Class Action Lawsuit Filed Over iPhone 4 Glass Breakage

[Journojulz]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

If apple lied - a case would bd over in seconds.

The people taking advantage are the lawyers of this numbskull who expects a glass phone to be childproof.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

If apple lied - a case would bd over in seconds.

The people taking advantage are the lawyers of this numbskull who expects a glass phone to be childproof.

but apple pretty much as lied. multiple links to the story showing Apple lie has been shown.

Apple said it was stronger than plastic. As it turns out it seems to break more often than the plastic backing they had.

 

[NT1440]

but apple pretty much as lied. multiple links to the story showing Apple lie has been shown.

Apple said it was stronger than plastic. As it turns out it seems to break more often than the plastic backing they had.

Not all plastics are the same. Strength and durability have very specific definitions in the field. There is no way Apple didn't choose their wording very carefully for their advertisements.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Not all plastics are the same. Strength and durability have very specific definitions in the field. There is no way Apple didn't choose their wording very carefully for their advertisements.

true but there is no getting around that Apple was very questionable in how far it mess lead the consumers. Apple has been caught multiple times in the pass with there very heavy handed near lie advertisements.
I personal have put zero faith in much of the BS coming out of Apple mouth after Barefeet.com nailed them for the BS they pulled in how much better there G5 iMacs were compared to the G4. Apple has not really changed much in being honest since then. If anything they tend to pull the same BS.

 

[Journojulz]

but apple pretty much as lied. multiple links to the story showing Apple lie has been shown.

Name ONE that shows they makes false scientific claim and you will win the court case. Simple.

Apple said it was stronger than plastic. As it turns out it seems to break more often than the plastic backing they had.

They said "20 times stiffer and 30 times harder than plastic".

Surely someone who has £500 to spend on a mobile phone understands the difference between stiffer and stronger?

You could have made the case from marshmallow - it wouldn't be stiffer or stronger but it would survive a fall better.

The iphone is made of strong glass - not kryptonite.

This claim is everything that is wrong with the overcosseted 'whatever dumb things I do - It can't be my fault' society.

Sheesh! - if you gave a lead crystal chandalier to an 8 year old - would you sue if they broke it?

MAN UP!
You made a mistake - pay for it.

I personal have put zero faith in much of the BS coming out of Apple mouth...

Then obviously you wouldn't trust the 'stronger glass' to be strong enough to withstand dropping by children and used a case/bumper?

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Name ONE that shows they makes false scientific claim and you will win the court case. Simple.



They said "20 times stiffer and 30 times harder than plastic".

Surely someone who has £500 to spend on a mobile phone understands the difference between stiffer and stronger?

You could have made the case from marshmallow - it wouldn't be stiffer or stronger but it would survive a fall better.

The iphone is made of strong glass - not kryptonite.

This claim is everything that is wrong with the overcosseted 'whatever dumb things I do - It can't be my fault' society.

Sheesh! - if you gave a lead crystal chandalier to an 8 year old - would you sue if they broke it?

MAN UP!
You made a mistake - pay for it.



Then obviously you wouldn't trust the 'stronger glass' to be strong enough to withstand dropping by children and used a case/bumper?

blah blah blah.
We already have established that comparing the iPhone to something like a glass plate or in your case Chandalier. is a bad argument and just standard Apple appoligised.

You have failed to counter the point that Apple iPhone4 has a much higher than average accident rate compared to the iPhone 3. Also you can not assume anything about people paying that much for a phone understanding the difference. Apple Advertised that is easy to use and clueless idiots can use their stuff and they push that fact. This leads to the fact that good part of Apple users are idiots who do not understand some basic engineering facts.

 

[Geckotek]

Not all plastics are the same. Strength and durability have very specific definitions in the field. There is no way Apple didn't choose their wording very carefully for their advertisements.

This statement in itself makes Apple's claim false unless they specified the plastic they were comparing it to. Based on Apple's statement it would have to be stronger than any plastic it's compared to because they failed to qualify the statement.

 

[Journojulz]

You have failed to counter the point that Apple iPhone4 has a much higher than average accident rate compared to the iPhone 3.

Never disputed it. It is obviously a most pretentious design.
And its very obviousness - "Its a glass phone" - is why this lawsuit is a cancer.

Sensible people spend a few bucks on a case before handing it to children.

This leads to the fact that good part of Apple users are idiots who do not understand some basic engineering facts.

