engadget.com/entry/1234000703045433
iPods You know, lots of people complain about the iPods non-user-replaceable ( well, not easily, anyway) battery and its tendency to just plain crap ou t after while. Then, there are some people who mount a class action laws uit over it, and it turns out theyve actually won a settlement. Those who purchased a new first- or second-generation iPod on or before May 31, 2004 and whove e xperienced battery failure within two years can choose between a $50 cre dit at the Apple Store (retail or online) or a $25 reimbursement check.
Add your comments) Reader Comments 1 Posted Jun 2, 2005, 5:13 PM ET by saycheese Apple deserved a kick in the oranges for intentionally making the battery non-replaceable (at least by the average user). never knew you could sue for that 3 Posted Jun 2, 2005, 5:35 PM ET by Pip Wonder how this will effect all the other MP3 players as well. I mean, it is common sense that a rechargable battery will eventually wear out, an d there are many many many gizmos out there with a non-replacable batter y in it as well. Given it a ppears that Apple is willing to hand out $50 per claim, it seems doubtfu l IMO they'll issue new ipods. When I take my iPod mi ni to work it is off usually until lunch break, and when I turn it on th e battery level is always at 3/4... and the damn thing had been charging all night and I had not turned it on before.
i don't know if the battery they used was in fact of lower quality, b ut the ipod wore out the battery faster. and since it didn't really turn off, it was always drawing at least a little. if they used a beefi er battery, it would make the ipod thicker. if they make it easily repla ceable, it would make the ipod thicker. since it's only a few mm thinner than most of the competition, it would lose it's appeal. those who comp lained should understand that you can't have superthin and instant-on wi thout some sacrifice.
Posted Jun 2, 2005, 5:58 PM ET by justathought #8 I think the idea is that you've sent upwards of $500 (I spent $400 on min e in 2002) on a product that becomes almost unusable (as originally inte nded) after a year or so because of a weak component. Then consider that it happens to a good number of these products and you've got this class action lawsuit. I'm definitely going for this to help pay for a new third party battery.
Posted Jun 2, 2005, 5:58 PM ET by justathought #8 I think the idea is that you've sent upwards of $500 (I spent $400 on min e in 2002) on a product that becomes almost unusable (as originally inte nded) after a year or so because of a weak component. Then consider that it happens to a good number of these products and you've got this class action lawsuit. I'm definitely going for this to help pay for a new third party battery.
Posted Jun 2, 2005, 6:22 PM ET by indolene So, Apple is basically saying that it expects it's product will only last for 2 years. Don't get me wrong, I own one (40gig 4g), but that's not the most emphatic sel f-confidence from Apple. What I wonder is exactly what percentage of pod s were dying? Maybe Apple would be better off just designing things (the y are nice) instead of manufacturing them, too. It's sad, cause Apple makes cool st uff, and they sue anyone who tries to get too close to what makes them g reat. If they designed iPods, then had the freakin' free market make the stuff (which means the uber-competition for quality vs. price) we'd be playing our 5-10 yr warrantied iPods that we bought for a hundred bucks.
Posted Jun 2, 2005, 6:23 PM ET by Voidious #9 - That may very well just be the meter being wrong. I think it's prett y widely agreed that the iPod battery meter is highly inaccurate. The tr ue test is just timing how long it will play continuously on a full char ge.
Posted Jun 2, 2005, 6:27 PM ET by bt It's not a fair trade-off if you take your iPod in for hard drive failure , and then you're handed a refurbished model as a replacement. And then that refurbished model's battery fails after only 3 weeks.
Posted Jun 2, 2005, 7:08 PM ET by mikedt From the yahoo article, Apple didn't get sued just because of bad batteri es, but on how they claimed the battery was supposed to last a lifetime. "In the fall of 2003, eight consumers filed a suit, alleging that the iPo d failed to live up to claims that the rechargeable battery would last t he product's lifetime and play music continuously for up to 10 hours."
Posted Jun 2, 2005, 7:11 PM ET by bobby why are both sites down? unfortunately for me i used goof-off on my faceplate and melted the damn plastic on accident, so i'm gonna spend $250 fixing and tricking it out... but $50 credit at the apple store would be ok i guess, cuz apple pr obably won't give up any ipods.
Posted Jun 2, 2005, 9:39 PM ET by Lars Well I would try and claim my $50, but there's no way in hell I still hav e my receipt from September 2003. If I put in a valid serial number, how could I possi bly be frauding them? Add your comments Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry: inappropriate or p urely promotional comments may be removed. Email addresses are never dis played, but they are required to confirm your comments. To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we w ill make it a live link for you. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted no need to use <p> or <br> tags. Your name (required): Your email address (required, will not be shown to the public): Your sites URL (optional): Do you want us to remember your personal information for next time?
|
http://csua.com/feed/