analogjack

What about those little gear things on the left no body has seemed to notice that they could portend a wind up iPhone as a solution to the battery problem. Remove the battery altogether and replace it with a little mechanical energy storage device that the user simply winds up a couple of times a day.

jbdragon said:

You know when you drive a new car off the lot, the value just drops. It's no longer NEW. Anything you buy, once you walk out the store, open it up and start using, it's no longer NEW. It's now a used product. You used that new iPad for 4 months, it turned into a used iPad 4 months ago. Getting a used Replacement that looks new and was tested to work perfectly is a good device. Maybe even better tested then the ones coming off the factory assembly line. I really don't see what the issue here is. Replacing your broken for whatever reason iOS device for NEW seems crazy, especially if it's spelled out in the warranty. If you don't like the terms, don't buy it and then bitch later.

While I agree with the sentiment, you nevertheless pepper your argument with some incorrect ideas, most egregious is your assertion about terms being spelled out in the warranty, it's a general principle of law that warranty terms cannot be used to circumvent the law. In Australia the law has deemed two years to be a minimum amount of time that a warranty on an expensive piece of computer equipment, namely a MacBook Pro should be covered for. When I bought my MBP I fully knew that Apple only warranted it for one year but I also knew that their assertion was fully irrelevant under Australian law, and thusly I saw no need for AppleCare as I'm basically just paying for the third year when I know it's most likely to go wrong within two years or after the third year. It duly failed before two years and I had logic board replaced and I even had the entire screen assembly replaced after the two years as I showed that the problem began before the two years was up. Moral of story, consumers should be aware of their rights.

This is the beauty of Apple's position of knowing they have such a regular and reliable huge cash flow; they have the time it takes to develop things like this without needing to do it half assed. Bit by bit Apple will skewer Samsung but all in due course. 

But glass also conducts heat quickly


Seeing as the article is comparing glass to metal the above quote doesn't make sense seeing as however quickly glass conducts heat, it conducts it much slower than metal.

Just like you cannot libel the dead, so a non manufacturing entity should not be able to profit from a patent.