Settlement Proposed in iPod Class Action Suit

An anonymous reader writes "A court has conditionally approved a settlement in a class action suit brought against Apple Computer by several consumers who claim their iPod batteries did not live up to the company's representation, according to AppleInsider. The tentative approval was handed down by the Superior Court of California for San Mateo County and covers all consumers who purchased a first-, second-, or third-generation iPod model on or before May 31, 2004 and experienced 'battery failure.' According to the published settlement notice, 'battery failure' is when 'the capacity of an iPod's battery to hold an electrical charge has dropped to four hours or less of continuous audio playback, with earbuds attached, with respect to the Third Generation iPod, or five hours or less of continuous audio playback, with earbuds attached, with respect to the First Generation iPod and the Second Generation iPod.' The deadline for filing a claim is September 30, 2005."

Comments

Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

... with earbuds attached

Why would the type of headphones attached change the drain on the battery?

Re:Huh?

[k_187]

I'd imagine that people will listen to their ipod at lower volume levels with headphones. I know that when I use my itrip, the volume must be turned up high, and thusly the battery life while listening in my car is cut by probably 25%.

Re:Huh?

[RealityMogul]

Need power to make speakers play sound

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

Good point. Also, I bet the iTrip sucks battery life from the iPod as well, thus making it even lower. But, if you're using the iTrip, why wouldn't you have the car power adapter or use the car's own amplifier in the sound system?

Re:Huh?

[rsrsharma]

I'm just guessing here, but the earbuds given with the iPod (and most relatively cheap earbuds) are probably 8 ohm headphones, unlike the 16 ohms of most headphones and the 32 ohms of high-end 'phones. (Probably don't have to explain this on /., but lower ohms = lower resistance = less power.) That means that the iPod can power the earbuds easier, so you're more likely to turn down the volume to save your ears, and (most likely inadvertenly) save power. This gives them a little more leniancy.

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

So, in other words, at 75% volume it'll affect the battery the same way with either earbuds or a set of speakers - it's the difference in the volume the speakers produce. So, again, when all we're measuring is battery power, the headphones don't matter. Right?

Re:Huh?

[emandres]

I personally don't own a car adapter simply because you have to fork out US $40, at any store, and I'm too lazy to buy one off of the internet. Griffin claims that the iTrip doesn't suck battery life, but that's a totally unsabstantiated claim. My iPod (4G) will run nearly the full 12 hrs without the iTrip, but with it battery life is at best four hours. As for volume setting changing battery life, I've never noticed that, but, at least according to my limited knowledge of electrical physics, makes sense.

Re:Huh?

[Humorously_Inept]

You misunderstand. In order to drive a higher impedance set of headphones (say a 64 Ohm set of Sennheisers vs. the stock buds that are likely 16 Ohm), you'd have to have the volume turned higher to get the same audible sound level. Thus, more power is consumed.

You'd additionally want to consider the type of head phone and the environment you use it in. For example, an open set of supra-aural headphones would likely have to be turned up louder than a set of in-ear buds in a noisy, public environment.

Re:Huh?

[timeOday]

Omitting "with earbuds attached," Apple could test your iPod with no headphones attached, lowering the requirement for them.

Car and motorcycle makers do the equivalent of this all the time by quoting "dry weight" (where the vehicle is inoperable because it has no coolant, oil, or fuel), or measuring horsepower at the crankshaft (before some of it gets sapped by the powertrain).

And then there's the bogus way CRT screen size is measured.

Re:Huh?

[corsec67]

Not quite.

If you have 8 Ohm speakers at 75% you are drawing X Amps.
If you replace those speakers with 32 Ohm speakers, at the same 75% volume, you are drawing .25*X Amps, or 1/4 the power. .75 * X times the length of time would be the number of Amp-Hours that you saved by using the speakers with the higher resistance.

So, the headphone type is VERY important for determining the battery life, unless no power is sent through the headphones.

Re:Huh?

[discstickers]

Get one of these: Factory to radio adapters

Re:Huh?

[WonderSnatch]

Probably don't have to explain this on /., but lower ohms = lower resistance = less power.

Wrong. Lower resistance = more current = HIGHER power:
P=V*I
I=V/R
plug the second into the first:
P=V^2/R.

The output voltage will probably remain roughly constant. Decreasing R will INCREASE the power.

Brett

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

I think I got it - so the impedance of the headphones affects how much current is drawn because the headphones need an electric currect to be powered? So, I should get more battery life out of my expensive 16 OHm headphones as opposed to the 8 Ohm earbuds that came with the iPod, provided I use the same volume?

However, does this mean the volume level would change? Are the higher impedance heaphones going to be softer (theoretically) because they're drawing less power?

Re:Huh?

[rsrsharma]

Sorry, mispoke there, I meant lower power use for the same output volume. :)

Re:Huh?

[Mr.Radar]

I don't know where you get your information, but that is wrong. The lowest impedance I've seen in headphones is 16-ohms. Most portable headphones are 32 ohms to 120 ohms. The iPod earbuds are about 80 ohms. Also, not all high end headphones are the same impedance. Some are as high as 600 ohms, though those are mainly older models. Sennheiser's HD-650, their top-of-the-line dynamic headphone, are 300 ohms, Beyerdynamic's flagship DT880 is 250 ohms, Etymotic's flagship model, the ER4S, is 100 ohms. Grado Lab's high-end headphones (including their $700 flagship model, the RS-1) are all 32 ohms. Sennheiser's earbuds (considered by most audiophiles to be some of the best cheap earbuds currently on the market) are 32 ohms (MX-x00 series).

Also, lower resistance does not necessarily equal less power because while it does take less voltage to drive lower impedance headphones, it require more current. Really low impedance headphones start running into problems with portable players not being able to supply enough current, and most moderate to high impedance headphones run into the problem of not getting enough voltage from portable players.

Re:Huh?

[Biff Stu]

Mod this guy up! He has it right. It drives me nuts that /.ers know so little about science and technology when push comes to shove. This stuff is introductory electronics, folks. I can see that a few posters might get it wrong but what about the moderators?

Re:Huh?

[Jere H]

I think that what the parent is trying to say is that using the same volume setting on the iPod, the current will be lower with a higher impedence set of headphones. The sound output is theoretically lower, because the bigger drivers in the speakers need more power to cause them to vibrate and produce sound.

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

...

So. I don't care about sound output. If one set of headphones has 8 ohms impedance, and one has 32 ohms, will the 8 ohm one drain more power from the battery - negating all other variables like the volume setting on the ipod or final sound output?

Re:Huh?

[EggyToast]

OT, but that's definitely one thing I like about LCDs -- the screen measurements are entirely accurate, regardless of how large the bezel is.

Re:Huh?

[briankoenig]

They are specifying earbuds since they draw less power than an external set of speakers would. Lots of portable cheap speakers draw all their power from the headphone jack (and therefore from the iPod battery).

Re:Huh?

[Noehre]

And it drives me nuts that people can't understand things in context.

It was obvious that he was talking about less power at the same volume level.

Re:Huh?

[someonehasmyname]

It sounds like the same amount of current will be drawn, but on the more expensive headphones it will be quieter. Which may make you turn the volume up and then draw more current.

Re:Huh?

[DWIM]

It may not have much to do with how it drains the battery and more to do with what the retail package sold to the consumer contained. Apple advertised an "iPod", which definately is shown everywhere with the signature white earbuds and HD unit. That package had advertised performance with regard to the battery. The product should live up to the claims of the manufacturer. If you used 3rd-party earbuds, headphones, etc., Apple could say their claims were only for the stock configuration.

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

But if the output of the iPod stays the same, it takes the same amount of battery power wether or not they're senheisers or the earbuds, right? I know it takes more volume to make higher impedance headphones louder, but they don't just draw more power on their own, right?

Re:Huh?

[ToasterofDOOM]

beat me to it - damn

Re:Huh?

[corsec67]

V=I*R, if you decrease R by 1/4, then the volume or output voltage of the ipod needs to be raised by a factor of 4. If you stay below this amount, then yes, the higher impedance speakers will result in a longer battery life.

You can't neglect volume setting, because that is where the voltage comes from. If you have a volume of 0, then your voltage is 0, and headphones don't matter.

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

Ok. Thank you for being patient with me and explaining that. Your explinations made the most sense. You'd make a great teacher, I think, if you aren't one already - you can stand with explaining things over and over until people finally get it.

Re:Huh?

[camperslo]

The current drawn by the audio output stage is primarily dependent on the current flowing through the load. The load current depends on the load impedance, and the output voltage.

Measuring life while driving the Apple Earbuds seems entirely fair since that's what the iPod shipped with. Battery life would be slightly better driving a high-impedance load such as the typical input of a stereo system, and somewhat worse when driving un-amplified external speakers which may not only be lower impedance, but will be driven with more voltage (as you crank up the volume trying to get more power, as needed with a source comparitively far from the ears)

A higher volume control setting will NOT mean shorter battery life if it is with a high-impedance load, as the load current is then small enough to ignore.

Battery runtime, even in a new iPod, is influenced considerably by user behavior. As many owners of digital cameras have learned, using the backlight uses quite a bit of energy. Stepping between tracks manually and using higher bitrate files increases energy needs since those things reduce drive sleep.

I suspect that storage and operating temperature is a very important variable having considerable effect on how much battery runtime degrades with age. I've made a point of not leaving my 1G iPod in hot cars. I still get about 10 hours with the original battery. Most of my files are 128 and 160 kbps MP3s.

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

Truly, you have dizzying intellect. Or perhaps you missed the point of my post.

Re:Huh?

[corsec67]

Heh, I was planning on going to Japan next year with the Jet program and teach english, so I hope I have enough patientce.

Re:Huh?

[nxtw]

I got the Belkin car kit simply so I didn't have to turn up the volume. (the car kit has its own independent amplifier and uses the line-out.)

Re:Huh?

[sokoban]

because headphones have different impedance and sensitivity. A larger, less efficient open headphone will reqire a higer volume setting to achieve the same sound pressure levels of the smaller headphones.

Re:Huh?

[Biff Stu]

Ok, I see your point. People will adjust the volume (and therefore the output voltage level) for a particular audio power output from the speakers.

Having said that, what really matters is the efficiency at which the speaker converts electrical power to audio power. It's not obvious to me if speaker efficiency depends on speaker impedance. (There are other issues to worry about if you make big changes in speaker impedance, such the maximum current and voltage that the electronics can provide, but let's not worry about that for now.) Therefore, we can postulate that a brand x ear-bud (or headphone) might not be as efficient as an Apple ear-bud for some undetermined reason.

Another possibility could be that the i-pod is plugged into a completly different device (such as an air-tunes transmitter or powered loudspeakers). In such a case, the power requirements could differ significantly from the air-buds and all bets are off.

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

Wow, that's awesome. That, and I won't be out of college for a few years, but I should be speaking pretty fluent japanese by then, so that would be a great opportuinity. I had no idea something like that existed. Awesome.

Re:Huh?

[Ajmuller]

Actually, The iTrip needs to be between 50-70% of volume to work well.
I rarely use my iPod below 70% volume with the earbuds.

Re:Huh?

[Phanatic1a]

Efficiency. If you need to deliver 20% more power to reach the same volume level with one pair of headphones as another pair of headphones, you're going to drain the battery 20% faster.

All speakers are not equally efficient, and not even all 8-ohm speakers are equally efficient. The given resistance of a speaker is simply a minimum value, as the speaker is really a reactive load whose reactance varies according to the input frequency. Take one pair of 8-ohm speakers, compare it to another pair of 8-ohm speakers, and you'll find that for a given input power, they provide two different output volumes.

Re:Huh?

[pomo monster]

In case you hadn't figured it out already: The moderators are even stupider than the posters. As a corollary, when posters moderate, their intelligence immediately dwindles down past zero. That's the only explanation I've come up with that makes any sense, anyway.

Re:Huh?

[Babbster]

To be fair, the FTC does require advertisements for CRT monitors to include the actual viewable screen size. I think we're left with the 15-, 17-, 21-, etc. inch categories as a convenience and tradition at this point.

