PDA

View Full Version : Apple to Auto Adjust Maximum iPod Volume?




MacRumors
Dec 24, 2007, 02:37 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

DailyMail.co.uk reports (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/technology/technology.html?in_article_id=504292&in_page_id=1965) on a recent Apple patent application that describes how Apple could automatically adjust maximum volumes on their iPod devices to help protect the listeners from developing any long-term hearing damage.
A new patent reveals that the next iPods and iPhones could automatically calculate how long a person has been listening and at what volume, before gradually reducing the sound level.
The maximum safe level would be determined by how loud the iPod had been playing and the amount of quiet time since last play. This is not the first time that this potential problem has been in the news.

In February 2006, a man sued (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4673584.stm) Apple over the risk for iPod-related hearing loss. Apple addressed this potential issue in a software update (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/mar/29ipod.html) in March 2006 which allowed users to set their own personal maximum volume limit.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/24/apple-to-auto-adjust-maximum-ipod-volume/)



P-Worm
Dec 24, 2007, 02:39 PM
Great idea. If the volume gets lowered gradually, the listener wouldn't notice, but their hearing could be saved.

P-Worm

Harpo
Dec 24, 2007, 02:39 PM
I feel like that could get annoying. Sometimes you need to go deaf for a few seconds to hear your music.

They should just package sound isolating headphones with the iPod instead.

Mac-Addict
Dec 24, 2007, 02:41 PM
I never have my volume up that loud, my eyesight is already buggered, I seriously want my hearing later on in life.

EricNau
Dec 24, 2007, 02:43 PM
This would be a great optional feature on all iPods, as long as the user could turn it on/off (or the user's parents with a passcode), very much like the current volume limiter.

Scarlet Fever
Dec 24, 2007, 02:44 PM
Why? Volume changes with different earbuds, and not everyone uses the Apple ones. And what if you're driving it through a set of speakers? I don't want my music being turned down when I'm playing it at a party.

I can't see this as being a good thing.

JMax1
Dec 24, 2007, 02:44 PM
bologna to the lawsuit...

Eraserhead
Dec 24, 2007, 02:45 PM
I think it should be a matter of user preference and intelligence to pick a suitable volume. Of course given that this is the Daily Mail it isn't necessarily a reliable source ;).

TheSpaz
Dec 24, 2007, 02:48 PM
"In February 2006, a mac sued Apple over the risk for iPod-related hearing loss. Apple addressed this potential issue in a software update in March 2006 which allowed users to set their own personal maximum volume limit."

I didn't know Macs could sue Apple. Interesting.

mikes63737
Dec 24, 2007, 02:50 PM
In February 2006, a mac sued (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4673584.stm) Apple over the risk for iPod-related hearing loss.

Macs can sue? Is iSue included this the new iLife '08? :confused:

Edit: Damn... TheSpaz beat me to it...

superleccy
Dec 24, 2007, 02:50 PM
Curious source for a rumour! I'm surprised The Daily Mail isn't trying to pin the blame for hearing loss on asylum seekers, teenage pregnancies and general declining moral standards. :D

SL

koobcamuk
Dec 24, 2007, 02:51 PM
I think this is ridiculous. It's up to us to choose how long we want to listen. What happens if we have the headphone jack connected to a car stereo?

In February 2006, a mac sued (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4673584.stm) Apple over the risk for iPod-related hearing loss. Apple addressed this potential issue in a software update (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/mar/29ipod.html) in March 2006 which allowed users to set their own personal maximum volume limit.

Nice slip up!

EDIT: About 2 people beat me to it.

TheSpaz
Dec 24, 2007, 02:51 PM
Macs can sue? Is iSue included this the new iLife '08? :confused:

I beat you to it! Haha! *rubs it in your face*

33scottie33
Dec 24, 2007, 02:56 PM
The maximum volume level is a lot like the maximum speed your car can go. If you want to drive at 120mph, you take full responsibility, not the manufacturer. ;)

aitikin
Dec 24, 2007, 02:56 PM
I think that if they were to do this, there'd probably be a (allbeit difficult) way to disable such a setting. I feel this is like putting a band-aid on broken bone. It doesn't really fix the problem, it just seems to me that the problem lies in people trying to drown everything out with music. All in all, I feel this part of the loudness wars is exactly what will cause extreme hearing loss by the time this generation is 35. Loss into the range of 1K-6K, which is just ridiculous...

lazyrighteye
Dec 24, 2007, 02:59 PM
In February 2006, a mac sued (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4673584.stm) Apple over the risk for iPod-related hearing loss. Apple addressed this potential issue in a software update (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/mar/29ipod.html) in March 2006 which allowed users to set their own personal maximum volume limit.


A "mac" or a "man?" :p

Regardless, this is a thoughtful feature I would like to see left as a user-controlled option.
While ear fatigue is definitely a legit issue, it might not be so good to have the volume eventually decrease if (say) you're playing an iPod/iPhone through a home system.

My $ says if this feature does see the light of day, it will most certainly be a user-controlled option.
Toggle On. Toggle Off.

lazyrighteye
Dec 24, 2007, 03:00 PM
I think that if they were to do this, there'd probably be a (allbeit difficult) way to disable such a setting. I feel this is like putting a band-aid on broken bone. It doesn't really fix the problem, it just seems to me that the problem lies in people trying to drown everything out with music. All in all, I feel this part of the loudness wars is exactly what will cause extreme hearing loss by the time this generation is 35. Loss into the range of 1K-6K, which is just ridiculous...

What if this generation is already 35?!? :eek:

:D

Prof.
Dec 24, 2007, 03:02 PM
This isn't a rumor. Why is there a question mark on the front page? Apple comfirmed it yesterday on the evening news.

Prof.:apple:

Stella
Dec 24, 2007, 03:10 PM
Hopefully this feature won't be mandatory. Highly annoying otherwise.

If I want to f??? up my hearing - that is my choice, not Apple.

japanime
Dec 24, 2007, 03:10 PM
The Mac was simply responding to Apple's challenge: "Sosumi."

:D

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 03:11 PM
I think it is important. An entire generation (or two, or three) is being raised on devices that just happen to be causing long-term hearing loss. It's as much out of ignorance as anything else. The ultra-fine hairs in the ear aren't something that grow back or recover like other body parts do.

MattJessop
Dec 24, 2007, 03:14 PM
Curious source for a rumour! I'm surprised The Daily Mail isn't trying to pin the blame for hearing loss on asylum seekers, teenage pregnancies and general declining moral standards. :D

SL

Well, they probably tried to, but had a rare moment of sensibility and came to their senses. I personally am calling Satan, i think he might want to know that hell has frozen over.


Anyway, Apple controlling things for the sake of the user experience is entirely what they've been doing for the last 20 years. No point complaining that this is a bad move for Apple, they seem to have coped well recently :)

MacFly123
Dec 24, 2007, 03:24 PM
This would be a great optional feature on all iPods, as long as the user could turn it on/off (or the user's parents with a passcode), very much like the current volume limiter.

Ya, if it wasn't able to be turned off this would REALLY PISS ME OFF. Why can't people take responsibility for their own decisions DAMN it. If you want to go deaf, GO DEAF! Why do idiots have to sue someone? :mad:

iMikeT
Dec 24, 2007, 03:30 PM
They're my own g-damn ears... I'll choose when they go deaf and when they don't.

But seriously, "a mac sued Apple"?

iHerzeleid
Dec 24, 2007, 03:44 PM
is the mac that sued Apple, Too $hort? Lol...

(hopefully someone gets my pop culture reference)

bmk
Dec 24, 2007, 03:47 PM
I think it is important. An entire generation (or two, or three) is being raised on devices that just happen to be causing long-term hearing loss.

That's not the problem. The problem is that an entire generation (or two or three) is being raised on the notion that class action lawsuits are a way of getting money from someone else, and that what happens to them is always someone else's fault.

SimonTheSoundMa
Dec 24, 2007, 03:49 PM
Good if this becomes reality. Any sound over long periods of time over 80dB SPL(A) will cause permanent hearing loss. Most kids play their highly compressed songs at full volume and they do not know what damage they are ding to themselves. The iPod headphones can exceed 90dB. iPod's are restricted in the UK, however because the iPod headphones have low impedance it's easy to get high volumes.

ericmjl
Dec 24, 2007, 03:49 PM
Common sense died when the user had to rely on others to protect himself. Is it that tough for the man to realize that it's his own responsibility to take care of himself? Does he need others to help protect him from himself?

I really think somebody needs to resurrect common sense... common sense just ain't common anymore...

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 03:51 PM
That's not the problem. The problem is that an entire generation (or two or three) is being raised on the notion that class action lawsuits are a way of getting money from someone else, and that what happens to them is always someone else's fault.

Well, I understand that, and don't necessarily disagree.

