Apple is facing class action for iOS 7

[charlituna]

Because it's bull..all software has bugs, the majority of users are not experiencing the issues presented by the "plaintiff." It will be tossed so quickly.

I suspect that they won't be able to prove a huge class issue, especially if the majority were in fact under warranty and thus swapped for the wifi etc issues.

Apple might end up settling and doing a similar quality program for the scant percent of folks that brought in a phone undated to iOS 7 with a burnt out wifi and replaced out of warranty.

As for the whole 'slow' part that could get tossed under the notion that folks should expect some issues if they are using generations old hardware with newer software

----------

And because it is free and optional to upgrade (written on my iOS 6 iPad 2).

But it isn't totally optional. If something goes wrong and you have to restore, say for a passcode lock out, you have to get the newer software. iTunes won't do it otherwise.

And for a long time you couldn't get the older versions of apps. Either you updated to the new iOS or you did without that app.

All that said, I think it's something if a hulabaloo, except for this issue of the iPhone 4. I really feel like Apple needs to rein in the updates. You get two and out. So you buy an iPhone 5s, it comes with iOS 7, you get 8 and 9 then out. You want iOS 10, buy a newer phone. It's still better than some android phones where you get what it came with and nothing.

And I wouldn't object to being able to limit the downloading and installing of iOS updates in the Restrictions. What happened with LAUSD wouldn't have happened if they could have blocked running updates, parents don't have to deal with kids games not working cause it wasn't updated yet and the kid freaks out etc

----------

This is almost as stupid as the lady that sued McDonalds because her coffee was hot and she got burned from it. lmao

She had second and third degree burns because, as it was proven, they were brewing the coffee way over the guidelines for safe temps.

So not really the same.

Now if it was unproven with no doubts, that iOS 7 was causing the battery to explode it might be the same

 

[Armen]

Apple is facing class action for iOS 7

Just because users accept EULA does not mean users cannot sue. EULA can always be overturned in the court . Even constitution law can be modified, EULA can be changed or void entirely if plaintiff gets resasonable argument.

Instead of arguing Why don't we just follow this case to its death and then I'll just say "I told you so".

----------

Well, as always, that's the part it circles back and comes down to, letting it go through the system and work itself out.



----------



Perhaps the hope is that it doesn't necessarily result in some sort of money being split up (or at least only in that), but in some change in how Apple does things when it comes to certain situations and/or what their user agreement can or can't really (legally/ethically) say with respect to some things.

It's just this class action lawsuit is really reaching. I would never back the claims just for the fact that I've seen so many iPhone 4 and 4S run ios 7 just fine.

 

[C DM]

In other news, ovens get hot and ice is cold!

The jury decided that the warnings on the cup saying that the contents are hot were not big enough, but what about the fact that she would have felt the heat through the cup prior to removing the lid?

Restaurants sell flaming food/drinks, or hot drinks. They should not be held responsible for any injury caused by customer negligence.

I wouldn't even dream of suing for spilling a hot drink on myself, I have self respect.

It's unfortunate what happened to the poor old woman, but hot coffee is, well, hot! She should have been more careful.

Ah, yes, another comment about something that someone never even really looked into and/or understood.

 

[matttye]

Ah, yes, another comment about something that someone never even really looked into and/or understood.

I get it. There are guidelines about how hot hot drinks should be kept and McDonalds breached/ignored those guidelines. Other establishments do keep their hot drinks at a cooler temperature.

The temperature that McDonalds stores their coffee at causes third degree burns significantly faster than it would at the recommended temperature.

I know some about this case, but the fact remains that no matter how hot the coffee was, mcdonalds didn't do anything to make her spill it and she damn well knew it was hot. That, in my eyes, should absolve them of all responsibility. It's not like they threw it at her and said 'hey, catch!' Or slid it across the counter at her like it was a saloon. They just passed her the cup and she spilled it on herself in the car. Nothing mcdonalds did could prevent that.