Indeed. We both agree this guy is an idiot.

Case dismissed.

 

[Geckotek]

This leads to the fact that good part of Apple users are idiots who do not understand some basic engineering facts.

And Apple is expected to assume this when marketing and building their product. They must consider the average customer, not the MR forum types of customers.

 

[Journojulz]

And Apple is expected to assume this when marketing and building their product.

Ok - where does this lead us?

The full screen glass on the front of the first iPhone is just as vulnerable as the 4

So the 4 is only twice as vulnerable to fall damage.
(less so if you can live with a cracked back glass)

So does this mean the original should have been turned down as not being "idiot proof"?

-----------

I am just asking this because fear of dumb lawsuits is holding back evolution on fear of being sued. I think it is good for lawyers - but everyone else pays for it and gets dumbed down design instead.

Take airbags in cars - it became mandatory for makers to equip them because it was found that a seatbelt law in the US was practically unenforceable.

So everyone gets airbags - despite seatbelts being statistically better at saving lives. This is what happens when you dumb down.

 

[Geckotek]

Placing glass on the front served a purpose no other material could....capacitive touchscreen.

There is no touch screen on the back. So it was added just to look nice. Form over function. Bad idea.

This is not a dumbing down issue. There is no loss of function if you loose the glass.

 

[Journojulz]

Placing glass on the front served a purpose no other material could....capacitive touchscreen.

Indeed, and you can't expect a glass screen to survive if you drop it from 3 foot.

So we agree a fragile nature is inherent in the design and an unavoidable risk.

There is no touch screen on the back. So it was added just to look nice. Form over function. Bad idea.

But - as we have agreed we can't expect the front screen to survive if dropped it from 3 foot - then the point is moot.

You could still not expect to drop the phone from 3 foot and expect either glass panel to survive.

Out of interest - is this case about the breaking of the rear casing?

This is not a dumbing down issue. There is no loss of function if you loose the glass.

Even if the back was a piece of plastic - the front would still be fragile - it is inherent in the design and an unavoidable risk. You could still not expect to drop it from 3 foot and survive. This Nimrod would still make this dumb claim.

No?

 

[takao]

Indeed, and you can't expect a glass screen to survive if you drop it from 3 foot.

So we agree a fragile nature is inherent in the design and an unavoidable risk.



But - as we have agreed we can't expect the front screen to survive if dropped it from 3 foot - then the point is moot.

You could still not expect to drop the phone from 3 foot and expect either glass panel to survive.

Out of interest - is this case about the breaking of the rear casing?



Even if the back was a piece of plastic - the front would still be fragile - it is inherent in the design and an unavoidable risk. You could still not expect to drop it from 3 foot and survive. This Nimrod would still make this dumb claim.

No?

actually withstanding a 3 feet/1meter drop is more or less an industry standard test for testing phones since it's mroe or less the height of pockets of your pants
in some countries it could void certain quality criteria

 

[Namji]

What I don't udnerstand is what was the point of Steve Jobs advertising and touting that the Iphone 4 has this new glass that is 20 x stronger than plastic?

If it is still fragile enough to shatter when dropped.. what is the point of even commenting about the so called feature.

 

[torbjoern]

What I don't udnerstand is what was the point of Steve Jobs advertising and touting that the Iphone 4 has this new glass that is 20 x stronger than plastic?

If it is still fragile enough to shatter when dropped.. what is the point of even commenting about the so called feature.

It's called marketing. I certainly knew about the fragility when I bought my iPhone 4, but my insurance policy covers any kind of damage by any cause. So I bought it anyway - after all, it looks nice.

 

[NT1440]

true but there is no getting around that Apple was very questionable in how far it mess lead the consumers. Apple has been caught multiple times in the pass with there very heavy handed near lie advertisements.
I personal have put zero faith in much of the BS coming out of Apple mouth after Barefeet.com nailed them for the BS they pulled in how much better there G5 iMacs were compared to the G4. Apple has not really changed much in being honest since then. If anything they tend to pull the same BS.

All I'm saying is that I'm sure that they did their homework in the terms they used. They will most likely win this lawsuit. They never made any claims about things like dropping durability.

Also, I don't get how people can get pissed off about something like this and not go out and sue companies like T-Mobile for their 4G commercials claims.

 

[Glideslope]

actually withstanding a 3 feet/1meter drop is more or less an industry standard test for testing phones since it's mroe or less the height of pockets of your pants
in some countries it could void certain quality criteria

We can't be certain. It was "approximately 3'. Could have been 3.4', 3.5'?