My point is that you don't really see or hear (ha) the problem of hearing loss talked about much with regard to iPods, despite it being a problem right now and potentially a huge problem in 20 years for currently young folks to have accelerated hearing loss later in life.

It's all the more important to at least discuss or bring attention to (lawsuit or not) because it's something that's irreversible. It's not like quitting drinking or smoking, or some other harmful activity that isn't completely irreversible. Once you lose some level of hearing, it's gone.

millerrh
Dec 24, 2007, 03:51 PM
Well I certainly hope that they have a way to calculate the actual dB level coming out of the headphones and don't just rely on where you have your volume set.

I can tell you that older songs that aren't mastered that well and audiobooks have to be cranked up way louder compared to newer songs just to be able to hear them at the same volume. If they put a max level it should be related to what is actually being played and adjust accordingly.

SimonTheSoundMa
Dec 24, 2007, 03:56 PM
Well I certainly hope that they have a way to calculate the actual dB level coming out of the headphones and don't just rely on where you have your volume set.Problem will arise when you use different headphones. The Leq and Lavq will be different because the headphones have different sensitivities. Wonder how apple will think that one out.

flyinmac
Dec 24, 2007, 03:57 PM
It's the new automated money maker program generously provided with every new Mac purchased.

They are calling it "iGetMoney".

The program runs constantly in the background and even works while you are sleeping. It scours the Internet looking for anyone that it could possibly file any claim against. It automatically files the claim, handles all the associated legal issues, and then alerts you when it has won and asks you where you want the money deposited.

The only problem, is that the rest of the world uses the program "iGetYouBack".

Apple has so far not developed an antidote to this program. The rest of the industry started using this program after their experience with the litigious Apple of the 1980's.

As Apple has discovered, pursuing everyone with no end, eventually results in everyone else suing you every time you wiggle your little finger.

So, be cautious. Apple's iGetMoney will make you a fortune rather quickly. But, the industry's iGetYouBack will cost you a fortune in the long run.

Perhaps the thing to do is let iGetMoney rake in a fortune, and then send your Mac to the bottom of the ocean in cement shoes (so you cannot be traced). Then, quickly disappear to some non-extradition country for your retirement :D

BRH
Dec 24, 2007, 03:59 PM
This is a ridiculus idea. What's even more amazing is that there are actually people here who support this. I'm sorry, but it is my own personal decision about what I do with my body and what volume I choose to listen at is nobody's business but my own. (Want me to sign a waiver that I won't sue? Fine, I'll be more than happy to).

Geez, the people who support this are probably the same right wing wackos that want to dictate and force their beliefs on every other aspect of your life. I've got an idea for them; if they don't want to damage their hearing with loud music, than DON'T LISTEN TO IT LOUDLY! But keep the h*ll out of my business and keep your hands off of my ears! (The only good thing about losing hearing from loud music is that later on in life I won't have to listen to controlling nuts like this :)

Also, If Apple implements this I will immediately hack the device to disable it, or if it is not possible, I will IMMEDIATELY dump my iPOD and iPhone for another MP3 device (as will hoards of others). This would be a ridiculusly dumb business move on Apple's part (and that's why I think this is just a rumour).

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 04:02 PM
I think some people are overreaaaacting...

There's no certainty as to whether this:

A) Will happen for sure
B) Will be anything other than optional
C) Is a bad idea

Yes, you can do what you want to your hearing, but I suspect many people don't really know what they're doing to it in the first place.

SimonTheSoundMa
Dec 24, 2007, 04:02 PM
BRH, this is a loose/loose thread for you.

I'm only coming to this thread as a professional.

BRH
Dec 24, 2007, 04:05 PM
BRH, this is a loose/loose thread for you.

I'm only coming to this thread as a professional.

Sorry, I'm not even sure what this comment means.

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 04:08 PM
Sorry, I'm not even sure what this comment means.

I think it means that he works with audio as a professional, and is thus qualified to give an educated opinion on related matters.

Data
Dec 24, 2007, 04:09 PM
As long as i have the choice to turn it on and off myself .

flyinmac
Dec 24, 2007, 04:09 PM
This is a ridiculus idea. What's even more amazing is that there are actually people here who support this. I'm sorry, but it is my own personal decision about what I do with my body and what volume I choose to listen at is nobody's business but my own. (Want me to sign a waiver that I won't sue? Fine, I'll be more than happy to).

Geez, the people who support this are probably the same right wing wackos that want to dictate and force their beliefs on every other aspect of your life. I've got an idea for them; if they don't want to damage their hearing with loud music, than DON'T LISTEN TO IT LOUDLY! But keep the h*ll out of my business and keep your hands off of my ears! (The only good thing about losing hearing from loud music is that later on in life I won't have to listen to controlling nuts like this :)

Also, If Apple implements this I will immediately hack the device to disable it, or if it is not possible, I will IMMEDIATELY dump my iPOD and iPhone for another MP3 device (as will hoards of others). This would be a ridiculusly dumb business move on Apple's part (and that's why I think this is just a rumour).



Waaahhhhhhhh... I want my mommy :rolleyes:

Dont Hurt Me
Dec 24, 2007, 04:10 PM
Ya, if it wasn't able to be turned off this would REALLY PISS ME OFF. Why can't people take responsibility for their own decisions DAMN it. If you want to go deaf, GO DEAF! Why do idiots have to sue someone? :mad:
Its because these days someone else is allways responsible for your actions. LAWYERS.

TurboSC
Dec 24, 2007, 04:18 PM
there will always be idiots who sue over the stupidest things, and sometimes they win... *sigh* that's the down side of selling products in America.

flyinmac
Dec 24, 2007, 04:19 PM
Its because these days someone else is allways responsible for your actions. LAWYERS.

Yep, if people would quit acting like helpless babies, and accept that they made their choices, then the rest of the world could quit coddling (I mean protecting) you.

As long as people can buy hot coffee, and then sue because it was hot, then you are going to get lawyers and technology controlling how you use stuff.

If everyone would grow up and act like mature adults, this stuff would go away.

I could only imagine if our founding fathers could see the United States as it is now. They'd look at us, and sadly declare us a bunch of whiny babies.

How is it that we've regressed so far from being a country built on strong men? Now we're a bunch of people who whine and cry every time someone says something we don't like. We sue if someone says something with the wrong sentence structure because it offends us. We sue if something we buy causes us injury even if we deliberately used it improperly.

Sorry folks, if you act like a bunch of babies, you'll get a bunch of babysitters to take care of you.

nagromme
Dec 24, 2007, 04:23 PM
Why so many negatives about this patent?

If people object to the idea of an optional volume limit, that's already an iPod feature. I wasn't aware of any outcry asking Apple to take that option away from people.

This sounds like simply a more sophisticated kind of limit. Take it or leave it, but the health risk is real, so what's wrong with giving people more options to control it?

I think people are inventing some imaginary scenario about this article and then getting mad about it, rather than responding to what the patent actually is :o

macbattle
Dec 24, 2007, 04:41 PM
I feel like that could get annoying. Sometimes you need to go deaf for a few seconds to hear your music.

They should just package sound isolating headphones with the iPod instead.

Kind of like how Sony was including 55usd sound isolating headphones with some of their flash players? I hear the headphones were suppose to be top notch.

adulgo
Dec 24, 2007, 04:41 PM
What happened to personal responsibility? If it's too loud turn it down. If your hearing is damaged because YOU turned up the volume, tough. I am sick of whiners.

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 04:51 PM
What happened to personal responsibility? If it's too loud turn it down. If your hearing is damaged because YOU turned up the volume, tough. I am sick of whiners.

Yet again, too many people don't even know about the risks involved in turning the music up too loud.

It's always about personal responsibility until something happens to you. Then it's someone else's fault.

flyinmac
Dec 24, 2007, 04:53 PM
Yet again, too many people don't even know about the risks involved in turning the music up too loud.

It's always about personal responsibility until something happens to you. Then it's someone else's fault.

I think it would be nearly impossible to find anyone who lived in America as a teenager who didn't know high volume could hurt your ears. Actually, let's make that anyone who was ever a teenager with a stereo.

If you can find one teen who's parents haven't told them to turn that thing down because it was too loud and would hurt their ears, I'd be surprised.

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 04:54 PM
I think it would be nearly impossible to find anyone who lived in America as a teenager who didn't know high volume could hurt your ears. Actually, let's make that anyone who was ever a teenager with a stereo.

If you can find one teen who's parents haven't told them to turn that thing down because it was too loud and would hurt their ears, I'd be surprised.

Well, great. How many people know how it damages your hearing?

I suspect the number falls off a table by comparison.

CWallace
Dec 24, 2007, 04:55 PM
Also, If Apple implements this I will immediately hack the device to disable it, or if it is not possible, I will IMMEDIATELY dump my iPOD and iPhone for another MP3 device (as will hoards of others). This would be a ridiculusly dumb business move on Apple's part (and that's why I think this is just a rumour).