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

Truly, you have dizzying intellect.

Re:Huh?

[iotaborg]

There's more to it than just resistance. You need to consider the sensitivity of the headphone, which is a better measurement for determining power consumption (and it is in dB/mW). More sensitive the transducers, less power needed (turn volume down), simple as that. Resistance does not definitively determine power consumption.

Re:Huh?

[Stankatz]

Because different headphones draw drain different levels of power. Also, if you had no headphones attached, the iPod would last longer than with headphones. It's probably a small difference, but they just wanted to be as precise as possible.

Re:Huh?

[Puma_Concolor]

Ummm NO. Lower resistance(ohms)=more current at a given DC voltage. Since we are talking about an AC audio signal, we are actually talking about impedance here. So the higher the impedence of the speaker, the more sensitive it is to voltage. That is why the high end phones are 32 Ohm impedence.

Re:Huh?

[WonderSnatch]

Agreed!

I think there's also some confustion going round about here too. By volume are people meaning volume knob, or SPL? In my earlier statement, I was assuming that the volume knob was constant. I also assumed that the voltage would remain constant if the volume know remained constant. These may not be valid assumptions, and I should've stated them earlier.

Brett

Re:Huh?

[Tmack]

I always found amusement in seeing monitors that were packaged for sale in both the US and Canada. Evidently, living in Canada reduces the size of the screen an inch or so ;)

Its all just another way that marketing can get away with exagerating things that make me cringe. Im sure it started as some tech guy telling a marketing baffon the tube size was x, but only y of it made a picture, and marketing guy running with the bigger number.

Tm

Re:Huh?

[flosofl]

Why would the type of headphones attached change the drain on the battery?

I think this was added so Apple couldn't weasel out of some people's claims. It takes some power to drive the earbuds and that will hasten the drain from the battery. Apple could test it without the earphones and claim the battery is not defective.

I tested mine when I first got it (4th gen unfortunately - I get no love). Without the phones attached, I got about 10 or so hours of "playback." Well about that, I checked it every couple hours and the 10 hr mark was the last when I saw it was still playing. When I did the same thing with headphones at mid-level volume, It was still going at 8 hours but the next check showed it to be drained.

Re:Huh?

[flosofl]

Actually, I just read some of the other posts and I think my test may have been invalid. I don't remember, but I must have turned the volume down without the phones which in turn would have affected the drain.

Re:Huh?

[markwalling]

Stupidity is ALWAYS terminal.

Re:Huh?

[Breakfast Pants]

Ok this is one of the most wrong posts I've ever read. I don't know what crazy fictional Orwell government you under but 2 + 2 is not 5. Consider this: no headphones plugged in. Then you have just air between the contacts, and that has a super high resistance right? So by your logic having nothing plugged in uses more power than having the iPod earbuds plugged in?

Likewise how about if you just had a small length of wire (an eletrical short) connecting the contacts, that would have an extremely low resistance right? Metal wire is known for its conductivity and not its resistivity I thought... hang on I'm checking with a nearby toddler. Yep he confirmed it.

"(Probably don't have to explain this on /., but lower ohms = lower resistance = less power.)" I don't know which is worse. The fact that you said you didn't have to explain it here or the fact that you didn't even go on to explain it (you just made a blind assertion).

Re:Huh?

[NanoGator]

"Why would the type of headphones attached change the drain on the battery?"

Does it really matter if it affects battery life? The point is to have a consistent and fair test that everybody can agree on. The iPod comes with earbuds, so it makes sense.

Although, if I'm right about that, I wonder why they didn't specify a volume setting or bit-rate for the music being played. Eh, maybe this post is just chocked full of poo.

Re:Huh?

[zippthorne]

8 ohms is impedance at some audio frequency, not resistance to DC. In general, at the same volume levels, higher DC resistance should mean more wasted power, but mismatched impedences can be much worse. look up standing wave ratio. All "reflected power" as a result of mismatched impedences is dissipated as heat. Fortunately, there are ways to couple impedences reducing such losses.

What the parent meant to say was less power wasted in resistances because more of it is converted to sound instead of heat. This is a qualified true: we need to know more about the real and imaginary parts of the impedence. afaik, "8 ohm" refers to the magnitude only.

Re:Huh?

[ketamine-bp]

I do not think much of musicians playing electric guitar has any substantial knowledge of how the MOSFETs (or tubes) in their nice amp works.

IMHO, they are smart if they know their music well, and they can produce decent music.

Re:Huh?

[Kadin2048]

Well, sort of. But what you're forgetting in this analysis is that, given 'phones of similar efficiency, you have to have similar amounts of POWER in order to produce similar volume levels.

So a higher-impedience set of phones would require a higher voltage in order to produce a similar power output than a low-imepedence set.

This is why if you read high-end audio forums, you'll often hear people characterizing high-impedence phones as 'hard to drive.' Except there, 'high impedance' means more like 300-ohms and up...32 would be very low.

Re:Huh?

[Kadin2048]

Efficiency and impedance are not related. You can have high efficiency, low impedance phones (Grados, for instance) and also high impedance, low efficiency ones. Of course, as I noted in an earlier post, to get the same power out of a high impedance set, you have to drive it at a higher voltage. In a battery powered appliance, this is often a problem, which is why there are outboard amplifiers to drive high impedance headphones from the iPod.

Re:Huh?

[Kadin2048]

Thanks for the info. I would mod this up if I had the points.

I've used my iPod heavily with 32-ohm Grado 'phones, which have much larger transducers and sit much further from my ears, and found it to produce more than enough power at about the same volume levels.

However, what I don't know is if the iPod is actually trying to output a set voltage depending on the 'volume' setting, into whatever load is attached: meaning that its battery life should be substantially lower with the Grados than the earbuds. I've never really measured, though.

Re:Huh?

[Kadin2048]

Uh, no. Decent, midrange headphones are 32-ohms. Really good headphones often have fairly high input impedances, which vary dramatically with frequency: 300-ohms is a fairly standard value.

Not to mention that the optimal audio component--any component--would have an infinite input impedance.

Re:Huh?

[NutscrapeSucks]

If this is a FTC requirement, it wasn't put into place until after ever brandname computer company (including Apple) had settled a class-action lawsuit.

Re:Huh?

[Babbster]

It is indeed possible that this is not an FTC rule, though that is what I had been given to understand over the years. Either way, it seems like that particular issue has been settled and moot for quite a while now.

Re:Huh?

[corsec67]

You are absolutly correct. Instead of impedance, we should care about efficency as far as the headphones relate to battery life.

Most people want a specific volume coming out of the headphones, and don't care what the input power is as long as the output is correct. Since more efficent headphones will use less power to make the same volume, they will make the batteries last longer.

In fact, I think you could neglect impediance as long as the amplifier is reasonably efficent across the range of voltages it can produce.

I just got sidetracked into impediance because that is what people had mentioned, but really efficency is more important.

Re:Huh?

[jacksonj04]

If the volume and music played is identical, the 32 Ohm headphones will draw more power.

This is made exponentially worse by the fact you need to ramp up the volume to get an audiable output from an iPod on 23 Ohm headphones.

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

Please, hate me for no reason. I appreciate it.

Re:Huh?

[Koiu Lpoi]

*gasp* You found me out! I'm fucking stupid. I knew I could only hide it for so long with the likes of detective Anonymous Coward around!

Re:Huh?

[Chewbacon]

I do audio engineering, so you're right on with the concept. Here's an audio lesson: I have a Crown Macro-Tech 5002vs amp. At 8ohms it outputs 1300 watts; 4ohms, 2000 watts; 2ohms, 2500 watts. If it's bridged: 8ohms, 4000watts; 4ohms, 5000 watts. So yeah, if you use headphones with a lower resistance, you're going to spend extra juice from the battery to power them. Unless they manage to restrict how much is going out to the headphones.

Re:Huh?

[tgd]

Horsepower at the crank is how you HAVE to report it. At the wheels depends on your transmission, the fluid in it, the wheels, the tires on the wheels and the alignment. You can't compare wheel horsepower between two different cars (even same model cars, unless everything is set up identically between them), but you can compare crank horsepower.

Re:Huh?

[timeOday]

For people buying a ready-made vehicle, I'd say the horsepower at the wheel (as measured on a dyno) is the "real" one, since they're buying a complete package that includes the transmission, wheels, and whatever else. (For that matter 0-60 or 1/4mi. times are even better, since they factor in the weight of the vehicle.)

Now if you're looking for an engine to put into a car you're designing or restoring, then yeah, crank HP.

Re:Huh?

[Sunrun]

...Not to mention the ridiculously antiquated methodology employed by the EPA for measuring vehicular fuel efficiency.

Re:Huh?

[StemCellVirus]

Same here.. Mines at about 80-90% when Im using the earbuds.. Of course Ive spent like 10 years playing guitar with a Marshall half stack so Im a bit deaf on my own hehe..

Re:Huh?

[ehrichweiss]

I think you've described this backwards. Lower resistance equals MORE power being consumed, not less. Power = Voltage * Voltage / Resistance The smaller the resistance, the more power is consumed by the circuit. I'm hoping that I haven't missed someone correcting this mistake already, if so, I apologize.

Re:Huh?

[ehrichweiss]

Ok, this is the message I was looking for but it and the previous one I responded to should have been in the same post. Power consumption doesn't equal sound pressure level(SPL). 1 watt with speakers/headphones with an SPL of 90dB@1ft. sounds 10 times louder than 1 watt with an SPL of 80dB@1ft. SPL pretty much equals raw efficiency in this case but has nothing to do with the quality/frequency response. However, you are right..if you consume 1 watt at a certain volume level with 8 ohms, it will be quite lower consumption at the same volume level with 32 ohms.

Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[OS24Ever]

...I got 8 hours out of it before I retired it. At the time I had VBR 320KB MP3s on it.

But I'm torn. $50 in Apple pr0n or join the evil empire of class action lawsuits where the lawyeres get huge chunks of the settlement and the 'injured' party gets a gift cert or a measly check relatively speaking to the cost of the item you bought.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[cataclyst]

Yea, the attorneys get a lot of the total... but they did take a lot of the risk! They get NO return on all their discovery costs if the lawsuit falls through.

Just a little devil's advocate [hmm... quite literally this time... or would it be devil's advocate's advocate?] for ya.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[magarity]

the lawyeres get huge chunks of the settlement and the 'injured' party gets a gift cert

Did you mean this part:

the plaintiffs' counsel will ask the Court to award attorneys' fees and out-of-pocket expenses in the amount of $2,768,000

USA needs tort reform, badly.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[hobbesmaster]

I'm curious how many people spent how many hours for that $2.768 million. If this is like many lawsuits and law firms (remember, these are businesses employing attorneys, clerks, secretaries, janitors, etc.) taking on this kind of case for long periods of time that could actually be a very reasonable sum.

Not knowing specifics of this case of course its hard to comment. If this was going to one guy then yes that would be silly high. The question of course becomes how many people and how long?

I know this isn't a very popular opinion on /. but 2.7million is not all that much compared to some previous class action settlements...

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[cataclyst]

That's the way the high-power ones work... usually... They are the ones who tend to have enough $$$ to not care TOO much if they lose, and the possible payoff DEFINATELY outweights the risk.

That's the whole reason behind, like you said, taking cases on contingency.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[FatAlb3rt]

I understand your points (and agree to an extent) - it would be interesting to see what "costs" were actually incurred. However, you know that after expenses they still cleared a large pile of cash - they wouldn't have settled otherwise.
I know this isn't a very popular opinion on /. but 2.7million is not all that much compared to some previous class action settlements...

But that doesn't justify it. At all.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[NanoGator]

"But I'm torn. $50 in Apple pr0n or join the evil empire of class action lawsuits where the lawyeres get huge chunks of the settlement and the 'injured' party gets a gift cert or a measly check relatively speaking to the cost of the item you bought."

