth.
    Indeed. It's almost like, in the case of Sonos, no-one bothered checking, but when Apple releases something, they have to find a problem to complain about.
    FWIW some industrial designers have chimed in to mention surprise that it's something Apple didn't notice in testing. Apparently it's something many other speaker manufacturers already dealt with, Sonos not withstanding. 
    edited February 2018 Soli
  • Reply 134 of 134
    LatkoLatko Posts: 398member
    This is the Ring of Progress. 
    It was purposefully implemented by Jony for the exact repositioning of the HomePod after cleaning/repairs
Sign In or Register to comment.