Except the more likely outcome is that all the other MP3 devices will quickly adopt the same thing, lest they be sued not only for damaging hearing, but for recklessly doing so (which translates into even richer damage settlements) because they didn't implement the same technologies.

RoboCop001
Dec 24, 2007, 05:01 PM
I don't really mind one way or the other if they add this feature, but how many of you guys would complain about hearing loss and then wish they had this feature? :D

Anyway, the point is that someone should mod Time Machine so it's a Stargate instead of a black hole.

Or maybe even a unicorn!... but that would be wtf.

.... Maybe it could be KITT. Because that car can do anything.

Or a shoe!

No wait! No.... it should be .... the Time Tunnel!

Loge
Dec 24, 2007, 05:05 PM
Why so many negatives about this patent?

If people object to the idea of an optional volume limit, that's already an iPod feature. I wasn't aware of any outcry asking Apple to take that option away from people.


Except in Europe it is a compulsory iPod feature. I don't object so much in principle as long as it allows for the fact that not everyone listens to over-compressed modern pop music, and that to hear some quieter classical pieces properly you do need some flexibility over the volume control.

nemaslov
Dec 24, 2007, 05:09 PM
In a related story, General Motors will have all of their 2009 Car Models shut down completely when the speed of the automobile exceeds the posted limit on any roadway or highway. Also Guinness has announced a new beer that turns to water after the drinker hits an .08 alcohol level.:confused:

twoodcc
Dec 24, 2007, 05:10 PM
sounds ok i guess

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 05:12 PM
In a related story, General Motors will have all of their 2009 Car Models shut down completely when the speed of the automobile exceeds the posted limit on any roadway or highway. Also Guinness has announced a new beer that turns to water after the drinker hits an .08 alcohol level.:confused:

So far as I know, most cars do have a fixed speed limit and will not go over it.

andy721
Dec 24, 2007, 05:18 PM
you stupid morons, maybe if you weren't listening to the music so damn loud you wouldn't have this problem, also think about your age if your semi old between 35-65 stop listening to it so efing loud an stop being so stupid an try to get apple to give you money.:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

slffl
Dec 24, 2007, 05:24 PM
WOW! Anyone who voted negative on this probably shouldn't be using computers. Do you really think this would not be an option? God there are some idiots out there.

RoboCop001
Dec 24, 2007, 05:25 PM
In a related story, General Motors will have all of their 2009 Car Models shut down completely when the speed of the automobile exceeds the posted limit on any roadway or highway. Also Guinness has announced a new beer that turns to water after the drinker hits an .08 alcohol level.:confused:

I'm going to call JT Marlin and buy some stock, quick!

Marx55
Dec 24, 2007, 05:31 PM
The consequences of the iPod and similar devices will be DEVASTATING and Apple knows about it. This is a long-term experiment carried out now with millions of people worldwide. Be prepared for the shock! The less you use these devices, the better for your hearing pleasure!

naroola
Dec 24, 2007, 05:37 PM
As a user-settable option this would be welcome, but this will only used by me on long haul flights where I often tend to fall asleep while listening to my iPod. However, if Apple decides to shove this down my throat as a "mandatory feature" (which I doubt), I might just have to turn over and buy an ugly, heavy, lousy-interfaced Zune - YUCK!

hob
Dec 24, 2007, 05:40 PM
This is simple scare-mongering. This argument has been banging about since the first Walkman's came out. Hearing loss is, of course, possible when listening to loud music - but as many have said this is down to a personal preference!

I choose NOT to go deaf. I listen to a hell of a lot of music, and I really want to keep my hearing in tact, so I spent a reasonable amount on some Shure sound isolating headphones. Because I can't hear anything else when wearing them, the volume doesn't have to be so high. Simple.

Apple can keep their mitts off my volume levels!

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 05:40 PM
but i want my hearing buggered. seriously, what is this?

i can't be responsible for myself?

hell, if anyone wants to take care of me get me decent job.

but if you offer me your healthcare plan with restrictions my hard on liberty, i'll keep my liberty thank you.

i haven't bought an ipod or iphone, yet. if such a draconian "feature" is added and i can;t turn it off, i won't be buying either.

I never have my volume up that loud, my eyesight is already buggered, I seriously want my hearing later on in life.

flyinmac
Dec 24, 2007, 05:46 PM
but i want my hearing buggered. seriously, what is this?

i can't be responsible for myself?

hell, if anyone wants to take cate of me get me decent job.

but if you offer me your healthcare plan with restrictions my hard on liberty, i'll keep my liberty thank you.

i haven't bought an ipod or iphone, yet. if such a draconian "feature" is added and i can;t turn it off, i won't be buying either.


The problem, is that even if someone did get a job for you, we'd still have to hire someone else to do the work for you as well. ;)

nemaslov
Dec 24, 2007, 05:48 PM
So far as I know, most cars do have a fixed speed limit and will not go over it.

Well I guess. My Audi can hit 120 MPH which is a bit faster than what is posted on US Highways.

QuarterSwede
Dec 24, 2007, 05:48 PM
This is a ridiculus idea. What's even more amazing is that there are actually people here who support this. I'm sorry, but it is my own personal decision about what I do with my body and what volume I choose to listen at is nobody's business but my own. (Want me to sign a waiver that I won't sue? Fine, I'll be more than happy to).

Geez, the people who support this are probably the same right wing wackos that want to dictate and force their beliefs on every other aspect of your life. I've got an idea for them; if they don't want to damage their hearing with loud music, than DON'T LISTEN TO IT LOUDLY! But keep the h*ll out of my business and keep your hands off of my ears! (The only good thing about losing hearing from loud music is that later on in life I won't have to listen to controlling nuts like this :)

Also, If Apple implements this I will immediately hack the device to disable it, or if it is not possible, I will IMMEDIATELY dump my iPOD and iPhone for another MP3 device (as will hoards of others). This would be a ridiculusly dumb business move on Apple's part (and that's why I think this is just a rumour).

What happened to personal responsibility? If it's too loud turn it down. If your hearing is damaged because YOU turned up the volume, tough. I am sick of whiners.

you stupid morons, maybe if you weren't listening to the music so damn loud you wouldn't have this problem, also think about your age if your semi old between 35-65 stop listening to it so efing loud an stop being so stupid an try to get apple to give you money.:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
The problem is that people hurt their hearing even though it doesn't cause them pain, therefore they don't know it's hurting them in the long run.

nemaslov
Dec 24, 2007, 05:50 PM
The loudness is not the problem but the morons who cross the streets oblivious to anything and everything. I've seen so many jerks almost hit by cars and busses simply not LOOKING AROUND!

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 05:58 PM
The problem, is that even if someone did get a job for you, we'd still have to hire someone else to do the work for you as well. ;)

you mean you won't fire me for not showing up? where do i sign up. :P

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 06:00 PM
Well I guess. My Audi can hit 120 MPH which is a bit faster than what is posted on US Highways.

yes i regularly do 110 down i75. perfectly safe.

but let's not encourage the fascist, k?

which is nearly the point, someone sold him a car with limits and he doesn't even know it. now excuse me, but how did all of you get in my cave, more importantly, where did you come from?

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 06:07 PM
The problem is that people hurt their hearing even though it doesn't cause them pain, therefore they don't know it's hurting them in the long run.

sorry, WRONG. the problem there is that they are morons. does it "hurt" when you cross street without looking first? --that's called learning/education from freely available, observable, data.

besides, my ears are better than yours. :P

on top of them being better, they're full of "protective" wax, and they're still better than yours.

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 06:12 PM
That's not the problem. The problem is that an entire generation (or two or three) is being raised on the notion that class action lawsuits are a way of getting money from someone else, and that what happens to them is always someone else's fault.

led to the alter of the State by their parents who can't raise them and so think they are owed both protection and monies.

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 06:14 PM
Common sense died when the user had to rely on others to protect himself. Is it that tough for the man to realize that it's his own responsibility to take care of himself? Does he need others to help protect him from himself?

I really think somebody needs to resurrect common sense... common sense just ain't common anymore...

in america, it's dead and buried. sorry to have let you down world but the jig is up. --seriously.

QuarterSwede
Dec 24, 2007, 06:18 PM
sorry, WRONG. the problem there is that they are morons. does it "hurt" when you cross street without looking first? --that's called learning/education from freely available, observable, data.

besides, my ears are better than yours. :P

on top of them being better, they're full of "protective" wax, and they're still better than yours.
Seriously, do you realize you didn't even reply to what I actual meant?

rockosmodurnlif
Dec 24, 2007, 06:19 PM
Now my iPod will be telling me I'm listening to my music too loud. Cripes, how about my iPod being able to tune into an AM or FM station?