The silver lining is that the 'evil empire' is going to think harder about how Apple presents its future products. I don't have an iPod, but if I did, I'd join the suit just to send Apple a message that I want realistic expectations of the stuff I buy of theirs.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[Rydia]

Awards and expenses are usually downgraded rather sharply during the tort process, so throwing around the initial numbers is relatively useless. The idea is to ask for as much as you possibly can get away with without lying and then hope that a lot of it won't be nixed.

Then again, that can also come back to bite attournies, like that counsel that lost all of his fees for a case he worked on exclusively for 3 years because a jury found his fees excessive in a lawsuit the appelants in the last case (his former clients) brought against him.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[Kadin2048]

It's practically standard for lawyers who take on cases without payment upfront to take almost 50% of the settlement in return for their services. At least in personal injury and insurance litigation. I can't imagine that class-action stuff is any different.

It's a big industry, and when you look into it very far, the big law firms don't come out looking much better than the big companies they sue.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[Sigl]

I know those layer fees can be quite unbelievable. But what really bothers me about class action suits is that they often require little proof that a given consumer even qualifies. This encourages people to lie about their battery usage being under 5 hours just to get in on $50 measly bucks.

It makes me sad to think some peoples integrity is worth so little.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[jedidiah]

If a lawyer ever wanted a retainer out of you it was likely because you were full of sh*t.

If you have a reasonable looking class action cause of action, contingency lawyers will be lining themselves up wanting to help you. That's the whole point of the "jackpot" contingency system. Success in the matter gives people a selfish reason to come to your aid.

Otherwise, you would have to pay them $300/hr.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[jedidiah]

To be replaced with what?

The Tort system is the only thing that keeps people in line in this country. Without it, EVERYONE would feel free to kill or mangle you with impugnity. Forget about product safety or reliability.

You want to replace something resembling justice with anarchy just because those that do the dirty work are getting paid.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[jedidiah]

Except that's not the point.

Who's going to keep corps and careless people from running amok? The government that's already in the pockets of the same corps? Some other random do gooders?

Someone with the equivalent of a PhD shouldn't be expected to work for a pittance or for free.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[Overzeetop]

No it won't make a difference. "12 Hour Playback" will become "12 Hour Payback*" and the fine print will disclaim any expectation of performance. It's just an expensive paragraph to have to add, but it won't change the actual marketing or product.

Re:Well, I have a 2G iPod but...

[rabtech]

You are quite correct.

If the lawsuit had 10 people working on it (lawyers, paras, runners/office workers, etc) and they worked for two years then that's ~2 million in salaries after you factor in benefits and so forth. Add in 700,000 of expenses (plane trips, hotels, etc) and the figure isn't totally baseless.

What about Nokia!?

[cataclyst]

I agree that the iPod battery life was misrepresented by Apple... but what about cell phones? Aren't their battery lifetimes inflated MUCH more than that of the iPod? And don't they have at least as short of a lifespan?

Re:What about Nokia!?

[m50d]

If it is, call your lawyer. You've got something of a precedent now.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[Oculus Habent]

Next up, we sue Energizer for making NiCad and NiMH batteries. "THEY DIE?!"

Re:What about Nokia!?

[kahanamoku]

I think that misrepresentation of the battery life is only half the issue here. the rest of the issue is the inability to replace the battery (at least cost-effectively). cellphone replacement batteries are available almost everywhere

Re:What about Nokia!?

[Reality Master 101]

You can replace your cell phone battery. The issue with iPods was that the battery was irreplaceable, and Apple told people to buy a new iPod when the battery failed after a year.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[cataclyst]

Good point...

guess I just got robo-served...

Re:What about Nokia!?

[Michalson]

Please mod parent up. This is the heart of the issue. As will likely be presented and proven in this case:

• Apple knew its substandard battery would not hold up to its claims for long after purchase in many cases, yet still chose to push the misleading battery life specification.
• Made the battery impossible to legitamately replace, and from dissections they might have even intentionally tried to prevent user replacements (why are so many iPod models pumped full of a sticky paste around the battery area, when other similar electronics need no such adhesive to hold the battery in place)
• As documented by at least one person (the iPod battery secret guy), it seems Apple had a corperate policy in effect from their tech support lines down to their retail stores to tell consumers the only way to service their dead battery was to buy a new iPod from Apple. (as pointed out by parent, this is the real gotcha)

Re:What about Nokia!?

[commodoresloat]

(why are so many iPod models pumped full of a sticky paste around the battery area

That's the chewy center!

Remember, this is before the iPod Shuffle, when Apple began recommending against eating it...

Re:What about Nokia!?

[jdhutchins]

Please mod parent up. This is the heart of the issue. As will likely be presented and proven in this case:

This article is about a proposed settlement. The settlement means that they don't go to trial and no one has to prove anything. Apple is saying "it's easier to pay you and then you shut up and go away than it is to pay the money to fight." Even if Apple had gone to court and won, it would have cost them a lot of money, close to or greater than the amount that the settlement is for.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[falcon5768]

owning a 1 gen and not havingthe battery fail for long after it should have and likewise knowing that a lot of people DID research the whole battery claim and found that it was false

I CALL BULLSHIT.

Sometimes companies settle cause they just dont want to spend the money fighting. My 1st gen still works perfectly, had no "sticky paste" and was offered a battery replacement for 50 bucks before the policy was ever stated. I may be one guy, but there are plenty of others who would also agree with my findings.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[JaseOne]

So you sue them? That is what the heart of this issue is, litigation obsessed Americans!

Oh no I can't replace my battery... Must sue Apple... Give me a friggin break.

You know people would complain if they did add a battery door to the back of the iPod and personally I like it just how it is, I don't want no easily replacable battery but am I going to sue Apple for ruining the asthetic design of the iPod by doing so? Not at all.

Some bored lawyer must have stumbled across some whiner on a blog and started this class action...

Re:What about Nokia!?

[MoneyT]

What substandard battery? The batteries are rated for about 500 charges and that's all in the documentation. If you drain your battery completely every day yes, you'll get about a year and a half of use. If you use it less frequently, you'll get more use out of it. Apple made no claims as to the length in years that your battery would last you, they made claims as to how long it would last on a single charge.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[jdbo]

> As will likely be presented and proven in this case:

Huh?

Isn't it standard operating procedure in large corporate settlements - heck, the entire point of a settlement - to avoid the exposure (legally and publicity-wise) that comes with a full public hearing?

I haven't looked into the case, but I don't see any reason for any of your assertions to be proven (or disproven, for that matter) if Apple settles this case ahead of the full hearing.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[NanoGator]

" but what about cell phones? Aren't their battery lifetimes inflated MUCH more than that of the iPod?"

There are some key differences between a cell phone and an iPod:

1.) An iPod's battery life isn't dependent on how close it is to a cell tower.

2.) The only real reason to have an iPod on is to play music. A cell phone stays on to monitor whether or not it's recieving calls.

3.) This sort of relates to 2, but I'm going to go into a little more detail. Cell phones these days do other things besides make/recieve calls. My phone, for example, also works as an alarm clock and appointment calendar. The more I do with it (i.e. playing with settings), the more the battery is drained.

Yes, cell phone battery life is disgustingly optimistic, but its use is nowhere near as consistent as an iPod's.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[Golias]

the rest of the issue is the inability to replace the battery (at least cost-effectively).

Ahem

About thirty bucks is not cost-effective enough for you!?

Fuck, you even end up with a better battery than the original.

This is yet another frivolous lawsuit where the corporation took the settlement because making it go away was more important to them than winning. Expect the next round of iPod price cuts to be delayed while Apple tries to make that money back. Fucking scumwad lawyers.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, those iPod batteries are so irreplacable that an entire cottage industry of 3rd parties have sprung up offering replacement iPod batteries, many with substantially longer runtimes than Apple offered in the first place.

I dunno, the battery seems pretty replaceable to me, using a selection of off the shelf tools no less. This is like suing a car company because they don't let you replace the battery, even though you can easily do it by opening the damn hood.

If they told people they needed to buy a new iPod, and the person believed them - there's always that old proverb about a fool and his money. Apple's culpable, but y'know, last time I checked nobody's got a class action suit running against Microsoft over similar crap.

Can't wait for the next wave of nuisance class action suits based on this logic - Hard Drives in computers are irreplaceable! RAM cannot be installed! Dear lord, the consumer can't be expected to actually OPEN anything to get the functionality they require during a product's useful lifespan.

Bah. What a bunch of whiny crybaby bitches. And now a few lawyers are millions richer for no good fscking reason.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[nogginthenog]

Sounds just like my iPaq. You need a Torx (sp?) screwdriver to get to where the battery lives.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[mbbac]

Apple has had a battery replacement program for quite a while now. This is NOT an issue for the majority of people that are accepted by this class. It would only affect owners of first generation Ipods.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[mbbac]

...and my first gen. is still running strong.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[jedidiah]

Aren't these the same batteries (ipod) that tend to EXPLODE?

I seem to recall not to long ago a bunch of Apple Cheerleaders coming out of the woodwork supporting the notion that if you open up your own ipod it is reasonable to expect the thing to explode in your face. Well, if this is indeed the case then it is highly unreasonable to expect the end user to replace their own battery.

H*LL, it makes the liability potential remarkably higher.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[Pendersempai]

If you really think cell phone companies are falsely advertising, then get a lawyer and start the ball rolling. The only way to keep the market fair is if parties are punished when the falsely advertise. If they aren't, then the only way to compete is to falsely advertise.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[Golias]

Aren't these the same batteries (ipod) that tend to EXPLODE?

No. To get them explode you must:

1. Get them wet.
2. Jam a screwdriver straight into them.

I have a lot of things around the house which could kill you if misused that badly. How many people are hurt every year because they dropped a hair dryer in the tub? Or tried to fix the fuse box themselves? Or used a table-saw while drinking? Or tried to clear a lawnmower blade without shutting it down?

If that kid had died from spearing his iPod battery, he would have been a Darwin Award candidate.

Re:What about Nokia!?

[daveschroeder]

Since this article is not in the limelight any longer, you probably won't respond, but:

Apple knew its substandard battery would not hold up to its claims for long after purchase in many cases, yet still chose to push the misleading battery life specification.

Bullshit.

The 1st and 2nd generation iPods use a Sony UP325385 A4H 3.7V 1230mAh lithium ion polymer battery. Please define exactly how this is "substandard", or not the best LiIon polymer battery available at the time for this application.

Made the battery impossible to legitamately replace, and from dissections they might have even intentionally tried to prevent user replacements (why are so many iPod models pumped full of a sticky paste around the battery area, when other similar electronics need no such adhesive to hold the battery in place)

Bullshit. Replacing the iPod battery is ridiculously easy. See this site for video of each of the iPod battery replacement procedures. Doors, screws, access mechanisms, compartments segregating the battery from other electronics for end-user replacement, etc., would have increased the size of the iPod and/or detracted from the sleek appearance that is the very thing that makes it so attractive. Therefore, Apple chose to engineer the iPod as it is. And since the battery is easily replaced in minutes, this issue is moot.

Your "sticky paste" claim is unsupported, unadulterated bullshit. Yes, there is some adhesive in there. No, it's not designed to "intentionally [...] prevent user replacements". Christ.

As documented by at least one person (the iPod battery secret guy), it seems Apple had a corperate policy in effect from their tech support lines down to their retail stores to tell consumers the only way to service their dead battery was to buy a new iPod from Apple. (as pointed out by parent, this is the real gotcha)

Bullshit. It wasn't a "corporate policy". Apple had no program to replace the battery out of warranty, period. They DID have a $250 flat-rate repair program to repair ANY out-of-warranty iPod issue. The phone representative said something to the effect that at that price, you might as well buy a new iPod. There is no evidence that this was part of a "corporate policy" at Apple; rather, Apple had no official way to replace the battery.

HOWEVER:

- They HAVE had an official way to replace the battery since November 14, 2003.

- There were numerous ways to replace the battery yourself.

- Apple was the FIRST of any vendor that shipped a sealed music player to offer ANY kind of official battery replacement at all.

- Other small music players at the time also used LiIon batteries sealed inside the case.