 

[C DM]

I get it. There are guidelines about how hot hot drinks should be kept and McDonalds breached/ignored those guidelines. Other establishments do keep their hot drinks at a cooler temperature.

The temperature that McDonalds stores their coffee at causes third degree burns significantly faster than it would at the recommended temperature.

I know some about this case, but the fact remains that no matter how hot the coffee was, mcdonalds didn't do anything to make her spill it and she damn well knew it was hot. That, in my eyes, should absolve them of all responsibility. It's not like they threw it at her and said 'hey, catch!' Or slid it across the counter at her like it was a saloon. They just passed her the cup and she spilled it on herself in the car. Nothing mcdonalds did could prevent that.

Except for brewing the coffee at the accepted safety standards. It's one thing to get a burn it's another thing to get what resulted in that case. One particular factor of the cause is just one aspect of it. But, again, understanding of the nuances and actual details would be needed.

 

[matttye]

Except for brewing the coffee at the accepted safety standards. It's one thing to get a burn it's another thing to get what resulted in that case. One particular factor of the cause is just one aspect of it. But, again, understanding of the nuances and actual details would be needed.

If you read the case description in detail it simply points out that it would take longer to get a third degree burn if the coffee was brewed at a cooler temperature. It doesn't say it would avoid a burn altogether.

The thing is, why are there rules governing the sale of some products and not others? Where's the consistency? For example, women's hair straighteners go to ridiculous temperatures like 200 degrees C. Such a product would cause a major burn much more quickly than coffee sold at ~90C.

A knife can cause penetrating wounds.

A car can cause serious injury to the driver, pedestrians, damage property and even explode.

Some products are dangerous and can cause injury. They need to be handled/operated with due care and diligence. The mere fact that the coffee was "too" hot is neither here nor there, really. People expect the coffee to be hot and should take appropriate care with it. That means not being careless so as to spill it all over yourself.

The same thing could quite easily happen at most homes and workplaces, as kettles boil water at 100C.

Why should things be any different in a restaurant? Like I say, if McDonalds had caused the spillage I could understand the suit, but as it stands it's just absolutely crazy that she won. Completely batsh*t crazy.

 

[patrickgerr]

Is IOS7 the only version with a class action?

 

[dannyyankou]

Is IOS7 the only version with a class action?

Nope. iOS 6 lawsuit- http://www.iphonehacks.com/2013/11/...on-lawsuit-poor-performance-ios-maps-app.html

iOS 4 lawsuit- http://www.maclife.com/article/news/iphone_3g_user_files_class_action_lawsuit_over_ios_4_upgrade

 

[C DM]

If you read the case description in detail it simply points out that it would take longer to get a third degree burn if the coffee was brewed at a cooler temperature. It doesn't say it would avoid a burn altogether.

The thing is, why are there rules governing the sale of some products and not others? Where's the consistency? For example, women's hair straighteners go to ridiculous temperatures like 200 degrees C. Such a product would cause a major burn much more quickly than coffee sold at ~90C.

A knife can cause penetrating wounds.

A car can cause serious injury to the driver, pedestrians, damage property and even explode.

Some products are dangerous and can cause injury. They need to be handled/operated with due care and diligence. The mere fact that the coffee was "too" hot is neither here nor there, really. People expect the coffee to be hot and should take appropriate care with it. That means not being careless so as to spill it all over yourself.

The same thing could quite easily happen at most homes and workplaces, as kettles boil water at 100C.

Why should things be any different in a restaurant? Like I say, if McDonalds had caused the spillage I could understand the suit, but as it stands it's just absolutely crazy that she won. Completely batsh*t crazy.

Despite its various downsides thankfully there's still a legal system that exists to counterbalance generally reactionary, simplistic, and/or biased takes people have on almost anything.

 

[BvizioN]

Ah, yes, another comment about something that someone never even really looked into and/or understood.