I know I plug a speaker into my iPod at times and let it play, now I don't want the volume decreasing as I am listening on an external speaker.

Next the iPod will tell you, you've been listening to your music too long and should give your ears a break before it shuts itself off for an hour or so. Or give your eyes a break since you've been staring at the screen watching a movie for over an hour.

Is this going to carry over to the iPhone? Will the iPhone detect the volume of your voice and that you are in a public setting then kindly disconnect the call so everyone else doesn't have to hear you yelling about what your girlfriend did last night?

But seriously, can I get a built in radio tuner?

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 06:19 PM
I like how almost everyone assumes this is going to be hardwired and not optional.

flyinmac
Dec 24, 2007, 06:21 PM
you mean you won't fire me for not showing up? where do i sign up. :P

Nah, with this being America and all, I figured you'd sue us if we fired you ;)

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 06:23 PM
Well, I understand that, and don't necessarily disagree.

My point is that you don't really see or hear (ha) the problem of hearing loss talked about much with regard to iPods, despite it being a problem right now and potentially a huge problem in 20 years for currently young folks to have accelerated hearing loss later in life.

It's all the more important to at least discuss or bring attention to (lawsuit or not) because it's something that's irreversible. It's not like quitting drinking or smoking, or some other harmful activity that isn't completely irreversible. Once you lose some level of hearing, it's gone.

dude, i spent twenty on the road where cops walked around with db meters telling me it was too loud. (i would move a few faders that did nothing then ask them if tat was better and they'd leave for a while.) maybe you ought to get your kid's head out my PA then you can educate him on his earbuds (from any device), how about YOU take THAT responsibility instead of suing to get the government to do it for you.

because in the end you're are going to trash freedom and gain NADA. nothing. zero. what next, auto gradual lower pete townsend's amps and the PA at The Who concert?

take a long walk off a short pier will ya?

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 06:27 PM
I think some people are overreaaaacting...

There's no certainty as to whether this:

A) Will happen for sure
B) Will be anything other than optional
C) Is a bad idea

Yes, you can do what you want to your hearing, but I suspect many people don't really know what they're doing to it in the first place.


no, what's observable here is that ppl support "it" no matter how it turns up or not.

i say, TURN IT DOWN! :D

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 06:29 PM
In a related story, General Motors will have all of their 2009 Car Models shut down completely when the speed of the automobile exceeds the posted limit on any roadway or highway. Also Guinness has announced a new beer that turns to water after the drinker hits an .08 alcohol level.:confused:

fine. but cigarettes DO NOT cause cancer. :eek:

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 06:31 PM
It's too bad we can't check back here in 25 years and see what people's opinions are. I suspect a number of them will have changed, perhaps radically.

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 06:32 PM
So far as I know, most cars do have a fixed speed limit and will not go over it.

they do, then the motor blows up, it's called redline.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redline

ichi
Dec 24, 2007, 06:33 PM
It's too bad we can't check back here in 25 years and see what people's opinions are. I suspect a number of them will have changed, perhaps radically.
do tell. how so?

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 06:34 PM
do tell. how so?

When millions more people than there should be have serious hearing loss, there will be people who either kick themselves for playing so much music so loudly and/or who blame others for making it possible.

It's never a problem until it affects us. Then it's a big problem.

mrkramer
Dec 24, 2007, 07:05 PM
This would be very annoying, I like to listen to my iPod in the car, and I have the volume at the highest it goes and adjust it from the controls in the car.

bloodycape
Dec 24, 2007, 07:10 PM
So far as I know, most cars do have a fixed speed limit and will not go over it.

Yeah fixed speed limit is 155. Not 155 then slowly slowing down to 80.

Not a bad idea if they make it an option and have it be able to tell the difference between speakers, headphones and when it is connected to a car.

QuarterSwede
Dec 24, 2007, 07:17 PM
Not a bad idea if they make it an option and have it be able to tell the difference between speakers, headphones and when it is connected to a car.
Good thing I have my iPod connected via dock connector to my car's head unit. :D (Good thing too because the iPod's amp is pure garbage).

Rocketman
Dec 24, 2007, 07:18 PM
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night.

Rocketman

Stella
Dec 24, 2007, 07:29 PM
What happened to personal responsibility? If it's too loud turn it down. If your hearing is damaged because YOU turned up the volume, tough. I am sick of whiners.

Apple will need to introduce this as a compulsory feature for the u.s customers only:

1. They are the only ones who would start Class Action lawsuits
2 They are the ones who don't understand personal responsibility. For example, fat americans suing fast food restaurants for making them fat, amongst the many stupid law suits.

The rest of the world: an optional or parental feature only!

QuarterSwede
Dec 24, 2007, 07:32 PM
Apple will need to introduce this as a compulsory feature for the u.s customers only ; because they are the only ones who would start Class Action lawsuits ; since they are the ones who don't understand personal responsibility. For example, fat americans suing fast food restaurants for making them fat, amongst the many stupid law suits.
Amen to that ... and I'm an American! I'm surrounded by MORONS!!! Arrrrggggghhhhhh!!!!

Stella
Dec 24, 2007, 07:34 PM
Amen to that ... and I'm an American! I'm surrounded by MORONS!!!

Sorry, it was a tad harsh.

Have a great Christmas, all.

flyinmac
Dec 24, 2007, 07:34 PM
fine. but cigarettes DO NOT cause cancer. :eek:

You're absolutely correct... Cigarettes do not cause cancer. Lighting and Smoking them does (or being around one that's lit).

An unlit cigarette is perfectly fine.

nemaslov
Dec 24, 2007, 07:53 PM
fine. but cigarettes DO NOT cause cancer. :eek:

Yes and they can just put a warning label on the box: Loud music may cause hearing damage. Done end of story and no limits on the POD!

Steflinsky
Dec 24, 2007, 07:53 PM
Joyeux NoŰl
frohe Weihnachten / fr÷hliche Weihnachten
djoyeus NoyÚ
gleckika W´anachta
Wesołych Świąt
bon Nadal
Eguberri on
gle­ileg jˇl
vrolijk Kerstfeest
buon Natale / gioioso Natale
Nadolig llawen
schÚi ChrŰschtdeeg
....

felix dies Nativitatis

TheSpaz
Dec 24, 2007, 08:24 PM
BRH, this is a loose/loose thread for you.

I'm only coming to this thread as a professional.

What does loose/loose mean? Extra baggy? Not tight? I'm confused.

specialistmac
Dec 24, 2007, 08:35 PM
this is ridiculous. while i think that the technology sounds cool, and i'm sure apple will do it right...i still can't help but think...

people should be smart enough to know to adjust the volume themselves.

unfortunately they aren't.

rbroady
Dec 24, 2007, 08:44 PM
...was hoping this was about making the volume louder

...disappointment...

max volume is not sufficiant for us NYC commuters, those subways are loud

blashphemy
Dec 24, 2007, 08:53 PM
good so long as its optional.

1) Some people don't use Apple buds and need more power to get the same decibels with their beefier set
2) Some people (like me) have a hearing loss and need to set it to 100% so that we can hear the thing to begin with (note: my hearing loss is genetic and not related to auditory damage)

sparkleytone
Dec 24, 2007, 09:56 PM
It's fairly obvious that the problem lies with the engineering of the vast majority of commercial music. Dynamic range simply does not exist anymore. Everything is compressed to hell and subsequently mastered to be as loud as freaking possible. By the time it gets to the listener's device, there's really very little that can be done.

Iggy
Dec 24, 2007, 10:03 PM
If it's too loud....you're too old!

Seriously though, there is this revolutionary thing that Apple have come up with that lets you adjust the volume if you find it too loud or quiet.

Iggy
Dec 24, 2007, 10:14 PM
It's fairly obvious that the problem lies with the engineering of the vast majority of commercial music. Dynamic range simply does not exist anymore. Everything is compressed to hell and subsequently mastered to be as loud as freaking possible. By the time it gets to the listener's device, there's really very little that can be done.

I completely agree. I was talking to an engineer friend of mine that works at Abbey Road and he was saying how all the new bands that come in demand more and more compression on their material until they just sound like a big mess. There's absolutely no separation left between any of the instruments and it sounds more like a wall of crap than a wall of sound. These new kids have no sense of dynamics nowadays because all they've been influenced by, production-wise, is the stuff they hear on Radio 1.

Darkroom
Dec 24, 2007, 10:33 PM
oh look, another douche bag is trying to make some easy money thru an idiotic lawsuit... grrrrr :mad::mad::mad:

puckhead193
Dec 24, 2007, 11:08 PM
...or apple could team up with shure and they could supply the headphones... maybe the e2c's? :D

Bababasjd
Dec 24, 2007, 11:14 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

DailyMail.co.uk reports (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/technology/technology.html?in_article_id=504292&in_page_id=1965) on a recent Apple patent application that describes how Apple could automatically adjust maximum volumes on their iPod devices to help protect the listeners from developing any long-term hearing damage.