- Unless people threw out their iPods, the battery replacement service (as well as mind-bendingly numerous third party ways to do it with even higher capacity batteries for as little as $30) is available to everyone

There's no real "gotcha". The only issue was that Apple did not have its OWN battery replacement service. There was no "corporate policy" predicated on making people buy new iPods when the "substandard" battery dies.

If that is your claim, then please explain:

- How Apple is consistently and continuously ranked #1, usually by wide margins, by Consumer Reports for technical support, product quality, and need for repairs beyond all other vendors (if Apple's goal was to make shitty products that died and then force people to buy new ones, this wouldn't exactly support that claim)

- How the Sony battery is "substandard"

- Why other vendors (Dell, Samsung, etc.) never had a way to replace sealed batteries until AFTER Apple

- Why Apple would have even bothered to create a battery replacement service at all (Hint: it WASN'T because of iPod's Dirty Secret; Apple's battery program was launched before the video ever hit the web. Further, the day that the battery program was launched, that video became nothing but lies.)

Can't they develop fuel cells?

[catmistake]

I'd like an iPod that runs for a year on a charge... then just fill 'er up, and go for another... (I understand so little...)

DAMMIT

[Oculus Habent]

Gah! I have a first generation iPod. No, it's batteries don't last as long as they once did.

THAT'S FUCKING LIFE

Equipment wears out. Shit breaks. The only problem I have is that Apple didn't initially provide a way to replace the batteries. I think the current price point to do so is unfortunate, but I don't think we're being robbed. Eventually, I may have the batteries replaced. Or, I might just buy a spiffy new iPod. Or both.

When I've had bad hardware from Apple, they fix it. My PB 190 suffered three broken power connectors, and then they offered a trade-in program on them, which got me a PowerBook G3 (Pismo). When my power block died (because the connector pulled free of the cord) I assumed I was too damned hard on it and bought a new one. This week I got a letter about a class-action suit over it. I'm not going for my compensation because I still believe it was my fault.

How many of these suits are valid, and how many are simply pissy users and overzealous lawyers?

Re:DAMMIT

[anonicon]

"How many of these suits are valid, and how many are simply pissy users and overzealous lawyers?"

Oh, they're all pissy users who are dumb enough to expect Apple to stand by their claims, especially since they paid more for their products than the competition charges.

Eventually, they'll learn.

</sarcasm>

Re:DAMMIT

[PyWiz]

How many of these suits are valid, and how many are simply pissy users and overzealous lawyers?

All of them. Think of how much money could a customer hope to recover based on iPod battery life being a couple hours too short? Then think of how much money a LAWYER would make for handling a class action lawsuit for thousands of users. Now you see where these suits come from...

On a side note, when I originally tried to post this comment, I got:

Slashdot requires you to wait 2 minutes between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.
It's been 7 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment



LOL! Nice work slashcoders!

Re:DAMMIT

[geekoid]

"
Equipment wears out. Shit breaks."

not the point. I relize for you Apple is technology God of the universe, but they lied and now they are paying for there lies.

Now, I know you won't understand because you won't even go to them when there shoddy equipment breaks to get a replacement. You assume if sonething goes wrong with an Apple product, it's your fault.

of course, if MS made it, you would be all over them like ugly on an ape.

Re:DAMMIT

[Bigthecat]

Well geeze, I'm very impressed with your logic that consumer protection laws should be replaced with 'That's fucking life'.

I'm sorry, but whether it's Apple or anyone else, when you have hundreds to thousands of people working for you a company can make mistakes. Because they don't screw up with one product in your experience that doesn't mean they're shielded from any failure to come.

The way I see it is that the settlement is being arranged, and it's pretty clear cut, Apple made bad claims and are going to have to make on offer like, oh, thousands of other companies have in the past. No it doesn't mean that they're suddenly going to lose the computing war, or that their OS is going to turn to shit, it means that they're going to have to honor their claims.

Re:DAMMIT

[ScoLgo]

"of course, if MS made it, you would be all over them like ugly on an ape."

Hey! Why don't you come over here and say that?!?

I will peel you like the proverbial banana!

Re:DAMMIT

[Potrzebie]

And I'm quite confident that the lawsuit would've been thrown out if Apple's advertisements said "Sorry, but battery life cannot be guaranteed because equipment wears out, and that's life."

The article in question doesn't do the best job of highlighting the issue of misrepresentation in advertising, but that's what this suit is really about.

There's another response that equates this suit to trying to sue GM over an empty fuel tank. Wouldn't a more appropriate comparison would be suing GM for advertising a car as getting 30 miles to the gallon if a gallon never gets you further than 10 miles.

I'm extremely skeptical of advertisements, and everyone else should be, too. But does the gullibility of consumers mitigate Apple's responsibility to sell products that can back up the claims they make in their advertisements?

IANAL, but if the ad says "Your iPod (or new GM car, or whatever) will make you the envy of all of your friends", that's called puffery, and it's legal even if it doesn't perform as advertised. The reasoning is that it's a highly subjective claim in the first place.

If the ad says "Your iPod (car, whatever) will perform in this or that measurable way", and it does not perform in this or that measurable way, that's false advertising. That's an objective claim and I might have used it to choose the product over others. You're not obligated to believe it's "your fault" if someone gets your money by lying to you.

Telling the difference between puffery and verifiable claims is the responsibility of the consumer. That's life. Convincing people to buy your product without making false claims is the responsibility of the advertiser. I don't see battery life as falling in the grey area.

Re:DAMMIT

[halr9000]

Yeah, batteries wear out. Mine wore out in 3 months. Was holding a charge for an hour if I was lucky. Totally different situation there, it's not whining, it's defective. $400 device, non-replaceable battery? It was a long process, but they eventually redeemed themselves.

Re:DAMMIT

[Lars T.]

Your just jeallous that you won't get as much out of the lies from the cheaper competitors.

Re:DAMMIT

[SavvyPlayer]

When asking one of my colleagues recently whether I should participate in another frivolous class-action suit, I got an interesting reply:

Judgements in these suits are not based on the size of the class. By participating in the suit, you decrease the size of the award given to each of the other participants.

By this logic, participation has no effect on the ethos of the suit itself, but a punitive effect on those participants who refuse to accept responsibility for their own actions and consider themselves entitled to restitution for their own carelessness.

Re:DAMMIT

[AliasMoze]

Regular wear and tear is a different issue. The issue here is a company's promising one thing and delivering something else. If you enjoy getting screwed or blame yourself when a seller breaks his promised to you, good luck to ya. But it's unfair to condemn others for defending themselves when it's their right to do.

You say, "The only problem I have is that Apple didn't initially provide a way to replace the batteries," and that "the current price point to do so is unfortunate" which are big problems these other customers have had. The only difference is that you err against the injured party.

Re:DAMMIT

[rainman_bc]

Anyone know why Apple made the ipod without a replaceable battery? I mean it seams like an obvious ploy to sell more iPods to me.

Imagine if Dell made it impossible to replace dead ram... Truth it usually takes RAM longer than a year to die. You guys would be screaming bloddy murder if Dell did that.

But this is /. and Apple is the company that can do no wrong around here.

This is bad business practice. Making the iPod a disposable commodity at a not-so-disposable price.

IMO there's a lot of good mp3 players out there that DO offer replaceable batteries, or even just the use of standard batteries. Honestly I think the iPod's a lot of hype and little extra over lower priced competitors.

Re:DAMMIT

[ArbitraryConstant]

I am not inclined to be so forgiving.

These lawsuits protect the consumer. They impose a financial cost on selling bad hardware, which Apple does regularly. I'm disapointed that laywers get most of the compensation, but at the end of the day if Apple has to spend millions of dollars of lawsuits because of flawed hardware they will eventually start spending more on QA to prevent future lawsuits.

"I'm not going for my compensation because I still believe it was my fault."

I expect Apple to replace the logic board for my iBook every 3-6 months and I expect them to thank me for remaining their customer after they knowingly sold me hardware with such a critical flaw.

Apple is not a religion. Apple is a company and they'll screw you if you don't stay on your toes, just like every other company out there.

Re:DAMMIT

[DWIM]

THAT'S FUCKING LIFE

The fact that the parent thread has even appeared at +3 Insightful is proof that many Apple fanbois that hang out on Slashdot are a bit short on integrity. Talk about rabid product loyalty. No way other corporations regularly discussed here get this kind of leeway.

How about some honesty, principles, integrity here?

Re:DAMMIT

[Solandri]

not the point. I relize for you Apple is technology God of the universe, but they lied and now they are paying for there lies.

From the article:

Apple has agreed to the settlement without admitting fault or misrepresentation.

As near as I can tell, Apple never admitted to lying. All they did was pay off a bunch of people (and lawyers) to shut up.

That's what I don't get about these class action lawsuits. If they were really about faulty products, wouldn't the primary goal be to get the company to acknowledge wrongdoing? Instead they all seem to be about money with no admission of fault.

Re:DAMMIT

[nugneant]

It's sheep like you that make life in corporate America such a wasteland.

"SHIT FUCKING JESUS GOD ARMAGEDDON!! Who fucking cares if Joseph Hazlewood scraped some reefs and made all the shoreline in Alaska gooey and black? Those wildlife advocates and the wildlife using the shoreline are pissy advocates and pissy users, respectively! Five billion dollars!? Sounds like overzealous lawyers once again! I've been driving for ten years, yesterday I made a wide left and accidently scraped the curb. Yeah I had a scotch and a brandy and some cognag to wash it down, who fucking CARES? Overzealous curb if you ask me!

Speaking of which, this has nothing to do with the satirical statement I just uttered, but last week I was horrifically scarred when the Firestone tires I had on my Ford Pinto reacted with the liquid hydrogen that some schmucky +1 underrated gas station genius spilled all over my cigarette lighter during my last car wash! How I made it out of that fireball alive beats me. I still believe it was my fault for not yielding right of way along I-80 when the Presidential Motorcade needed to suddenly swerve 90 degrees to the right for Secret Presidential Reason!

I'm damn proud to be a PATRIOT!"

Equipment wears out. But does it HAVE to wear out? Cars need constant refueling. But do they HAVE to? The power I need to run my computer and keep my food cold comes from nonrenewable energy sources - but does it (hyperlink to informative webpage on solar energy) HAVE (/hyperlink) to?

Fact is, these greedy corporations are making money off of schmucks like you, and as long as schmucks like you continue to side with them in their moments of inhuman, fat, bloated walrus-like greed, they'll continue to be greedy and fat walruses. Just because Johnny did all his homework last night doesn't give him the right to set fire to Granny's hair. Just because Ronald Reagan didn't lie about being an actor didn't justify his hostile takeover of the Air Traffic Controller's Union. Just because Osama Bin Laden didn't play any active part in the Holocaust doesn't give him the right to organize the September 11th attacks. And it doesn't mean that when Granny's bald and scarred and the Air Traffic Controllers are denied their right to strike and thousands of people lie dead and mangled that any of these things are okay, or justifiable.

Re:DAMMIT

[G-funk]

That's what I don't get about these class action lawsuits. If they were really about faulty products, wouldn't the primary goal be to get the company to acknowledge wrongdoing? Instead they all seem to be about money with no admission of fault.

How do you figure? If you sell me something that doesn't live up to what you promised, I don't want an apology, I want my damned money back.

Re:DAMMIT

[Oculus Habent]

When my equipment was broken, Apple fixed it. As I stated, when my PowerBook 190 had a damaged power connector because of poor design, for which they eventually offered a replacement system at a reduced price, and were required to repair it free for some years - probably by a much more reasonable lawsuit - they repaired it. When it came back the second time with a shattered screen, they replaced the screen.

When the door covering the ports broke on a teacher's - weak hinge design - they sent a bag of 144, free of charge. When the power brick on my 1400cs overheated to the point it discolored the plastic, they replaced it.

All of the times I have had problems with Apple's hardware that were not a) my fault or b) typical wear, I have had a good experiences.

I am not saying that no one recieved defective units. I am not saying that people who did should not have an avenue for recompense. My problem is the implementation of this lawsuit.
--
My first generation iPod is old, now. It has been dropped several times. The Lucite facing is chipped. The chrome back is scratched. The battery doesn't last as long as it used to. Part of that - I'm sure - is it being in heat and cold when it spent time in my parked car. That's my fault.