The truth is, well, we may never know the truth to this unresolvable crime against humanity.

Fairly certain about a few things however.

1. APPL will sell 22-25 million Verizon iPhones in 2011.

2. APPL will sell over 50 million GSM iPhone4/4s in 2011.

In 2012 APPL will be 250+ Billion a year company.

The seeds have germinated. The Cult has been affirmed. The Assimilation Continues.

Plenty of other options in the world if you think APPL is a dishonest, manipulating, demon that engages in the art of verbal distortion.

Act quickly. Your time IS limited.

 

[blueraja]

no, but maybe he thinks apple shouldnt make an iphone whose front and back are made of glass? which makes total sense.

They still do its called 3gs...they still sell them. Obw there are thousands of other phones to choose from. Buying a phone with a glass front and back is completely consumer choice.

 

[zorinlynx]

Phones get dropped. It's part of life for a phone; it's a small object that you carry with you at all times and frequently take out of your pocket to use.

It's expected that a phone be able to be dropped without being destroyed. I've dropped my Treo 650 many times and it was fine. I even dropped my Palm Pre multiple times and it was fine too. The iPhone 4 should be no different.

I have mine in an inCase for extra protection, but it shouldn't need this. I think they are right in bringing the lawsuit if the iPhone 4 easily shatters when dropped. We're talking a device that WILL be dropped during its lifetime, unless you are hermit who never goes out into the real world.

 

[iUser4Lyfe]

Phones get dropped. It's part of life for a phone; it's a small object that you carry with you at all times and frequently take out of your pocket to use.

It's expected that a phone be able to be dropped without being destroyed. I've dropped my Treo 650 many times and it was fine. I even dropped my Palm Pre multiple times and it was fine too. The iPhone 4 should be no different.

I have mine in an inCase for extra protection, but it shouldn't need this. I think they are right in bringing the lawsuit if the iPhone 4 easily shatters when dropped. We're talking a device that WILL be dropped during its lifetime, unless you are hermit who never goes out into the real world.

Ok. Why do you think you can drop electronics? Where did this STUPID idea come from that people drop electronics and complain that they aren't strong enough? The most retarded concept I've ever heard.

 

[greytmom]

Man, people are dumb.

 

[NT1440]

Ok. Why do you think you can drop electronics? Where did this STUPID idea come from that people drop electronics and complain that they aren't strong enough? The most retarded concept I've ever heard.

Right? Its almost like complaining your car gets a dent even though "I barely hit that pole!". Stupid weak car bodies!

 

[Geckotek]

Indeed, and you can't expect a glass screen to survive if you drop it from 3 foot.

So we agree a fragile nature is inherent in the design and an unavoidable risk.



But - as we have agreed we can't expect the front screen to survive if dropped it from 3 foot - then the point is moot.

You could still not expect to drop the phone from 3 foot and expect either glass panel to survive.

Out of interest - is this case about the breaking of the rear casing?



Even if the back was a piece of plastic - the front would still be fragile - it is inherent in the design and an unavoidable risk. You could still not expect to drop it from 3 foot and survive. This Nimrod would still make this dumb claim.

No?

You yourself agreed that adding glass to the back doubled the chances of it breaking. Did you not? (I'm too lazy to verify it was you honestly)

 

[zorinlynx]

Ok. Why do you think you can drop electronics? Where did this STUPID idea come from that people drop electronics and complain that they aren't strong enough? The most retarded concept I've ever heard.

Because other popular phones can be dropped and survive just fine. Yet the iPhone is dropped once and *smash*.

I expect an $800 phone to live up to the industry standards, that's all. I don't expect it to be indestructible, but I'd rather it not die if it slips out of my hand from a reasonable height.

Don't you want your phone to be durable? Why are you defending Apple here? I'll note that I own some AAPL stock too, so I have a vested interest in the company producing durable products.

 

[TMar]

Isn't he the guy that had an... "apple" fall on his head? Makes sense he should be added.

Yeah but that apple didn't break..

Come on, yeah it might be stronger but it's also more exposed to impacts. It's not a design flaw because they are not designed to be dropped. To the people saying that it shouldn't have glass, it's a phone. Desks shouldn't be made of glass either but yet I have one. I avoid dropping anything on it the same way I've avoided dropping any of my phone that have glass.