The maximum safe level would be determined by how loud the iPod had been playing and the amount of quiet time since last play. This is not the first time that this potential problem has been in the news.

In February 2006, a man sued (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4673584.stm) Apple over the risk for iPod-related hearing loss. Apple addressed this potential issue in a software update (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/mar/29ipod.html) in March 2006 which allowed users to set their own personal maximum volume limit.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/24/apple-to-auto-adjust-maximum-ipod-volume/)

Haha does this person think he is going to win, is this a joke? Just like mc donalds you cant sue them, because if apple clearly states the issue it is the consumers responsibility to accept that problem. In the case of Mc Donalds the judge ruled and that it is the consumers job to research and understand the risks if the information is avaliable. And trust me there are thousdands of compact disks that cause hearing damage and mp3 on the market today that cause hearing dmaage. If the case ever get reviewed which it will not, the judge will have to and can not under the law rule in favor of the client because then the case of Mc donalds would have to be over rulled then mp3 would have to be changed. If the judge ever rules in favor of the client actually he can be released from his duty as apple is a big corporation and many judges will not even take on a case like this unless there is something that violates human rights like wal-mart. All in all, it wont happen 100 percent gurantee! However, that does not mean apple will not implement new ideas for hearing, the onyl reason apple would do that is through their generosity, but other than that they are not forced.

luminosity
Dec 24, 2007, 11:16 PM
Haha does this person think he is going to win, is this a joke? First off from a lawyer this guy has a 1 in 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000

chance in winning, why? Just like mc donalds you cant sue them because if it is clearly stated it is your choice as a consumer and your respnsiblity to make that decesion and accept that risk. it is like LCD's it is your responsiblity you understand they cause eye damage but you still buy them. Just liek cigaretts you know they cause lung cancer but you cant sue them a few lawsuits won but try know it is impossible. The list goes on and on. All in all, the judge would dismiss the case.

You're a lawyer?

bretm
Dec 24, 2007, 11:34 PM
Its because these days someone else is allways responsible for your actions. LAWYERS.

Try government. This whole entitlement society is only going to get worse. Take government health care for instance. If I'm not responsible for me, then how could I have possibly be responsible for hurting my ears? Must've been someone else's fault (Apple's) because I'm not responsible for anything, right?

bretm
Dec 24, 2007, 11:37 PM
Haha does this person think he is going to win, is this a joke? Just like mc donalds you cant sue them, because if apple clearly states the issue it is the consumers responsibility to accept that problem. In the case of Mc Donalds the judge ruled and that it is the consumers job to research and understand the risks if the information is avaliable. And trust me there are thousdands of compact disks that cause hearing damage and mp3 on the market today that cause hearing dmaage. If the case ever get reviewed which it will not, the judge will have to and can not under the law rule in favor of the client because then the case of Mc donalds would have to be over rulled then mp3 would have to be changed. If the judge ever rules in favor of the client actually he can be released from his duty as apple is a big corporation and many judges will not even take on a case like this unless there is something that violates human rights like wal-mart. All in all, it wont happen 100 percent gurantee! However, that does not mean apple will not implement new ideas for hearing, the onyl reason apple would do that is through their generosity, but other than that they are not forced.

McDonalds was sued and lost over how hot their coffee was. Why do you think every coffee now says "caution: hot" Duh!

If coffee isn't hot enough to scald, then it's not right.

bretm
Dec 24, 2007, 11:39 PM
Haha does this person think he is going to win, is this a joke? Just like mc donalds you cant sue them, because if apple clearly states the issue it is the consumers responsibility to accept that problem. In the case of Mc Donalds the judge ruled and that it is the consumers job to research and understand the risks if the information is avaliable. And trust me there are thousdands of compact disks that cause hearing damage and mp3 on the market today that cause hearing dmaage. If the case ever get reviewed which it will not, the judge will have to and can not under the law rule in favor of the client because then the case of Mc donalds would have to be over rulled then mp3 would have to be changed. If the judge ever rules in favor of the client actually he can be released from his duty as apple is a big corporation and many judges will not even take on a case like this unless there is something that violates human rights like wal-mart. All in all, it wont happen 100 percent gurantee! However, that does not mean apple will not implement new ideas for hearing, the onyl reason apple would do that is through their generosity, but other than that they are not forced.

Please name one compact DISC that causes hearing damage. And then state your sources or give it up.

andy721
Dec 25, 2007, 12:02 AM
The problem is that people hurt their hearing even though it doesn't cause them pain, therefore they don't know it's hurting them in the long run.

but the thing is, THEY KNOW THIS! It's really moronic of them to even attempt it. people are retarded when it comes to health.

luminosity
Dec 25, 2007, 12:07 AM
but the thing is, THEY KNOW THIS! It's really moronic of them to even attempt it. people are retarded when it comes to health.

no, people don't know it. Some do, but the majority don't, and just as importantly, don't know that the damage is irreversible. We're used to healing from most injuries.

igazza
Dec 25, 2007, 12:07 AM
good idea apple i love listening to music and i wanna have hearing when im 90 i only listen now at around 75 80%

100% for over 1 hour its doing damage to your hearing i heard :apple:

cameronjpu
Dec 25, 2007, 12:50 AM
Haha does this person think he is going to win, is this a joke? Just like mc donalds you cant sue them...

See here's the thing.... in the McDonald's case, the plaintiff won, and won quite a lot of money.

sachxn
Dec 25, 2007, 01:01 AM
keep it low buddy otherwise someone from the Zune team may copy it in their next generation product.:D

Sachin (http://qtp.blogspot.com)

spriter
Dec 25, 2007, 01:12 AM
A good idea, although hopefully it's optional for people who want Tinnitus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinnitus) :eek:

Jokes aside, you really do no want Tinnitus. It's annoying.

IzzyJG99
Dec 25, 2007, 01:52 AM
Suing a company for something you did wrong. Any idiot knows that if you listen to music that loudly...you're gonna get damage. This is up there with that chick who spilled HOT coffee on her lap and sued McDonalds.

markie
Dec 25, 2007, 02:32 AM
This is rediculous. Lowering the signal level off the headphone jack is bad enough. Randomly adjusting it will be horrible. Again, parties, car stereos, etc...

I sure hope Apple doesn't do this or at least makes it optional. I would be ticked off big time.

"The iPod headphones can exceed 90dB"

I sure hope so, 90dB peaks are not very loud - similar to background noise levels on a bus or subway.

bmk
Dec 25, 2007, 03:30 AM
If you can find one teen who's parents haven't told them to turn that thing down because it was too loud and would hurt their ears, I'd be surprised.

Yeah, that's the problem with kids these days. You tell em that loud music's gonna damage their ears and they just don't hear ya...

Freis968
Dec 25, 2007, 04:26 AM
Thank God for the 5.5 Gen iPod, none of this crap to worry about!

swagi
Dec 25, 2007, 08:15 AM
Suing a company for something you did wrong. Any idiot knows that if you listen to music that loudly...you're gonna get damage. This is up there with that chick who spilled HOT coffee on her lap and sued McDonalds.

Actually your analogy shows, why your argument doesn't hold any water. You are right, McD was sued. You are also right, that that woman also bears a little fault with sipping the coffee over her lap.

You should check out these facts http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm

Quoted from there: "A report in Liability Week, September 29, 1997, indicated that Kathleen Gilliam, 73, suffered first degree burns when a cup of coffee spilled onto her lap. Reports also indicate that McDonald's consistently keeps its coffee at 185 degrees, still approximately 20 degrees hotter than at other restaurants. Third degree burns occur at this temperature in just two to seven seconds, requiring skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability to the victims for many months, and in some cases, years"

So actually, being possible to play your music at very high volume trhough your headphone jack is an issue to adress. And it really is a serious claim.

And to all the whiners that listen to their music though a speaker system. If your speaker system is attached to the headphone jack and the volume sucks, then there are two possibilities:

a) check out the inbuilt preamp before buying a speaker-set; A headphone jack is not designed for powering a passive speaker system.

b) Get a MF certified system for the iPod. There are dozens on the market, that are not only beautifully designed, but also use the dock connector.

tuneman07
Dec 25, 2007, 09:04 AM
The reason the lady at McD's won her lawsuit was because as someone else said their coffee was kept much hotter than it needed to be in order for them to save money (The hotter you have your water the less actual coffee grinds you need to brew coffee as the hot water pulls more flavor from less grounds). They were found to be liable because this was found to be an unreasonable and dangerous practice.

You can't make money off something like hearing loss when you made the choice to listen too loud and this precedent has been set a billion times - giving people the option of hurting themselves isn't liability- that goes for gun companies, fast food, alcohol etc...