Apple didn't lie. The iPod I received lived up to the battery specs, or reasonable approximations under non-ideal usage. Over time, the battery degraded. For people who didn't get the promised battery life (or anything reasonable), there should be compensation. For people who are complaining that old batteries don't hold a charge as well, I have no sympathy. I'm one of them.

Did that happen to everyone? No.
Did some people get bad batteries? Most likely.
Will many people who have misused their equipment be elligible for compensation? Yes.

I believe that class action lawsuits were conceived to provide protection to consumers who would otherwise be unaware that they have received poor quality or damaged goods and are entitled to compensation. I think that this lawsuit - while having some merit - overreaches what is reasonable and provides no safeguards against abuse. "Sure, my ipod battery is bad. Gimmegimmegimme!" Now I get $25.

If your first-gen iPod, which could be almost four years old is now experiencing battery problems, you're elligible. How many charge cycles have some of these iPods been through? How long ago did they experience loss? It's too broad.

Also, you'll find it is often the opposite with MS products. Most people simply expect a certain level of failure from Microsoft Software. With my PC hardware, I accept certain failure - when cheap RAM or an inexpensive motherboard fails, it's cheap. When I received a dead processor though, I got a replacement. When equipment fails unreasonably, I look into it. When the old laptop battery doesn't hold a charge, that's the cost of business.

Re:DAMMIT

[Elwood P Dowd]

http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=151501&c id=12709317

You're an idiot.

The only problem I have is that Apple didn't initially provide a way to replace the batteries.

As pointed out by above link, they also attempted to physically prevent battery replacement and told customers to buy new iPods when their batteries died.

So, your only problem is pretty much their only problem.

How many of these suits are valid, and how many are simply pissy users and overzealous lawyers

What if it's all three? Valid suit, pissy users, and overzealous lawyers all working together to prevent companies from fucking idiots like you.

It is exactly the point of a corporation to maximize shareholder value. The only reason that murdering people and selling their organs wouldn't maximize shareholder value is because pissy users and overzealous lawyers (and punitive damages) work to make it so.

Thank the fucking lord for those pissy users and overzealous lawyers.

Re:DAMMIT

[vyrus128]

I have to say, I'm torn here. I could certainly whip out my 1st-gen ipod and run it for 5 hours, and I doubt the battery would last... but I hate to dirty myself for $50 by participating in one of these class-action clusterf**ks.

Re:DAMMIT

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

Hey maybe you could apply to be legal counsel for apple next time, I'm sure you could convince the judge in a court of law you are right.

Heheh.

Re:DAMMIT

[ApostateApostle]

THAT'S FUCKING LIFE

Equipment wears out.

Well I think the issue wasn't that the iPod wore out, as all equipment does, but the fact that Apple misrepresented how long the average iPod battery life should be.

Re:DAMMIT

[KillShill]

well one could say that lawsuits are "JUST FUCKING LIFE" too.

frankly, this is warranted in my view.

yeah it's disgusting that we have to enrich the lawyers but find another way to give the customers back their money/lost value then we can consider that.

Re:DAMMIT

[FatAlb3rt]

Good points. I don't like the freeloading aspect of class action suits either, but had Apple handled the claims differently up front, they prolly could've avoided the mess.

I had a similar train of thought with the CD price-fixing lawsuit a few years back. Everyone lined up to get their $8 check or whatever it was because somehow the recording industry twisted their arms to buy overpriced CDs.

Re:DAMMIT

[OrenWolf]

Uh uh.

In this case, the issue at hand wasn't even so much that Apple misrepresented the battery life - it's that they did so, and then told users that the only way to fix the problem was to *buy a new iPod*.

they made sure they would not pay for battery replacements, and that you would void your warranty to replace it yourself.

That's the problem.

Re:DAMMIT

[MoneyT]

What claims? I don't recall Apple ever claiming that you would get X number of years out of your battery. I do recall claims of a 10 hour battery life on a single charge, and I do remember documentation on the battery being rated for about 500 charges, but that's it.

Re:DAMMIT

[MoneyT]

Why should they replace batteries? Do the toy manufacturers for your kids toys replace the batteries for you?

As for voiding your waranty, the fact that they wouldn't replace it in the first place means that it was in waranty anymore (the waranty is 1 year). If it's not in waranty it doesn't matter if you void it.

Re:DAMMIT

[MoneyT]

If apple isn't replacing your battery, it's out of waranty to begin with so what do you care if you void the waranty using some third party kit?

Re:DAMMIT

[Stankatz]

You think replacing something that costs as much as an iPod and only plays music every year or so is OK? I bought a portable CD player, oh, about 10 years ago. It still works fine.

Re:DAMMIT

[MoneyT]

Toys with non replaceable batteries? Have you been to a toys r us recently? All sorts of kids toys come with no replaceable batteries.

Furthermore, nothing in Apple's documentation (and I have it here) implies anything about >3 years of use out of your iPod. It explicitly says the battery is good for about 500 charges.

As far as warranty of mechantabillity, I don't think it means what you think it means. Here's the legal definition:

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/i014.htm

Now to me that says that someone sells you a product, and it will do what they told you it will do. No one is complaining their iPod doesn't do what it was designed to do. What people are complaining about is that their product, after the time period for which the manufacturer provides a waranty began to lose it's ability to hold a charge. They were then disapointed to find that that only Apple approved way to remedy this was to buy a new version of the product. Of course, what people seem to be forgetting is that there were and are third party batteries to be bought and use installed if they choose, and it doesn't matter if apple doesn't approve as you're no longer under waranty to begin with.

Besides, from the documentation, the battereis are rated for about 500 charges. From the complaints, it seems the people pissed off were annoyed because it happened about 18 months after they bought it.

18 months > 500 charges assuming 1 charge per day.

Therefore, it seems they got their use out of it.

Re:DAMMIT

[Kris_J]

While your tone is a little strong, I agree with the sentiment. My 2G's batteries appear to only last about 2.5 hours, but that is with an FM transmitter attached. That's enough for my sub-15 minute ride to work and for the occasional 45-minute each-way to a friends place. If the battery completely dies I'll get a third-party replacement, which I believe actually has a better capacity than the original.

Re:DAMMIT

[Golias]

Anyone know why Apple made the ipod without a replaceable battery?

Wrong question. The question you need to ask first is:

Is the Apple iPod battery replaceable?

And the answer is: Fuck yes!

First of all, there are iPods that are under warrantee. The Apple Warrantee on iPods goes for a year. If you buy the AppleCare extended warrantee on it, it goes for three.

If the battery fails under warrantee, Apple replaces it at zero cost.

If the battery fails after the warrantee has ended, you can replace it yourself very easily. Newer Technology sells batteries for the iPod for $25 - $40 (depending on the model) which actually outlast the originals, and they include a free tool for opening the case and complete instructions.

As long as you follow the directions, the trickiest part is making sure you don't yank the HD ribbon cable in half. It's really no more delicate an operation that installing an AirPort card in that slot under the keyboard of the iBook.

So, to recap:
Under warrantee == Free battery replacement installed for you
Out of warrantee == Cheap battery replacement you can easily do at home.

Any other questions?

Re:DAMMIT

[MonkeyBoy]

Name a phone with a non-replaceable battery. Name a computer with a non-replaceable battery. Camera... UPS... hell, possibly even a defribrillator.

The last cordless phone I owned, several years ago, had a battery just as non-replaceable as the iPod. Can't tell you the brand name of it, it was a cheap hunk of junk but worked for my few analog purposes.

Of course, I'm assuming non-replaceable means I have to open the case up to replace the battery, since that's all thats necessary for both an iPod and that old cordless phone. And just like an iPod, I had to hunt down a third party replacement battery, the manufacturer didn't offer one themselves.

The odd thing is I don't remember hearing about a class action suit against that phone manufacturer. Perhaps their pockets weren't deep enough?

Bah. I suppose my car battery is non-replaceable since I have to pop the hood to replace it.

Don't open anything up, arr matey, inside there be dragons and voodoo.

Re:DAMMIT

[FatAlb3rt]

Toys with non replaceable batteries? Have you been to a toys r us recently? All sorts of kids toys come with no replaceable batteries.

But how many of them are $500 toys? I think that's one of the main contentions in the argument. If it were a $25 toy, no one would have any heartburn over it. But who wants to shell out several hundred dollars every year or two for an mp3 player?

18 months > 500 charges assuming 1 charge per day. Therefore, it seems they got their use out of it.

Nice assumption, and I'd agree with you for the folks who did get their allotted 500 charges, but I'd venture to say that most people weren't charging every day and fell far short of 500 charges- do they have a legitimate gripe?

Re:DAMMIT

[petermgreen]

i'd say a battery is not user replaceable (which is not the same thing as not replaceable period) if any of the following holds

1: the manufacturer specifically tells you not to replace it and/or tells you if you do replace it then you will void the warranty

2: the manufacturer takes deliberare steps to stop you getting at the battery and/or requires special tools to do it (e.g. soldering the battery in using security screws etc)

3: the battery is of a non-standard type and the manufacturer does not make spares availible.

with your car the manufacturer generally tells you how to replace the battery and what type to replace it with. you only need standard spanners to disconnect it with, and they warn you of any issues with disconnecting it (such as radio security codes)

i've also had calculators and test equipment where you have to unscrew the back to change the batteries but there were instructions in the manual on doing this and the batteries were a standard size so theese batteries were perfectly user replaceable

Re:DAMMIT

[EdelFactor19]

It feels like you miss several of the key points to this lawsuit, why it is a lawsuit, and why it is a valid one. For starters the key contrast between the MS products you mention and the iPod is that they are replacable pieces of equipment. The battery on the ipod was not replaceble without voiding the warranty, and their answer was you need to buy a new ipod. That coupled with the advertising claims, and the large amount of battery problems that exist is the reason for the lawsuit. Given the nature of the suit as targeting the false claim of battery life, it shuold be irrelevant whether your ipod is suffering now or not, because how do you know that next week it wont be suffering and no longer achieve the desired length? Are there people with iPods who dont have these problems? certainly. are there people who dont think they do but just dont realize they do, you bet.. and are there people who have been conditioned not to give a damn and just accept it as life, you and the parent to this DAMMIT thread are perfect examples of them.

Another of your main points is the first gen iPod people suffering problems.. there is one fatal flaw with your reasoning, you assume that none of them had problems back when their ipod was only a year or two old (or three), could it be that they just lived with it, gave up after attempting to get it resolved, or already bought a new ipod?? Its irrellevant in my opinion because there was no course of action for them to take, think of it as a case where they havent reached the 'statute of limitations' and maybe that would make sense to you.

As for people misusing their equipment being elligble, thats life. Companies deal with it all the time; if you want to make that arguement consider this, if the company had done it right in the first place they wouldnt be in this mess now would they?

you say "Apple didn't lie, the battery i recieved lived up to the specs" , I'm going to venture you didn't pay attention in math class when they covered proofs.. You can't prove an existential qualifier such as Apple didn't lie, by going on one single account, or even a collection of many; you'd have to prove that it wasn't possible for them to have been lying, and you dont come close. granted this really cant be done here; however consider that to disprove their statement, it only takes a single case, and you admit there are many.. by your own statements they are lying. to me your argument is akin to saying "for all X, X^2 + (X+1)^2 == X + 2(X+1) " because 1^2 + 2^2 = 5 = 1 + 2*2, youre examlped worked so you didnt lie... i have news for you, that doesnt even begin to hold up. So are you saying that I can advertise a laptop for getting 12 hours of battery life if i can find a handful of said laptop whereby running under obscure condition A i can attain 12 hours of life?

finally, i just want to highlight a comparison to the auto industry... when theres a part recall, its pretty much always for a specific year, model, and make of a car; and everyone gets the recall for free regardless of whether theirs is defective yet because it very well could be a problem later, but the settlement is now and is done to avoid the problem later. When theres a part recall or warranty work done to your car are charged for it? no, its WARRANTY work; "As I stated, when my PowerBook 190 had a damaged power connector because of poor design, for which they eventually offered a replacement system at a reduced price," if you ask me that isnt a good experience. They should have offered the replacement system free.. to me thats like saying oh the computer i sold you the hard drive has a problem and will fail in 2 months, we'll replace it then for free, probably with another defective one that lasts two months, but for only $$$$ you can buy one from us at a special discount that wont break.

draw the parallel to laptop use, they also have a very speculatory battery life side to them.. to me the key difference is that A. the batteries perform as guarenteed for a longer period

Where's my check?