Man, you keep repeating that but can you kindly enlighten us? What did really happen? Did that customer order an iced cold drink and got a boiling hot one instead?

 

[CB1234]

Wait until Apple rolls out full health and fitness Service's on future devices and iOS's..... I fear this will give people carte blanche to sue Apple wheelie neelie !!!

 

[C DM]

Man, you keep repeating that but can you kindly enlighten us? What did really happen? Did that customer order an iced cold drink and got a boiling hot one instead?

I'm not the only one if you read the thread. And we are on the internet after all, do it's all rather self-explanatory. Seeing that this threads isn't really about that probably more than a good amount of time was already spent on it anyway.

 

[grockk]

frivolous.

 

[sracer]

Despite its various downsides thankfully there's still a legal system that exists to counterbalance generally reactionary, simplistic, and/or biased takes people have on almost anything.

Whether the lawsuit is successful against Apple or not, the responsibility ultimately falls on the consumer.

I generally liked what Apple was doing and where they appeared to be going with the iPhone/iPad/iPod. But things change I don't like the direction that Apple is going now. And so I have to make a decision whether or not to continue to invest in the Apple ecosystem or elsewhere or diversify my technology.

I'd prefer that Apple change, but ultimately all I can do is vote with my wallet. That'll make absolutely zero impact to Apple, but I have to do what is right for me.

There is a flipside to the Apple "collective" coin.... and that is that those who want change want to gather enough support to make that change. I tend to think that lawsuits like this are a passive, simple alternative to doing the hard thing... which is to simply move on.

 

[CB1234]

Whether the lawsuit is successful against Apple or not, the responsibility ultimately falls on the consumer.

I generally liked what Apple was doing and where they appeared to be going with the iPhone/iPad/iPod. But things change I don't like the direction that Apple is going now. And so I have to make a decision whether or not to continue to invest in the Apple ecosystem or elsewhere or diversify my technology.

I'd prefer that Apple change, but ultimately all I can do is vote with my wallet. That'll make absolutely zero impact to Apple, but I have to do what is right for me.

There is a flipside to the Apple "collective" coin.... and that is that those who want change want to gather enough support to make that change. I tend to think that lawsuits like this are a passive, simple alternative to doing the hard thing... which is to simply move on.

Very well said sir....

 

[C DM]

Whether the lawsuit is successful against Apple or not, the responsibility ultimately falls on the consumer.

I generally liked what Apple was doing and where they appeared to be going with the iPhone/iPad/iPod. But things change I don't like the direction that Apple is going now. And so I have to make a decision whether or not to continue to invest in the Apple ecosystem or elsewhere or diversify my technology.

I'd prefer that Apple change, but ultimately all I can do is vote with my wallet. That'll make absolutely zero impact to Apple, but I have to do what is right for me.

There is a flipside to the Apple "collective" coin.... and that is that those who want change want to gather enough support to make that change. I tend to think that lawsuits like this are a passive, simple alternative to doing the hard thing... which is to simply move on.

Moving on is the simple way out.

 

[sracer]

Moving on is the simple way out.

You are correct. I supposed that I mispoke when I used the word "simple" when I really meant to say "easy".

"Simple" does not imply "easy".

In the context of the financial investment made in software, hardware, and media, it isn't easy to move on. Signing on to a class-action lawsuit is easy.

 

[C DM]

You are correct. I supposed that I mispoke when I used the word "simple" when I really meant to say "easy".

"Simple" does not imply "easy".

In the context of the financial investment made in software, hardware, and media, it isn't easy to move on. Signing on to a class-action lawsuit is easy.

Sticking with a device that had been degraded by the manufacturer in one way or another wound't seem like an easy/simple thing. Just shrugging that away and moving on on the other hand does seem somewhat simpler/easier in that respect.

 

[Armen]

Sticking with a device that had been degraded by the manufacturer in one way or another wound't seem like an easy/simple thing. Just shrugging that away and moving on on the other hand does seem somewhat simpler/easier in that respect.