As for this volume control I wouldn't buy an Ipod that had that out of principle- When does this ridiculousness stop? If we keep this up trying to protect everyone from everything including themselves we honestly wont be able to leave the house in 20 years. This stuff pisses me off to no end.

birdsong
Dec 25, 2007, 09:50 AM
The reason the lady at McD's won her lawsuit was because as someone else said their coffee was kept much hotter than it needed to be in order for them to save money (The hotter you have your water the less actual coffee grinds you need to brew coffee as the hot water pulls more flavor from less grounds). They were found to be liable because this was found to be an unreasonable and dangerous practice.

It's still ridiculous that they had to pay up. She burned herself. End of story. I don't know about you, but when I make espresso at home, the temperatures involved are significantly hotter than 185 degrees Fahrenheit. When I've burned myself on the steam wand (which gets to over 212 degrees Fahrenheit as it's steam), I don't cry and run to my lawyer. I say "alright, hopefully I won't be an idiot again." Suffice it to say, most people don't have the recognition that they too are idiots sometimes. It's always someone else's fault.

I guess I'm glad I have an external headphone amplifier to use with my Etymotic ER-4Ps, as they require significantly more voltage for the same volume level compared to iPhone buds.

Cygnus311
Dec 25, 2007, 10:19 AM
If iPods starting changing volume on their own, I'll just never buy one again. Dumbest idea ever.

MrCrowbar
Dec 25, 2007, 11:02 AM
Well, I wouldn't mind an optional "keep my ears safe" option. If it could detect what kind of headphone is connected to adjust that accordingly, it would be useful. If you plug your iPod to computer speakers for a party (which lots of people like to do) it would be futile to have the volume adjusted downward as the signal is run through an amplifier afterwards.

If it's done, right, I would embrace the thought that my iPod is reminding me to turn it down a little bit. I usually can understand the lyrics of the guy's iPod next to me in the underground while I'm listening to my iPod, so I think my volume levels are ok. :)

funkybatt
Dec 25, 2007, 11:18 AM
what next, will they upload the proper music for us?

Eriamjh1138@DAN
Dec 25, 2007, 12:28 PM
Whatever happened to that ******* who sued apple about the volume levels, anyway?

Rychy
Dec 25, 2007, 01:13 PM
Interesting.... I'm quite worried about hearing loss myself. I keep my iPhone's volume limit at a little under 50%, and if I can't hear my music with that limit I don't listen to it.

MikeTheC
Dec 25, 2007, 01:45 PM
What a load of crap. I mean, what special, unique risk does an iPod present that just about every other source of sound on the planet does not? That's such a bogus, junk lawsuit. I'd have thrown it out of court if it had been me.

But, so much for personal responsibility in this grand old country of ours.

"I had the volume really cranked up, and went deaf because Apple didn't stop me from exercising my own constitutionally-guaranteed personal liberty." I mean, WTF?!?!?!?!?!?

Virgil-TB2
Dec 25, 2007, 02:01 PM
I like how almost everyone assumes this is going to be hardwired and not optional.Really. :)

I have read all the relevant info and I don't see anywhere at all that it's stated that Apple will make this an automatic or unchangeable feature. Why the heck would they? :confused:

People are definitely assuming the worst here.

luminosity
Dec 25, 2007, 03:27 PM
What a load of crap. I mean, what special, unique risk does an iPod present that just about every other source of sound on the planet does not? .

Nothing, except that it puts loud music directly into your ears.

thechidz
Dec 25, 2007, 03:40 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3B48b Safari/419.3)

This would be a great optional feature on all iPods, as long as the user could turn it on/off (or the user's parents with a passcode), very much like the current volume limiter.

I agree. There should be some freedom of choice involved

Bababasjd
Dec 25, 2007, 03:46 PM
McDonalds was sued and lost over how hot their coffee was. Why do you think every coffee now says "caution: hot" Duh!

If coffee isn't hot enough to scald, then it's not right.

First off that is not how it happened. IN my law class we talked about this case and many people especially Americans like to gossip. I mean Ameircans can get information and twist it and turn it into something new. The press is responsible for this! Go here and read about it: http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_mcdonalds.htm The judge never awared the 2.8 million dollars he significanlty reduced it because Mc Donalds and its team of lawyers threatened to appeal the case with the Supreme Court and if the Supreme Court found that judges ruling harsh he can be released. Why did she sue because Mc Donalds coffeee was way to hot to sell and was not fit for consumption. It also had no label telling other consumers you can get burned if you spill it. When I drink my coffee instarbucks it says this warning. When I spilled my coffee on my lap many times I got a little red burn that went away after 1 hour or so. This woman needed skin grafting! Again this guy who is suing apple has a ZERO and I mean a ZERO chance.:apple:

mikes63737
Dec 25, 2007, 03:50 PM
I would be really mad if Apple did this.

One good compromise would be if they would ship iPods with the volume limited at 50% to prevent lawsuits, but clearly outline the steps so that the average user can take the limit off. This would take ~4 seconds to shut off if you wanted to and then if you go deaf it's your problem.

cbrain
Dec 25, 2007, 03:56 PM
If this gets released, I am looking forward to it. It would need to be optional though.

I can remember that update in March 2006 and I really liked it.

jazzkids
Dec 25, 2007, 04:56 PM
3 words

Caution: Hot Beverage

Now listed on the side of a hot coffee cup in case you thought you were buying a cold cup of hot coffee and decided to throw it in your face.
:rolleyes:

Everyone is sue happy.

luminosity
Dec 25, 2007, 07:00 PM
It's not that the coffee was hot. It's that it was beyond just hot, and the method for heating it was questionable.

birdsong
Dec 25, 2007, 08:36 PM
It's not that the coffee was hot. It's that it was beyond just hot, and the method for heating it was questionable.

And what is wrong with this? Once it gets in your cup, it can't be any hotter than boiling. If I order black tea, I expect to get it damn close to boiling, as you need boiling water to properly brew black tea. If I pour it on my leg and get third degree burns, I am a retard. If it makes me sterile, I probably deserved it. End of discussion.

luminosity
Dec 25, 2007, 08:47 PM
And what is wrong with this? Once it gets in your cup, it can't be any hotter than boiling. If I order black tea, I expect to get it damn close to boiling, as you need boiling water to properly brew black tea. If I pour it on my leg and get third degree burns, I am a retard. If it makes me sterile, I probably deserved it. End of discussion.

Obviously, a court of law disagreed.

MacFly123
Dec 25, 2007, 10:40 PM
Obviously, a court of law disagreed.

So basically the reason there is a forum due to a potential feature like this is because of people like you huh! :rolleyes:

Cameront9
Dec 25, 2007, 10:46 PM
As a hearing impaired person that NEEDs the volume to be turned up...They better make this optional!!

luminosity
Dec 25, 2007, 10:54 PM
So basically the reason there is a forum due to a potential feature like this is because of people like you huh! :rolleyes:

I guess so :).

andy721
Dec 26, 2007, 12:14 AM
then I wont get an ipod and hands down same with everyone else well maybe the old people might care but you know what, just leave it the ****** alone. Stop trying to make something that would make it better because in the end it wont be.

Bababasjd
Dec 26, 2007, 12:53 AM
People you guys are still over reacting they wont change the ipod volume, apple wont be sued. End of story go open your chirstmass presents. Well I am still waiting for Jan 15 for mine:apple:

andy721
Dec 26, 2007, 01:17 AM
People you guys are still over reacting they wont change the ipod volume, apple wont be sued. End of story go open your chirstmass presents. Well I am still waiting for Jan 15 for mine:apple:

Can't wait till its jan 08 already, I am getting the macpro for free aka GRANDPARENT$$$ :D
I wonder if the new LCD will be announced at the expo and available the same day.

thegman1234
Dec 26, 2007, 01:50 AM
I think it's unlikely that Apple would do this. The world is becoming such a weird place, everyone is suing for everything. BTW that McD lawsuit was retarded. If you burn yourself on coffee that is in a cup that says "Caution Hot" that's your fault and no one else's.

luminosity
Dec 26, 2007, 01:51 AM
I think it's unlikely that Apple would do this. The world is becoming such a weird place, everyone is suing for everything. BTW that McD lawsuit was retarded. If you burn yourself on coffee that is in a cup that says "Caution Hot" that's your fault and no one else's.

Where do you think that warning came from in the first place?

