Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Bern said:
"Happening in the opposite way to what is expected"

FYI. it's ill mannered to publicly correct a person's use of the english language, especially if your not 100% certain of your correction ;)

That definition isn't correct, although some people assume it to be.

You should find this helpful:

Usage Note: The words ironic, irony, and ironically are sometimes used of events and circumstances that might better be described as simply “coincidental” or “improbable,” in that they suggest no particular lessons about human vanity or folly. Thus 78 percent of the Usage Panel rejects the use of ironically in the sentence In 1969 Susie moved from Ithaca to California where she met her husband-to-be, who, ironically, also came from upstate New York. Some Panelists noted that this particular usage might be acceptable if Susie had in fact moved to California in order to find a husband, in which case the story could be taken as exemplifying the folly of supposing that we can know what fate has in store for us. By contrast, 73 percent accepted the sentence Ironically, even as the government was fulminating against American policy, American jeans and videocassettes were the hottest items in the stalls of the market, where the incongruity can be seen as an example of human inconsistency.

You'll see here that I am indeed 100 percent certain of my correction. :D

No worries. It's a common mistake.


Back to the Nano...
 
MmmPancakes said:
That definition isn't correct, although some people assume it to be.

You should find this helpful:

Usage Note: The words ironic, irony, and ironically are sometimes used of events and circumstances that might better be described as simply “coincidental” or “improbable,” in that they suggest no particular lessons about human vanity or folly. Thus 78 percent of the Usage Panel rejects the use of ironically in the sentence In 1969 Susie moved from Ithaca to California where she met her husband-to-be, who, ironically, also came from upstate New York. Some Panelists noted that this particular usage might be acceptable if Susie had in fact moved to California in order to find a husband, in which case the story could be taken as exemplifying the folly of supposing that we can know what fate has in store for us. By contrast, 73 percent accepted the sentence Ironically, even as the government was fulminating against American policy, American jeans and videocassettes were the hottest items in the stalls of the market, where the incongruity can be seen as an example of human inconsistency.

You'll see here that I am indeed 100 percent certain of my correction. :D

No worries. It's a common mistake.


Back to the Nano...

I reiterate my FYI :D
 
Lacero said:
Bern, do you own a nano?

Yes, it's fine. But as I did with my iPod I keep it in a case since day one. I figure hey this thing cost me some stosh so I'm looking after it.

Now that's definitely not ironic :D
 
eva01 said:
then you take them to court and sue for a thousand dollars just to show them you mean business.

you don't sue them for millions upon millions of dollars, that is just ridiculous.

And if you want to make sure that the mistakes don't happen, open up a criminal case, not a civil one.

If you have a civil case i believe they still are doctors and can still be making mistakes, but if you have a criminal case they could go to jail and no mistakes from that person anymore.

In response to suing for $1000 instead of a million... you may have achieved a moral victory, but the hospital doesn't care. If you want to change behavior, you have to create incentives for people (or corporations) to change. And it's only an incentive to the hospital if it's enough money that it hurts.

In response to bringing criminal instead of civil charges - yes, that's an option, but keep in mind that the standard of proof in a civil case is that the plaintiff "shows by a preponderance of the evidence" that there was negligence. Translated, that means it's more likely that there was negligence than that there wasn't. In a criminal case, the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt." There's a world of difference between proving something is more likely than not and proving it beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
plinden said:
I'm always happy to diss the country I'm a guest in, but how about this?
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050920/od_afp/francejusticehoroscope
from the article: "A Frenchman ..... was told he was wasting the court's time and ordered to pay 350 euros (425 dollars) in legal fees."
there will always be morons but the legal system shouldnnt encourage them. i wouldnt be suprised if the guy had won the case had it been in the states, or at least have been let off freely with some no-win-no-pay compensation lawyer
 
lucas said:
Correction: The USA is sue happy for no reason. most other parts of the world are less so

Actually i think australia has overtaken the US in terms of willingness to sue
 
/me hopes that his nano is among the good ones :D

Somehow, I don't buy the 1/10 of 1%. Feels like Apple is trying to confuse consumers when they could have easily said "1 out of 1,000" instead.
 