[ChePibe]

I'm just mad because my iPod didn't turn me black and vastly improve my dancing skills. I'm still just a fat old clumbsy white boy with no skills... talk about your false advertising.

Where's my check? Huh?

Ridiculous

[Frangible]

I think this is a very baseless legal suit. First of all, you can buy a new replacement battery for the iPod from any number of vendors very cheaply and easily, or even have Apple replace it for you if you want. Secondly, who said things last forever? The battery wears out, the hard drive wears out, the buttons wear out... nothing lasts forever. Do you sue Honda because the battery in your Honda died? Every consumer device that ships with a rechargable battery is going to fail, many of which are even internal like the iPods. So you have to open the case and replace it every few years. So what? How is that any more difficult or expensive than getting a new battery for your car? It's the price you pay for a flashy new lithium polymer battery instead of alkaline AAs.

Re:Ridiculous

[hobbesmaster]

If your Honda only held 1 gallon of gas after 2 months of use and when you complained Honda said buy a new car, would you be angry?

Re:Ridiculous

[Frangible]

But the batteries weren't failing after 2 months, they were failing after years of use. Guess what, your car battery is going to do exactly the same thing. And I promise you, it will be more expensive and time consuming to replace. Better call your lawyer.

Man, I feel sorry for Toyota once the Prius owners get wind of this...

Re:Ridiculous

[moonbender]

There wouldn't be a reason to get angry if this was true to mostly the same degree for all cars, and a fairly well-known fact to boot.

Re:Ridiculous

[KillShill]

spoken like a true brand-loyalist.

how about we compromise:

have all ipods and other merchandise come with big stickers with the words "BUYER BEWARE" written in big bold red letters.

that way, you would avert "pointless" lawsuits and keep the customers sufficiently warned.

Re:Ridiculous

[Scudsucker]

have all ipods and other merchandise come with big stickers with the words "BUYER BEWARE" written in big bold red letters.

What merchandise, exactly? Because you would have to put this label on EVERYTHING: electronics, cars, clothing, appliances...

Re:Ridiculous

[Michael Hunt]

I generally replace the battery in my car (650 cold crank amps or thereabouts) every 3 years for the princely sum of ~$A200.

It takes me five minutes. From what I've heard, you can't even get the back plate off an iPod in five minutes.

Dumb analogy.

Re:Ridiculous

[KillShill]

yeah, that's what i mean.

everything.

Re:Ridiculous

[TrancePhreak]

My car's battery was $85 for the more expensive version and included installation. Apple wants $100 or more, but they usually tell you to buy a new iPod ($250+).

In Apple's defense

[mattmentecky]

In Apple's defense...even though they lost the court battle their defense was well designed, and their lawyers were pretty slick looking.

Re:In Apple's defense

[commodoresloat]

Not to mention, the whole trial was pretty snappy!

This is great

[MmmmAqua]

I get $50 in Apple credit, and the lawyers get up to $2,768,000. I really don't know who to cheer for here. I wish my iPod's battery would have lasted a bit longer (it's 1G, holds about 3hrs worth of charge), but I also wish the legal system wasn't so screwed up that the only people really profiting from this aren't injured parties.

Only in America...

Re:This is great

[Dan667]

Completely agree, the lawyers should recieve a reasonable compensation. Wish I had mod points.

Re:This is great

[Callitrax]

While the amount the lawyers are getting paid is crazy, keep in mind a few important points.

1) The attorneys involved work on this exclusively for periods of time often exceeding a year or more.
2) They have to pay for research, finding witnesses, deposing testimony...
3) they do all this with no guarantee of any payment.
4) most importantly, without these attorneys the injured parties receive nothing and companies never get called on these things.

for an example of life without see: http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2005/04/14/ap1 947940.html

Re:This is great

[Dasein]

If you are opposed to class action lawsuits, you should be opposed to venture capitalists as well.

Lawyers who take these cases fund the cases, including all time (which would otherwise be billable) and the cost of expert witnesses, transportation for witnesses, discovery costs, everything, which in a case like this can be a pretty penny -- $1M isn't an unreasonable guess.

So, these lawyers get $1.78M in profit. Well, if you consider that they're going to win some and loose some, then getting the occasionaly $1.78M payday is no worse than VCs getting a 10X payday on IPO.

There's a movie out call "A Civil Action" (yeah it was a book first) that shows how class action suits can bankrupt firms (and individuals).

I'm not saying that this isn't a good payday, I'm just saying it's a high-risk business that has correspondingly high rewards.

Like any such business the key is to reduce idiosyncratic risk by diversifying. That's how VCs get and stay rich.

Re:This is great

[mobby_6kl]

Well and WTF do you expect to get for a faulty battery? $5000? I don't know how much the lawyer would get in this case, but if it weren't for him, thousands of suckers like you wouldn't get a cent from apple.

Re:This is great

[Queer Boy]

I also wish the legal system wasn't so screwed up that the only people really profiting from this aren't injured parties.

Push for tort reform.

Re:This is great

[JCY2K]

Yea, you make $50 for a $99 battery...

Re:This is great

[noidentity]

I get $50 in Apple credit, and the lawyers get up to $2,768,000. I really don't know who to cheer for here.

[...]

Only in America... ...do people not even think of the batteries. Think of the poor batteries won't you? Where's their cut?

Re:This is great

[ari_j]

That $2,768,000 figure includes all their costs, which are huge in a class action case of this size. The lawyers won't be poor when it's all said and done, but they won't exactly be sitting on a $3 million bucket of cash.

Re:This is great

[BitGeek]

I support Venture Capitalists but I oppose class action lawsuits.

This isn't directly on your point- but the reason is that class action lawsuits claim to represent people as a class- eg: "All people who bought 1G iPods" not people as a GROUP eg: "All people who are a party to lthe lawsuit".

Which means that if they win this class action lawsuit, then they limit my right to compensation as a member of that class, EVEN IF I AM NOT A PARTY TO THE SUIT. That's a violation of my rights. I have not waived my rights to sue Apple over this same issue explicityl, and part of the reasn the Lawyers get so much is that the suit removes my right to sue seperately over this issue.

Re:This is great

[Dasein]

You have a point there. I was trying to speak to the idea of excessive compensation. I'm addled by impending math final -- sorry.

Re:This is great

[hotspotbloc]

Well and WTF do you expect to get for a faulty battery? $5000?

How about being able to send your iPod back for a new battery? Neither the $50 Apple store credit or $25 check will fix one's dead iPod.

I don't know how much the lawyer would get in this case,

$2,768,000.00USD. IMO that's what the grandparent's post is complaining about.

... but if it weren't for him, thousands of suckers like you wouldn't get a cent from apple.

The legal firm gets $2.7M and those with defective iPods still don't get them fixed or the money to get them fixed.

It's clear that a percentage of the settlement (one third?) went to legal fees. If the settlement covered replacing the dead batteries (IMO the right thing to do) the lawyers would be taking home alot less. Considering the lawyers get paid to also dish out the checks and keep the unclaimed funds they made out like thiefs in the night.

IMO it's a lousy stettlement because in the end no one got their iPods fixed by Apple et al.

Re:This is great

[qengho]

So, these lawyers get $1.78M in profit. Well, if you consider that they're going to win some and loose some, then getting the occasionaly $1.78M payday is no worse than VCs getting a 10X payday on IPO.

Except that venture capitalists are helping to create wealth, while lawyers are simply redistributing it, and injecting a massive inefficiency into the process to boot (their fee). Don't get me started...

Re:This is great

[hymie3]

If you registered the product, you'll get a mailing notifying you of the lawsuit. If you read the fine print, you are allowed to opt-out of the class action lawsuit. If you opt-out, you can pursue the matter on your own.

I *still* haven't got my money from the CD settlement *or* the Microsoft settlement. I've kinda written thost off. Is it too late?

Re:This is great

[pla]

I get $50 in Apple credit

Actually, you don't even get THAT pittance.

As part of the terms of the settlement, you can't use that $50 to buy music from the iTMS. Name another Apple product that costs $50 or less...

Going further, since anyone getting this settlement would already have a portable music player (ie, an iPod), this settlement strikes me as nothing more than a 10% off coupon on a Mac Mini (cue the apologists saying "But I wanted a Mac Mini anyway..."). Wow, THAT will teach 'em to make false claims - Companies hate having more people buy their products, and never give discounts to entice them to do so.


What a wonderful settlement. Yet another example of why I don't join class action suits. We need to start pushing for criminal, not civil, action against these companies. Lock up a few entire Executive Boards, and see how long it takes to get real reform.

Re:This is great

[browngb]

It is your choice to participate in it or not. You can "opt-out" of a class suit if you wish to sue them independently.

Re:This is great

[Overzeetop]

Lawyers throw money around like its water, because they can expect to be reimbursed. $500/hr for a partners time while in transit. No problem! Actually, he was dictating a letter at the same time on another case, so he's going to bill both. Not a problem. Heck, I was informed by a lawyer client of mine that I don't charge enough for my expert witness services, he recommended an amount more than double my standard rate. Of course, now I do charge a 50% premium in litigation related work, because I can. I guess its all just business.

Re:This is great

[ari_j]

It's a free market. Those with something to sell can and should sell it at the equilibrium price. Personally, I think your 50% premium doesn't go far enough. After all, how much should you be paid extra to deal with lawyers all day? Just being in the same room as a lawyer should pay $100/hr. :P

Re:This is great

[Dasein]

As a single comlainant, you are unlikely to find it financially worthwhile to sue Apple over misleading advertising.

So, these lawyer provide a service in that the provide a strong incentive for companies to be truthful in their dealings with customers.

So, in absence of class action lawsuits, there's a zone in which companies can mislead consumers without fear of loss. With class action this gap is closed.

Re:This is great

[Pendersempai]

I'm pretty sure you can opt out of the class either explicitly or simply by not cashing in your $50.

Re:This is great

[Pendersempai]

True. On the other hand, the lawyers spent months of their time on this with no guarantee that they would get anything at all. Should they not get paid? If they're really charging too much, why haven't other lawyers undercut their contingency rates?

Also, realize that without the lawyers, you would get $0 instead of $50.

Lots will go unclaimed

[Dark Paladin]

From the notice:

I enclose proof of purchase of the iPod, in the form of the original or a photocopy of (check one and enclose the
requested documentation):
the invoice or receipt that reflects the purchase of the iPod
or
a cancelled check that reflects the purchase of the iPod
or
a credit or debit card statement that identifies the transaction as the purchase of the iPod [Underline, circle,
or highlight the iPod purchase transaction on your statement. You may cross out, white-out, or otherwise
redact the card number and any transactions other than the iPod purchase.]
or
a check, credit card statement or debit card statement that does not specifically identify the transaction as
one for the purchase of the iPod. I declare under penalty of perjury that the transaction reflected on
the check or statement was for the purchase of an iPod. [Underline, circle, or highlight the iPod
purchase transaction on your statement. You may cross out, white-out, or otherwise redact the card number
and any transactions other than the iPod purchase.]

I might be able to get my June or July statement from the bank with my credit slip - but otherwise, I'm out of this one. Too bad - $50 would have gone well to my purchase of a new iPod Photo. I don't need a new battery since I replaced mine about a couple of months ago myself (easier than I thought - the biggest problem was trying to keep my 9 month old son away from the taken apart iPod, who is convinced my iPod and my Game Boy Advance are the tastiest things on the planet.) It took 2 years for my iPod battery to reach that stage, so I guess I'm not too upset about missing on an additional $50 of Apple goodness.