Bababasjd
Dec 26, 2007, 01:58 AM
Can't wait till its jan 08 already, I am getting the mac pro for free aka GRANDPARENT$$$ :D
I wonder if the new LCD will be announced at the expo and available the same day.
im just ticked off that I bought a pc because i was desperate and spend so much extra money on it that i could have bought a nice mac:mad: oh well i learned my lesson and that is wait for the good stuff! I was so tempted this x mass to buy a mac book pro with the old core 2 duo, but I knew I was going to be disappointed around Jan, when the new macbooks come out, so I am waiting so impatiently. Apple really does make good products. You don't see dell rumors and dell fans pondering the next dell. Apple really does think different. Well I am counting down those days until Jan!:D

andy721
Dec 26, 2007, 02:13 AM
im just ticked off that I bought a pc because i was desperate and spend so much extra money on it that i could have bought a nice mac:mad: oh well i learned my lesson and that is wait for the good stuff! I was so tempted this x mass to buy a mac book pro with the old core 2 duo, but I knew I was going to be disappointed around Jan, when the new macbooks come out, so I am waiting so impatiently. Apple really does make good products. You don't see dell rumors and dell fans pondering the next dell. Apple really does think different. Well I am counting down those days until Jan!:D

I notice that DELL.com its impossible for checking out without a page asking you want to buy this n that or you cant live without this so you must spend more money on this product. It's ******** I tell ya. Apple hardware seems to last longer my comp never broke down an its 7 freaking years old, maybe when maxing out a pc it helps :D:mad:

cbrain
Dec 26, 2007, 03:44 AM
It would also be interesting to see this in Mac's, just as long as it was optional though.

Digitalclips
Dec 26, 2007, 07:07 AM
IN my law class we talked about this case and many people especially Americans like to gossip. :

Wow, I wonder if we 'Americans' are genetically predisposed to this? Unlike the rest of humanity I assume? Did your Law teacher study American sociology closely and come to this conclusion on his own or was it backed up by research? :p

hdasmith
Dec 26, 2007, 07:27 AM
Common sense died when the user had to rely on others to protect himself. Is it that tough for the man to realize that it's his own responsibility to take care of himself? Does he need others to help protect him from himself?

I really think somebody needs to resurrect common sense... common sense just ain't common anymore...

This was apparently in The Times (UK). Who are Apple and the Government to tell me what I can and can't do with things that don't harm others?! Small government!


London Times Obituary of the late Mr. Common Sense


'Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who
has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was,
since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He
will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as:
Knowing when to come in out of the rain; why the early bird gets the
worm; Life isn't always fair; and maybe it was my fault.


Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more
than you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in
charge).


His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but
overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy
charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended
from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for
reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.


Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the
job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly
children.


It declined even further when schools were required to get parental
consent to administer sun lotion or an Elastoplast to a student; but
could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to
have an abortion.


Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became
contraband; churches became businesses; and criminals received better
treatment than their victims. Common Sense took a beating when you
couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar
could sue you for assault.


Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to
realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in
her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.


Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust; his
wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. He
is survived by his 4 stepbrothers; I Know My Rights, I Want It Now,
Someone Else Is To Blame, and I'm A Victim.


Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone. If
you still remember him, pass this on. If not, join the majority and do
nothing.'


And a little extra........................

Can you imagine working for a company that has a little more than 600
employees and has the following statistics?

29 have been accused of spouse abuse

7 have been arrested for fraud

19 have been accused of writing bad cheques

117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses

3 have done time for assault

71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit

4 have been arrested on drug-related charges

8 have been arrested for shoplifting

21 are currently defendants in lawsuits

84 have been arrested for drink driving in the last year



Which organization is this?



It's the 635 members of the House of Commons, the same group that cranks
out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in
line.

Digitalclips
Dec 26, 2007, 07:29 AM
And what is wrong with this? Once it gets in your cup, it can't be any hotter than boiling. If I order black tea, I expect to get it damn close to boiling, as you need boiling water to properly brew black tea. If I pour it on my leg and get third degree burns, I am a retard. If it makes me sterile, I probably deserved it. End of discussion.

I see you are no science student. Plus you might just get bumped and not intentionally spill it. People that end their views with 'End of Discussion' are usually the retards too ;)

Water can indeed get hotter than 'boiling', by which I suspect you mean 100 degrees C. Putting pressure aside for a moment, try adding sugar and check out the temperature when it 'boils'. If a coffee machine produced a ready made cup of milky, sweet coffee after using steam to heat it as many do, the resulting coffee might well be well over the boiling point of pure water when handed to you and thus really burn badly if spilled on your lap ... :eek:

Now back to hearing issues and iPods :). I love the way so many here have actually got angry about what Apple might do! :rolleyes: If they do and I suspect they might add this feature, as many have said, you have to believe it will be optional to use.

Digitalclips
Dec 26, 2007, 07:39 AM
Who are Apple and the Government to tell me what I can and can't do with things that don't harm others?! Small government!

Yeah, and damn anyone who tries to make this World a safer place right. :rolleyes:

I wish all those who scream 'nanny state' every time anyone suggests anything to help people would give up their social security and medicare befits, you know they would have screamed the same thing when they were originally proposed too!

Yvan256
Dec 26, 2007, 07:45 AM
I always use headphones with my Mac mini and I'd like to see the current maximum volume iPod setting added to Macs. I never go beyond 2 or 3 steps (speaker volume icon that appears when we change volume).

This means I'm either at 50% of 100% volume, instead of having 16 steps of volume. If my maximum was 18% (3 steps) then the volume-changing keys would still give me 16 steps but each one would be 1% instead of 6%.

If that makes any sense. :o

ericthered
Dec 26, 2007, 09:15 AM
Why? Volume changes with different earbuds, and not everyone uses the Apple ones. And what if you're driving it through a set of speakers? I don't want my music being turned down when I'm playing it at a party.

I can't see this as being a good thing.

Only as an option. Nearly 80% of the time my nano is plugged into my car audio system Having the output cranked down would be really be a PITA

ChocoMan
Dec 26, 2007, 09:40 AM
what?

akadmon
Dec 26, 2007, 09:50 AM
Can we have some new (even if ultimately proven false) rumors, pleeez? This is depressing :( It's a slow day at work and I want something to pick me up :)

ChrisK018
Dec 26, 2007, 10:00 AM
^ New & false rumor: Apple Game System. The ermmm... iGameBox

luminosity
Dec 26, 2007, 10:32 AM
Yeah, and damn anyone who tries to make this World a safer place right. :rolleyes:

I wish all those who scream 'nanny state' every time anyone suggests anything to help people would give up their social security and medicare befits, you know they would have screamed the same thing when they were originally proposed too!

I'm sorry, but your posts have exceeded the sensibility limit. Please repost your thoughts using more hysterical language and irrational ideas.

Billicus
Dec 26, 2007, 10:45 AM
This is simply silly and a terrible idea in my opinion. If I want to listen to my iPod at full volume and go deaf in 5 years that's my own problem. People have to be responsible for their own actions and not depend on Apple (or the government) to take care of us and make sure we don't make wrong decisions.

My 2ó...

Maccus Aurelius
Dec 26, 2007, 10:46 AM
Heaven forfend a mere sophisticated volume limiter would be implemented. If I was a parent and gifted an iPod to the child, the volume would be preset. No worries. As I'm sure, as others are, that this would most definitely be optional, I wonder where all of this frustration is coming from? Now, I along with others would be annoyed if we have no choice, but really, we have no indication of that happening, sue-happy America or not.

137489
Dec 26, 2007, 11:27 AM
Huh Interesting post. I have low frequency hearing loss (I am only 39) due to standing too close to the speakers when I used to manage/video local rock bands, when I was in my teens/20's (plus the number of concerts I went to in the 80's) - so now I am forced to listen a little louder. In a way I can see why Apple would want to send out a caution. However, given the number of non-apple devices on the market for the iPod that have their own volume controls - I do not think this would go over very well. Also, as someone who has converted their old vynals, cassettes, 8-tracks (ok showing my age), 45's etc to mp3, plus do recording off the web, I can tell you sometimes you just have to turn the volume higher to hear it. I also listen to more than music on my ipod, and sometimes the source of the recording is low - so I have to increase the volume.

I say the only way for this to work and to make everyone happy would be to put a db meter in the headphone jack and limit the max volume to a certain db. If you connect it to an external device, then you are on your own (much like torqing out an engine - don't blame GM, Chrysler, Ford if the nitro fried your pistons).

Rodimus Prime
Dec 26, 2007, 11:42 AM
if it is not optional to turn off this feature I will not be buying a new iPod. Reason for this is because I have my iPod plug into my car though the AUX port. I set the iPod volume to max than adjusted it with the volume controls on my car. The iPod is not driving my car's speakers but the volume it puts out is then adjusted though my car's volume. Less volume in the iPod means less I have to turn it up more in my car. Not something I really want to do.