Lacero said:
This is not going to go over well with people. Essentially, it's telling them to shove off, it's not our problem. This doesn't get resolved, Apple is in for a class-action lawsuit.


Article said:
Affected customers simply need to contact Apple to arrange a free replacement unit.

First off this post isn’t meant as disrespect to Lacero, I actually find his (your) posts informative, and entertaining every day of the week.

What part about that is telling them to shove off?

Granted they "can" and will say no to some people, but it looks to me that they are working on this at some level.

I have a nano, have since before the first full week. I have no scratches on it, or any other blemishes because I took action on protecting it right away. I can somewhat understand people faulting Apple for not having protective covers right away, but this issue isn’t unique to a new Apple product release. There are electronic devices that come out every month with no external protection offered for them, and like the nano people buy them knowing this. Some people want to be cutting / bleeding edge and there IS a cost associated with that decision, one that I have learned to accept.

On the subject of “normal” (non faulty) durability, my nano has fallen off of the top of a 7' server rack and bounced on the ground with only a little scratch to my "package tape" cover as damage. This is along with 2 other stupid mistakes on my part when it has fallen from my desk onto a hard floor. Besides the drops, I have also had it in my pocket during motocross riding events, including jumping, tight turns and some track work situations.

With lesser falls then my nano has seen (for some reason I have dropped it 3 times all by setting it on something and walking away WITH the headphones in my ear still! (yeah I am dumb :( ) the 15gb has received MUCH more damage. A simple fall from my desk chipped the top corner of that ipod about 2 months ago. I still think the nano is a tough little ipod and to me was worth the money!
 
Lacero said:
This is not going to go over well with people. Essentially, it's telling them to shove off, it's not our problem. This doesn't get resolved, Apple is in for a class-action lawsuit.

It says "concerned" customers, not "affected" customers. There is a huge difference there. If Apple told customers having this problem just to put a cover on it, it wouldn't really do anything, since the damage has been done. At any rate, whether or not you use a cover, tube, case, or anything else, if your screen breaks, you can have it replaced.

EDIT: beat to the punch.
 
barneygumble said:
Actually i think australia has overtaken the US in terms of willingness to sue
We're getting pretty close too. We've got those commercials over here 'Clumsy b*stard? Didn't look where you were going? Didn't engage brain before doing something dumb? Well there's probably someone else you can blame. Employ us and we'll sue them and take all the compensation.'

It does have to be said we're not so into the 'Class Action' thing over here as the legal framework is a bit different. Give it time... :(
 
Counterfit said:
Did anyone read the article? It has nothing to do with scratches. It's about the few nano's that had faulty screens, which could crack just from sitting in your pocket.
I know, it seems that because with most here the issue has been the ease of scratching the thing, that must be wat the topic refers to.
 
d00kie said:
/me hopes that his nano is among the good ones :D

Somehow, I don't buy the 1/10 of 1%. Feels like Apple is trying to confuse consumers when they could have easily said "1 out of 1,000" instead.
Standard financial way of expressing 0.1%, in the same way as when they talk about interest rate changes they will say a quarter of one percent.
 
MmmPancakes said:
"Scratches" isn't the right word for this issue. I would use the word "scuff" to describe the sensitivity of the screens.

I can't help but wonder if this is due to a faulty batch too.

My first nano (2GB) was carried in my shirt or suit jacket pocket for about 4 days before I sold it so I could get a 4GB one.

The guy that bought it on eBay said "are you sure it's used??"

There was barely a mark on it. I'd covered the rear with vinyl but the front was mostly unprotected and I didn't get it scratched.
 
nomad01 said:
I can't help but wonder if this is due to a faulty batch too.

My first nano (2GB) was carried in my shirt or suit jacket pocket for about 4 days before I sold it so I could get a 4GB one.

The guy that bought it on eBay said "are you sure it's used??"

There was barely a mark on it. I'd covered the rear with vinyl but the front was mostly unprotected and I didn't get it scratched.


Thats good to know. I just listed my 4gb black on e-Bay. Might as well dump it there and invest in either a biga** photo or a 4gb white that will let me see the screen,
 
nomad01 said:
I can't help but wonder if this is due to a faulty batch too.

My first nano (2GB) was carried in my shirt or suit jacket pocket for about 4 days before I sold it so I could get a 4GB one.