When you say "Degraded" are you speaking out of personal experience? Because I can tell you that I've observed how well iOS 7 runs on the iPhone 4 and 4S first hand and it's hardly "degraded". In fact, it brought even MORE features that iOS 6 did not have.

 

[C DM]

When you say "Degraded" are you speaking out of personal experience? Because I can tell you that I've observed how well iOS 7 runs on the iPhone 4 and 4S first hand and it's hardly "degraded". In fact, it brought even MORE features that iOS 6 did not have.

I was referencing to those with iOS 6 (on devices that Apple deemed capable of iOS 7) where there's a security issue present and now FaceTime isn't working because of it. Whether or not they can upgrade to iOS 7 (as been discussed quite a bit, even if people have different opinions about it) is somewhat separate from them being on iOS 6 and Apple themselves causing issues that are degrading the services there and not providing an already existing fix to those users, but instead providing a workaround that changes more than just simply fixing only what's broken and not touching anything else (as should really be expected in these kinds of situations in any industry).

 

[MaSx]

I understand what you are saying, but if a suit goes through, it will be up to the courts to decide. The courts may actually side in Apples' favor and could mean even more control over the software/hardware.

^True that but this just goes to show, how much user have a say in anything or how much a user "choice" matters to Apple. They are big on pleasing consumer but in such small and very important cases they are just like Google with their G+ for everything. Which I disliked so much that I stopped using some Google services. And Apple is forcing their "will" on others in "upgrading" system. The funny thing is that OSX doesn't do that, so I don't see why they are so closed minded for iOS.

 

[Zxxv]

I think they could have a case by saying I bought my device to look like ios6 because I liked it. Apple changed it without notifying me. I don't like the new look. I would not have bought this. I bought iOS 6. Please can I have what I bought back.

Its like taking your BMW to the garage. Picking it up later and its a Mercedes.

Yea you get the point.

 

[Tyler23]

I think they could have a case by saying I bought my device to look like ios6 because I liked it. Apple changed it without notifying me. I don't like the new look. I would not have bought this. I bought iOS 6. Please can I have what I bought back.

Its like taking your BMW to the garage. Picking it up later and its a Mercedes.

Yea you get the point.

A more apt description would be a user buying a black BMW with a contract stating that at any time, BMW may offer to change the paint of your car. One day they show up and say hey, we're here to paint your car, is that ok? You then tell them yes, please do.

Problem is, Apple didn't "change it without notifying me." The user hit the update button. On that very page, before they got to the update button, was a description of the update, including mentioning that there was a very new, updated user-interface. They gave users plenty of warning, and any user could have easily looked online to see examples of the new user interface.

There is no case here.

 

[Zxxv]

A more apt description would be a user buying a black BMW with a contract stating that at any time, BMW may offer to change the paint of your car. One day they show up and say hey, we're here to paint your car, is that ok? You then tell them yes, please do.

Problem is, Apple didn't "change it without notifying me." The user hit the update button. On that very page, before they got to the update button, was a description of the update, including mentioning that there was a very new, updated user-interface. They gave users plenty of warning, and any user could have easily looked online to see examples of the new user interface.

There is no case here.

Nope. They changed the internals and whole look and function. They didn't change the paint. They didn't give users a white iPhone where they had black.

They changed the whole experience without giving users the chance to say no I prefer the way it is thanks. I don't like this , I would not buy this. They should have a way to go back to iOS 6. Its what they bought.

 

[zipa]

Go read the terms of service before you upgrade. You can't sue.

I'm no expert on the US legal system, but nowhere that I know of is any contract that tries to limit the legal rights of a consumer valid. I'd be willing to bet that the US is no different in this regard. Your laws grant you certain rights as a consumer (class action lawsuits obviously being one of them), I can't see that some contract would be able to bypass those rights.