I have not listen to my iPod with headphones in over a year now. I listen to it almost every day in my car. I am going to sit and wait on this one because I was thinking about replacing my iPod this summer. If Apple makes this manditory (sp) I will be looking at the Zune.

mrsebastian
Dec 26, 2007, 12:07 PM
dear apple, [bleep] you! they're my god damned ears and i'll do what i want with 'em. if someone sues you, because they are simply stupid, then add another [bleeping] lawyer to the legal team. it's not like you have the cash... or maybe you could focus on making your products better, kinda like they used to be...

like how my nano refuses to mount on any other computer without reformatting, even though synching is completely turned off. how my powerbook is ridiculously hot and that affects everything from the airport card to the processors. how my last two imacs all over heated, had faulty power supplies, logic boards, etc. oh yeah, airports that work intermittently at best and constantly need to be restarted. last but not least, my 60 gig ipod that randomly locks up when transferring files to and from it's hard drive.

come to think of it, i'm really starting to wonder why i'm still an apple fan? why do i support you're business and make you rich, when in the last eight of my 20 odd years of using apple products, 90% of them have all needed repairs or haven't worked as advertised?

karmapolice63
Dec 26, 2007, 12:12 PM
This isn't new news. Volume limiting has been an issue for years with doctors and Apple is trying to keep the masses happy by offering a compromise for their systems. Essentially it's the user's responsibility however to make sure they are listening at a comfortable level.

aranhamo
Dec 26, 2007, 01:39 PM
Yeah, and damn anyone who tries to make this World a safer place right. :rolleyes:

I wish all those who scream 'nanny state' every time anyone suggests anything to help people would give up their social security and medicare befits, you know they would have screamed the same thing when they were originally proposed too!

Happy to. Who do I talk to to have my social security and medicare benefits transferred to you?

birdsong
Dec 26, 2007, 02:09 PM
I see you are no science student. Plus you might just get bumped and not intentionally spill it. People that end their views with 'End of Discussion' are usually the retards too ;)

Actually I'm an engineer. We tend to think with logic. Logic dictates that it's not McDonald's fault if someone else bumps you and you get burned.

Water can indeed get hotter than 'boiling', by which I suspect you mean 100 degrees C. Putting pressure aside for a moment, try adding sugar and check out the temperature when it 'boils'. If a coffee machine produced a ready made cup of milky, sweet coffee after using steam to heat it as many do, the resulting coffee might well be well over the boiling point of pure water when handed to you and thus really burn badly if spilled on your lap ... :eek:

The effect of dissolved sugar in the quantities present in a cup of coffee on the boiling point of water is negligible.

Maccus Aurelius
Dec 26, 2007, 03:07 PM
Regarding that McD's lawsuit, didn't the woman actually only want the medical bills paid, and was only *temporarily* awarded punitive damages because they brushed her off? That said, I'll be damned if any vendor gives me a cup of coffee that isn't hot as hell, especially in the winter, when I'd like for my cup o' joe to stay warm longer. That's why I love little diners. If you b**** and moan that your coffee's too hot, they'd likely say "Then make it at home goofball"

Anyway, this is nothing to make a big stink over (yet). This is a way different case from the hot coffee lawsuit, because it's not about people accidentally boosting the volume up to levels that permanently damage their hearing in one fell swoop, but about a protective measure that is so vague on details, I'm surprised more people aren't asking for specifics before going on with their "So help me God!" comments.

aranhamo
Dec 26, 2007, 03:59 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants

Her medical bills were $11,000, and she initially sued for $20,000. In the end, she was awarded $2.9 million, and then pending appeal she settled with McDonald's for an undisclosed amount less than $600,000. The coffee cup already had a warning on it, but "the jury decided that the warning was neither large enough nor sufficient."

swagi
Dec 26, 2007, 05:19 PM
dear apple, [bleep] you! they're my god damned ears and i'll do what i want with 'em. if someone sues you, because they are simply stupid, then add another [bleeping] lawyer to the legal team. it's not like you have the cash... or maybe you could focus on making your products better, kinda like they used to be...

like how my nano refuses to mount on any other computer without reformatting, even though synching is completely turned off. how my powerbook is ridiculously hot and that affects everything from the airport card to the processors. how my last two imacs all over heated, had faulty power supplies, logic boards, etc. oh yeah, airports that work intermittently at best and constantly need to be restarted. last but not least, my 60 gig ipod that randomly locks up when transferring files to and from it's hard drive.

come to think of it, i'm really starting to wonder why i'm still an apple fan? why do i support you're business and make you rich, when in the last eight of my 20 odd years of using apple products, 90% of them have all needed repairs or haven't worked as advertised?

<completely off topic rant>
I agree, that Apple product quality totally deteriorated. But as a matter of fact Apple products are much cheaper than they were. Like the former time entry model iBook was at the price point of the current entry model MacBook Pro. I'm still thinking, as to why I paid 3.800 Euros for my current Powerbook.

Well, having played around with MacBooks, MacBook Pros and owning some Core Duo iMacs I know why -> Apple has gone the cheap road. Yes, they sell more products, they got more marketshare.

Now going into the 4th year with my PB I feel like it has to be replaced. But I'm so unhappy, that there ain't no worthy comp to replace it with :(

Apple computers weren't overpriced in the old days. They had better quality. Give me a 3.500 bucks 15" with great gfx card and other nifty options and I'm in the market again. But currently I don't feel that there is any worthy Apple computer out there to replace my Powerbook. I'm seriously considering using a Sony Vaio FZ-series notebook, to tide me over til Apple starts delivering a worthy Powerbook successor!
</completely off topic rant>

thegman1234
Dec 26, 2007, 08:34 PM
Where do you think that warning came from in the first place?

I may be mistaken, but to my knowledge the cup had said Caution Hot when she burned herself. They didn't add it after she burned herself.

macsound@gmail.
Dec 27, 2007, 03:38 AM
I think it would be a cool feature that you can disable because like someone else said, what if you are playing through speakers or something where you really dont want to have to deal with turning them back up every 20 minutes or whatever it is. It would be nice if you could turn it on and off if that is what you are looking for but would totally suck if it just was always like that but apple isnt that stoopid.

Sweetbike40
Dec 27, 2007, 08:53 AM
this will totally suck if you can't turn off the safety. there have been times when i had my earbuds on and a song will unexpectedly blast but i'd like the option to turn that feature on and off. when i use it in the car, i'd hate to be limited to volume level. or in the house. why then aren't stereos limited? people have always used headphones with any music device.

thegman1234
Dec 27, 2007, 09:38 AM
this will totally suck if you can't turn off the safety. there have been times when i had my earbuds on and a song will unexpectedly blast but i'd like the option to turn that feature on and off. when i use it in the car, i'd hate to be limited to volume level. or in the house. why then aren't stereos limited? people have always used headphones with any music device.

Limiting the sound that headphones can output is an excellent safety feature. My guitar amp only outputs a certain volume to headphones this way you can't blow your brain out. The iPod also has a feature where u can limit the volume output, and iTunes also has a feature where u can not only raise or lower the volume of a specific song, but you can regulate song volume.

These are all great features for your safety, and an auto adjust would be a great feature as well, but it seems like something that would definitely be optional to use, just as the other iPod volume features are.

Apple knows that, other than the iPod touch, they still have competition on the portable music player industry. They also know who their largest demographic of iPod sales is. And as a company that practices good business, they know the culture of that demographic. Myself being a member of that demographic, I can honestly tell you that one; we like to listen to loud music, and two; if this feature could not be disabled, it would turn heads away. Apple knows this.

johnmcboston
Dec 27, 2007, 11:55 AM
Ahhhh. So they can't get better volume control IN the ipods themselves, but it will make other volume decisions for me?? nice.

muncyweb
Dec 27, 2007, 05:09 PM
I second this motion. Everybody should take responsibility for their own safety! It shouldn't be the responsibility of government or companies to ensure the safety of our ears. I'm getting so tired of everyone trying to "safety pad" the entire planet. If people want to do stupid things, they should be able to. I'm sure Apple could do A LOT MORE if they didn't have to worry about idiots suing them. :apple:

Ya, if it wasn't able to be turned off this would REALLY PISS ME OFF. Why can't people take responsibility for their own decisions DAMN it. If you want to go deaf, GO DEAF! Why do idiots have to sue someone? :mad:

thegman1234
Dec 27, 2007, 06:49 PM
I second this motion. Everybody should take responsibility for their own safety! It shouldn't be the responsibility of government or companies to ensure the safety of our ears. I'm getting so tired of everyone trying to "safety pad" the entire planet. If people want to do stupid things, they should be able to. I'm sure Apple could do A LOT MORE if they didn't have to worry about idiots suing them. :apple:

I agree, though I like the idea of certain safety features, I believe that many of them give people a false sense of security. This in turn allows people to become less responsible. However, that's a whole different story.

b33k34
Dec 29, 2007, 07:27 AM
My new Nano is already too quiet - much quieter than my old one (1.5gen) and my iRiver. This would be a terrible idea.