The guy that bought it on eBay said "are you sure it's used??"

There was barely a mark on it. I'd covered the rear with vinyl but the front was mostly unprotected and I didn't get it scratched.
How much did you get for it? It seems like even seocnd hand iPods on ebay are close to retail price.
 
Woke up this morning to hear the Nano screen hoo-ha reported in the top items on BBC radio with very little further detail. The headline sounded much like this:

Electronics firm Apple has admitted there have been problems with its new iPod Nano music player, after a string of complaints about damaged screens.

Coming on the heels of the Watchdog report on iPod batteries and regardless of the actual facts of the matter, what counts is the perception amongst consumers, namely that Apple is releasing substandard products. No amount of 'halo' can withstand this sort of reporting — mud sticks.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4286294.stm
 
People hear things and then get the wrong end of the stick. I spoke to somebody a few weeks back who said they'd heard that there was some new software or something coming out that would mean the iPod would be usless. It turns out she had heard about the Creative patent and that apple would have to change their interface. People only hear that there might be problems though and then go overboard. Sure defective screens are a problem, but it's only a very small minority and then if you did get one, it will get replaced.
 
Blue Velvet said:
Coming on the heels of the Watchdog report on iPod batteries and regardless of the actual facts of the matter, what counts is the perception amongst consumers, namely that Apple is releasing substandard products. No amount of 'halo' can withstand this sort of reporting — mud sticks.

Well said.
 
What's more, this has the potential to become a real Achilles heel in the iPod range that could be exploited by competitors employing a guerilla FUD marketing strategy if they had the inclination. It's certainly what I would be doing if I was running Creative...

Just think of how many times you hear a friend, colleague or family member repeat a piece of information gleaned from the media or internet as an undisputed fact — language is a virus, memes are powerful. The prevalence and persistence of urban legends aptly demonstrates this.

On other forums, I've heard people say 'Oh, the iPod's battery sucks' without them ever actually having owned one or demonstrating any further knowledge of the product — and others are willing to believe them.

Although Steve Jobs would never make the same mistake as Gerald Ratner, the constant drip-drip of negative news can have an extremely corrosive effect as this piece below demonstrates.

In less than 10 years he (Gerald Ratner) transformed it (Ratners) from a business with 130 stores and sales of £13m to a public company with 2,500 stores, 25,000 employees, the brands H Samuel and Ernest Jones, and profits of £121m.

But describing a sherry decanter as ‘total crap’ in a 30 minute speech to 6,000 directors at the Royal Albert Hall cost him his personal fortune, his job, wiped an estimated £500m off the company’s value and turned the profits into a £122m loss. His family named business was also re-christened Signet. A lifetime’s work catastrophically ruined overnight.

Interestingly, he’d been making the same comments in his speeches, more or less, for five years. But in 1992 the Daily Mirror, pursuing an anti-Fat Cat agenda received an advance copy of his speech from the IOD and sensing a story had a reporter there to verify that Ratner uttered the immortal words. It chose his line as the cover splash the next day.

The Sun then matched its fiercest rival in later editions and a media circus ensued. “They didn’t let go, and never let go. I understand they’ve got to add a bit of spice. I just kick myself that I gave them the ammunition.”
 
Washington Post article today on the subject at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/27/AR2005092701701.html

Good paragraph inside:

Other reviewers have done more comprehensive research. The Ars Technica Web site conducted a suite of stress tests ( http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/nano.ars/3 ) that established that dropping the iPod Nano 9 feet onto a concrete sidewalk would leave the Nano's screen "seriously bugged out," but even driving a car over the Nano -- twice! -- could not stop it from playing. To kill it, they had to fling the Nano straight up, perhaps 40 feet in the air, and let it pancake onto concrete pavement.
 
Blue Velvet said:
No amount of 'halo' can withstand this sort of reporting — mud sticks.

Forget 'halo' withstanding how about 'long time apple lover' withstanding. I've always had Apple products love my 3G iPod and shuffle; and my Dorris's iPod Mini..... I wanted to add the super cool nano to my collection so that I had a colour screen...... but now I'm having second thoughts!

EDIT: 100th Post --> I'm a regular :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.