Hm - maybe I'll contact the bank anyway and see what I can figure out....

Re:Lots will go unclaimed

[DenDave]

No shit and what of the Ipods In EU???
My third Gen goes about 2 hours and then plops into oblivion.. oh well at least it doesn't threaten to blow me up or burn my gonads the way the iBook's battery reportedly threatened... recall... recall....

What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[dohduffbeer703]

already mailed in my claim. i can't wait to blow my entire settlement check at the apple store. i wonder what i'll get? what would you get?

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[flawedgeek]

Half an iPod Shuffle, then wait for the class-action lawsuit because it doesn't have a screen. Another claim later, free ipod shuffle!

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[glowimperial]

$50 at an apple store isn't going to go very far.

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[soupdevil]

iPod socks.

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[TrekCycling]

It will buy you new headphones...

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/A ppleStore.woa/70202/wo/aF7ksSJz3QSn2NkCe1s114BrFs7 /1.0.0.11.1.0.6.9.3.19.0.1.0.1.1.0.1.0.3

And half a laser pointer...

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/A ppleStore.woa/70202/wo/aF7ksSJz3QSn2NkCe1s114BrFs7 /9.0.0.11.1.0.6.9.3.19.0.1.1.1.1.0.1.0.1

This is why the lawsuit was allowed to proceed. Most iPod users are apparently morons who don't know they can get a laser pointer for $5 and new headphones for $10 somewhere else.

And in the interest of full disclosure I have a Mini. It was the cheapest/GB that worked well with Linux at the time. And when/if it dies I'll buy whatever is cheapest on the market that works with Linux.

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[rainman_bc]

Don't most mp3 players work with Linux? I mean, it's just a flash drive... It should show up (at least in FC) under /media/whatever

I mean, I use a pcmcia adaptor for my cf cards. When I plug in my camera into the usb port it shows up the same as it does if I use the pcmcia adaptor...

Or are you looking for software that'll downsample an mp3 when you move it to your device?

Mysteriously FC3's ability to recognize CF cards seems to wane over time.

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[TrekCycling]

In the case of flash MP3 players more work than don't work. Hard drive players are a mixed bag, though, as far as I understand it. I chose iPod simple because I knew it worked. iRiver may work just fine. So might the Zen. I don't know. What I do know is that the iPod worked even before I bought it. And with hard drive players that peace of mind that I won't have to monkey with the OS to get it to work was worth it. Plus the price ($250 for 4GB) was worth it.

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[forceflow2]

$50 iTunes Music Store Gift Certificate. Not that my battery holds a charge for any more than 15 minutes but at least I'll have more music that I might be able to listen to...someday.

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[nugneant]

Shut the fuck up! Apple users are NOT morons! We happen to be supporters of the creative, alternative, underground, rebel vibe! Haven't you SEEN an iPod? First off the way how they capitalize the second letter? Not the first? That goes against the Man! It's a call to rebel against our literate so-called "superiors" of the Establishment! Secondly, that dial? It's not just cute, it actually works! It beefs up your videogame skillz when you're driving and trying to listen to Elliot Smith and keep getting the Smiths by mistake! It is your fault if you can't work it! We're supporting new technology! We're with Steve Jobs against Bill Gates and HIS-- I mean, excuse me, his-- army of robot winblowz underling (l)userz!! We'll mod you down! You're redundant! Or worse yet OVERRATED! We Mac users understand how to rip a system!



</sarcasm>

(I can't believe I just used "we" in relation to Apple users. Even if it was within a sarcastic attempt at +1 funny, and thusly spoken in character, I still feel filthy. Is this anything like Ingmar Bergman felt when he was directing those soap commercials?)

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[KillShill]

so in effect you're saying that by them being fined a pittance and then further issuing "coupons", they really come out ahead when all's said and done.

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[KirkH]

You posted links containing your session id and you're calling iPod users morons?

Re:What would you buy at the Apple Store for $50?

[TrekCycling]

I admit, it is ironic and moronic. At least I still know you can get headphones somewhere else for $10 and a laser pointer for $5. Even if I was hasty in my post to paste in those links.

What interests me is ...

[TheGavster]

What interests me is that the older iPods are expected to retain more of their battery life. If a 1st or 2nd gen drops below 5 hours/charge, it is covered by this suit, but apparently 5 hours/charge is acceptable for a 3rd gen part. What amazing new capability on the 3rd gen iPod so dramatically reduces (by 20%) its expected battery life?

Re:What interests me is ...

[morcheeba]

The first and second gen ipods had physically larger batteries, the third gen battery was about 1/2 the size. There is a good picture illustrating this at anandtech. This made the 3rd gen ipods thinner than the earlier models.

Not bad engineering, false advertising

[Kiryat Malachi]

The suit isn't about whether or not lithium ion batteries decay; no one is arguing that they don't.

The suit's merit lies solely in the assertion that Apple, in its original product documentation, did not strongly enough explain that fact, and in fact glossed over it to the detriment of the consumer. If you say "Plays 8 hours", the suit argues, it damn well better play 8 hours... now, and later. Car makers don't represent that the car won't require maintenance; the suit argues that Apple represented the iPod as being something that would operate in the same fashion across its usable life.

Whether you think this is a valid suit or not, stop whining that "Batteries decay!", because that isn't the argument.

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[TomHandy]

I don't get it, how is that unique to Apple though? Are you saying Apple is the only company which mentions a battery life but doesn't specifically mention that the battery life will degrade in large print with the main claim?

I just don't get it. Almost every laptop I've seen advertised advertises some specific battery life...... same with most other devices sold with rechargable battery lives. And most of them don't put anything in big print about the lifespan of the batteries.

So why is Apple somehow unique in this?

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[emandres]

the suit argues that Apple represented the iPod as being something that would operate in the same fashion across its usable life

"usable life" being the operative phrase there. Apple never claimed that your iPod would last for any number of years. It's simply implausible to argue on basis of "usable life". Some might (stupidly) say its ten years, but another might argue that "usable life" is only up until the one year limited warantee on the product.

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[cameldrv]

When you buy a laptop, when the battery stops working well, you can buy another battery, or use AC. I know on my laptop it explicitly states that the battery is considered a "consumable" item, and it can be easily replaced, just like a toner cartrige. In an ipod, however, until Apple started their exchange program, there was no way to replace the battery, and the ipod is really designed for mobile use, so effectively, you just had to buy a new one after the battery ran low.

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[fimbulvetr]

I'm not going to argue as to why Laptop manufacturers are not getting sued, but at least Joe Consumer can go purchase a new battery after his ~320 Lithium Ion Cycles have been used up.

A few hundred bucks on an Ipod, and you can't change the battery? WTF? This isn't a 1985 Norelco Shaver!

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[fermion]

I also think there is an issue of the iPod as an aggressively designed and promoted product. The marketing people clearly made promises that the engineers could not keep. For example, my iPod mini, in the way I used it, quickly decayed to about 3 hourse of usable time.

The problem was that the way I used my iPod, with the backlight sometime on, looking for tracks that I wanted, and generally fiddling with the unit, is far different than what Apple advertises, which is simply turning it on and listening to whatever comes up for 5 or 8 hours. It is the same with portable computers.

It is the same with cars. it is not so much a matter of maintaince, as fuel effeciency. What saves the cars is there is a standard, and as long the lies follow the rules, everyone is happy. However, the truck manufacturers that make automobiles that are rated at 16 miles a gallon but get 9, are upset at the hybrid cars, that are rated at 60 mpg and get 35.

So I would say that Apple did not have the legal history to make the marketing people stay in line, and the consumer does not have enough of a history to know the exact extent the marketers are lying. i don't believe any level of language would have saved Apple this time, but now that the court case has happened, language can be added to standardize the lies.

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[TomHandy]

Right, I understand that. I was replying more to the point raised in the original post, that the problem here was that Apple didn't explicitly state that the "8 hour" battery life wouldn't last for the lifetime of the product. I didn't get that, since it does seem to be pretty similar.

And when you say your laptop explicitly states that the battery is considered a consumable item, what do you mean exactly? I know it does normally say this somewhere, usually in fine print. In most laptop advertising I've seen, they don't exactly go out of their way to talk about how the battery will wear down, etc. They normally bury that in the fine print somewhere.

-Tom

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[TomHandy]

I know, that wasn't the point I was replying to (I already understand that the underlying point of this case was Apple not having a replacement program).... I was replying to the parent post about the problem being Apple's "false advertising" by not explicitly stating that the battery life wouldn't be 8 hours forever.

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[Scudsucker]

In an ipod, however, until Apple started their exchange program, there was no way to replace the battery

Not really. And Apple never advertized the iPod as having a user-replaceable battery in the first place.

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[xombo]

FYI It's Lithium Polymer. I thought I'd clarify, not because I'm a bitch but because the two technologies are fundamentally different (discharge cycle counting). If a LiPoly battery isn't discharged beyond a certain voltage it doesn't count as a discharge cycle (of which LiPoly batteries are expected to have around 500 before going sour).

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[entrigant]

I disagree. I think it is. To use your flawed car analogy, car makers advertise the cars horsepower new, when it is well known that various things will cause that number to fall over time. Portable electronics are nothing new, and the customer should be expected to understand that rechargeable batteries lose their capacity over time. Anyone who owns a cell phone knows this, and I wonder just how many people involved in this suit owned a cell phone before they did an iPod. I should not be Apple's job to educate them about this.

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[Scudsucker]

but at least Joe Consumer can go purchase a new battery after his ~320 Lithium Ion Cycles have been used up.

Really? I wasn't aware that Joe was banned from this site, or paying Apple $100 to do it for you.

Re:Not bad engineering, false advertising

[cameldrv]

If the battery is replaceable, it's reasonable to say "the device lasts 8 hours on a battery", because the statement is about what the device can do, namely, last eight hours with a certain battery in a certain condition. If the battery isn't replacable, you have to treat the device and the battery as a single entity, so now you're saying, "the device lasts 8 hours when it is new", rather than saying "the device lasts 8 hours when the battery is new."

US only or world wide?

[gunleiksrud]

I can only guess, but this is only good if you're a US iPod user owner?? As a Norwegian I'll just have to live with the battery I have, right??

Re:Lawsuits

[Reality Master 101]

In other news: Several car owners are suing GM because they're cars ran out of gas.

Um, this would be a fine analogy -- if GM made a car where the gas tank shrunk after every use, and after a year of heavy use, the gas tank no longer held gas. And when you complained to GM that the tank was irreplaceable, you were told to "buy a new car". That's exactly what Apple did.

Good. Now I only need a settlement from Rio...

[sTalking_Goat]

...for the crappy scroll wheel that broke on my Karma a month after the waranty expired.

Re:Lawsuits

[outZider]

Are you aware of how a battery works?

Re:Lawsuits

[hawkbug]

Finally, somebody makes a true comparison to what goes on all the time with electronics - they sell something with certain specs with battery life, and then a year or two later, it's not what you bought. I had an IBM thinkpad, which after only 1 year of use, no longer held a charge in the battery. I replaced the battery for $190, a completel rip off. Again, less than 1 year later, the damn thing won't hold a charge. It's even worse with apple though because you can't replace the battery easily and without voiding your warranty.

smaller?

[SuperKendall]

Aren't the third gens a lot smaller? I can't remember if the shift from first to second gen was also smaller, but I know my first gen is substantially larger than current models.

Store Credit

[dsparil]

I just love it when class action lawsuits are settled with credit to purchasing products made by the sued company.

Re:Store Credit

[glowimperial]

The premise could be that since they are already suckers for Apple's marketing, they will continue to take it in the ass, even after Apple admits that it has been fucking them in said ass.

A Formula for Battery Life

[ndansmith]

IF you want to know the actual battery life of a product based on what is advertised, use this formula:

a = advertised length (hrs)
(a-1)/2
So if your iPod says it will get 4 hours of play time, the actual amount is 90 minutes.

please look into what you spout off about.

[geekoid]

"Secondly, who said things last forever?"

Apple did, hence the suit.

"Do you sue Honda because the battery in your Honda died? "
If they claimed it would start the car for 5 years, yes I would. actually, I would complain, and if they said 'buy a new car', then I would sue.

once again, it is a suit against Apple's claims. Not the fact that batteries wea rout, the fact they wear out substantially faster then Apple claimed they do.

Re:please look into what you spout off about.

[FLAGGR]

If you look in your iPod manual you will clearly see mention of how the battery only lasts x amount of charges. Apple NEVER claimed the batteries would last forever, they claimed that they last ~10 hours and deteriorate over time (as all rechargables do)

If you had an ipod you'd know this.

Re:please look into what you spout off about.

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

Whew, thats a relief... I guess we'd better show the judge the manual so, he can tell Apple to keep their money, and he should apologise for having made such a blindingly obvious error in judgement.

Heheheh.

Re:Lawsuits

[angle_slam]

The people who brought the lawsuit are not.

It's because people don't understand

[ian rogers]

The battery cycles. Kids in my classes take laptops that have been used for an hour and just plug them back in again, and it happens every hour. I really wonder how long it will be until they stop holding charges.

It also reminds me of kids who leave their iPod backlights on even when they aren't using them, they're just sitting in the kids' pockets.

"OMG WHY DOES MY IPOD NOT LAST AS LONG AS YOURZ? ITS GHEY!"

If you don't read Apple's instructions, and you fuck up the battery cycles, it's not going to be good for you iPod.

I've had stellar performance with my iPod Shuffle, and even pretty good performance with an iPod that is used almost exclusively with an iTrip FM transmitter that drains the batteries quite nicely.

This whole thing is bullshit, let alone the topic of the lawyers getting all the money from everything...

Re:It's because people don't understand

[geekoid]

"If you don't read Apple's instructions, and you fuck up the battery cycles, it's not going to be good for you iPod."

according to Apply instructions for the iPod mini, you only have to be sure to charge it for at least an hour when you first get it, after that, whenever you want.

so if there is some sort of rule about when it can charge it's not in the documents.

of course what they are probaly doing is not letting the battery charge unless it has gone to an apporpriet chrched level. Something laptops should do.

Of course, Apple lied about what the battery can do.

Re:It's because people don't understand

[harlows_monkeys]

The battery cycles. Kids in my classes take laptops that have been used for an hour and just plug them back in again, and it happens every hour. I really wonder how long it will be until they stop holding charges

For Apple laptops, they tell you right in the manual that it is OK to do that.

Re:It's because people don't understand

[ian rogers]

Well shit.

I've always gone with the let it drain as far as I can method because of what I was told by one of the guys at an Apple store about it.

Re:It's because people don't understand

[Vidiot3k]

Your thinking of battery "memory", a problem that lithium-ion batteries do not suffer from. A battery cycle represents running it from 100 to then back to 100. From the ipod website:

Standard Charging
Most Lithium-ion batteries use a fast charge to charge your device to 80% battery capacity, then switch to trickle charging. That's about two hours charge time to power iPod to 80% capacity, then another two hours to fully charge iPod, if you are not using iPod while charging. You can charge all Lithium-ion batteries a large but finite number of times, as defined by charge cycle.
A charge cycle means using all of the battery's power, but that doesn't necessarily mean a single charge. For instance, you could listen to your iPod for a few hours one day, using half its power, and then recharge it fully. If you did the same thing the next day, it would count as one charge cycle, not two, so you may take several days to complete a cycle. Each time you complete a charge cycle, it diminishes battery capacity slightly, but you can put both notebook and iPod batteries through many charge cycles before they will only hold 80% of original battery capacity. As with other rechargeable batteries, you may eventually need to replace your battery.

So, regardless of how many times you plug in any li-ion powered device the only thing that shortens battery life is use, or even worse, not using it at all.

Re:It's because people don't understand

[starbird]

It depends on the battery type used. If your laptop has older NICd batteries, you want to drain them as much as you can before charging. This is because NICd batteries will retain a 'memory' of how they're used. If you don't drain them, they think they are fully depleted when at a higher voltage. This reduces their life prematurely, as you now only have, say 2 hours of charge instead of 4.

NiMH's are a bit better. They have no memory problems, and they hold a charge a lot longer than NiCd (I've had nimhs show full voltage a month after being charged). You can recharge them whenever you want without worry about damaging them, but you now have to worry about overcharging (which laptops have circuitry to keep from happening).

LiIon are the same as NiMH, they're a bit more volatile, you have to be careful not to run the batteries under a certain voltage, and you really don't want to overcharge, but you can put them on a charger whenever you want. Again the laptop/cel phone/device will have circuitry that will prevent under and overcharging, so you don't need to worry about it.

Re:It's because people don't understand

[toddestan]

That's true for NiCad batteries. NiCads should be run down before charging due to the memory effect.However, I don't think any laptop on the market still uses NiCads.

Lion batteries are the opposite. They don't have a memory effect, and it's harmful to them to discharge them all the way. Best way to treat a Lion battery is to charge it back up whenever possible. iPods, and all current Apple laptops use Lion batteries.

There are also NiMH batteries. While these don't have the memory effect like NiCads, I find they tend to last the longest if you run them down until they are mostly discharged, then charge them back up. But, as always, YMMV.

Shoulda used Toshiba's li-ions

[Colin Smith]

1000 charges and negligible loss of capacity. They also charge up to 80% in 60 seconds.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/29/toshiba_li -ion_battery/

These'd make electric cars extremely cost effective. An electric vehicle needs bugger all maintenance compared to an internal combustion engine largely due to the few moving parts, N*1000 charges on the battery lifetime would be millions of miles rather than around 150,000 miles for current li-ions. Then there's the high fuel vs low electricity cost.

Re:Lawsuits

[moonbender]

I agree that 190 bucks is a very high price, but you shouldn't be so surprised by mobile gadgets having a dwindling battery life after a year. That's just the way it is with current battery technology. If you don't know that when buying a laptop, well, next time do your research. Caveat emptor. See why everybody says that battery technology is the limiting factor for mobile devices?

Re:Earbud?

[MightyMartian]

What the fuck is an earbud?

Remember those creatures that got inside Chekhov's head in the Wrath of Khan?

Prediction

[Kesh]

Ten bucks says Jobs cracks a joke / makes a snide comment about this during the WWDC keynote speech next week. ;)

Re:Prediction

[michaeldot]

20 bucks says his jeans have holes in the knees to make a point about how all the lawsuits are eating into profits.

Steps to making money out of technology companies:

1. Make jokes about beleaguered company going down the toilet and clean up by copying what it did
2. Wait for company to make a comeback
3. Sue it back into oblivion
4. Profit! (If you're a lawyer / trademark holder / IP patent holder / anyone else who ambulance chases companies with too many $$$ in the bank)

Re:Um... this isn't a problem

[thesupraman]

>The people in the demographics market for Apple
>Ipods should figure it out within 5 minutes how
>to replace a battery. This is a lame attempt by
>the old people to pretend they're hip.

I would suggest that most of the people in Apples
demographic market for Ipods would not realise
that it uses a battery, that it could possibly
be opened, or quite possibly what 'time' is.

I guess next time apple will put YMMV a little more obviously in the literature.

Re:Lawsuits

[aywwts4]

Right... Only every single car in the lot has it's MPG rating on the side. Its much more like buying an expensive gasoline/electric hybrid with a promise of 45 city, 50 highway, and then in a year getting SUV style gas consumption, and having the company say; yeah, they do that, you could always buy another one. Of course all these analogies are just silly...

Re:Lawsuits

[FLAGGR]

You obviously don't know how a battery works. Rechargable batteries only last an x amount of charges.

Re:Lawsuits

[DJbeta_masta]

This "gas" analogy is weak as hell. I bet there would be quite an uproar if people bought cars from GM and their mileage dropped from 30 mpg to 10 mpg over the course of a year or two. I would be mad anyway, but then again, I own an iPod. WHAAAAH!!!

Re:Um... this isn't a problem

[fimbulvetr]

Holy shit, you talked bad about Apple consumers whilst logged in?
Man, you have balls. I've been Karma bombed (Can't mod anymore) on a few accounts for doing this.

Re:Teach 'em

[FLAGGR]

Yes, how dare Apple use a rechargable battery that doesn't last a life time. Pretty shoddy.

You do realise that *all* rechargable batteries deteriorate over time, which the iPod ones have. Apple doesn't make the batteries, they are normal everyday Li-Ion rechargable batteries.

No, it's both!

[swb]

No, I think it's both bad advertising and engineering.

From an engineering standpoint, I think Apple could have added a few extra cubic millimeters to the battery size (and overall size) without sacrificing anything in the overall design. This way they would have delivered a real-world 8 hours of battery life, could have advertised it and those 3 people that start it up and listen without skipping or any UI interaction would have gotten 15 hours.

I just don't see how an iPod 2mm deeper, longer and wider and whose space was devoted to extra LiI battery would somehow have destroyed the design or usability of the iPod.

Overall I've been really disappointed with my 3G iPod's battery life and no longer even bother bringing it places where charging it isn't easy. On one trip I listened for about 30 minutes on the plane, 15 minutes in the airport and it died the next day after about another 30 minutes. Yes, I was careful to put it to sleep when done and it came out of the charger the morning of my flight. A whopping 75 minutes of use. I'd willing trade even an extra cubic centimeter of size increase to get realistic usage times out of it.

Re:No, it's both!

[Kiryat Malachi]

I got a real world 8 hours at first with my 3G; this included skipping and UI interaction, although UI interaction was more or less just skip-skip-skip-back "I like this song". Now it's probably down to 2 or 3 hours, after 2 years.

The thing you're not thinking about is - even if they had added that extra space, right now you'd be getting 80 or 90 minutes instead of 75. The decline isn't some fixed amount of capacity per unit time; the decline is percentage of total capacity per unit time.

Re:No, it's both!

[Fred Ferrigno]

From an engineering standpoint, I think Apple could have added a few extra cubic millimeters to the battery size (and overall size) without sacrificing anything in the overall design. This way they would have delivered a real-world 8 hours of battery life, could have advertised it and those 3 people that start it up and listen without skipping or any UI interaction would have gotten 15 hours.

You've got it backwards. As happens with many such devices, they likely decided on a size of the battery that will give them approximately the right battery life long before they could possibly know it exactly. Then you build the device, test to see how long the battery actually lasts under "normal conditions", and put that number in your marketing. What you're really asking for is a more demanding definition of "normal conditions", which is frankly a marketing decision, not an engineering one.

Re:No, it's both!

[swb]

I agree and disagree. Somebody made several decisions impacting the battery -- making it nonremovable, the target run life, the maximum size of the device. Whether the decisions were made by "marketing" or not doesn't really make the device's overall power engineering poor.

Re:No, it's both!

[mdarksbane]

I'm so sick of this bullshit. Both of my G3's have fine battery life.

And whatever their initial position was, currently you can have apple replace the battery for free if you're still under warranty if it's life is as bad as everyone claims, or you can have a third party replace for it for the same cost as a removeable replacement battery would have been.

Lithium Ion batteries degrade, and there's no real way to make a removable one without making the device bigger. And the mini shows that yes, a lot of people *do* want something even smaller. My 40 gig is noticeably larger than my old 10 gig, and yes, it makes a difference, enough that adding even more onto that to increase battery life would make it too big to fit comfortably in a pocket.

If people's batteries are going down that quickly, why are they bitching about them on slashdot instead of calling apple and getting the replacement battery that apple has been willing to provide since the G2's were released.

Re:No, it's both!

[zippthorne]

Depth of discharge really reduces the cycle life (as defined by factor of 2 reduction in capacity) of batteries. (did you think these devices use 100% of the battery every time? that's a quick way to kill any battery of any chemistry.) One of my textbooks puts it at about 500 cycles for 80% discharge in a LiIon. (NiCds are about 10,000 for the same DoD, but they have other disadvantages such as low power density) On the other hand, lower depth of discharge can extend the cycle life. There is, of course, some variation depending on manufacturer.

It seems apple engineers choose a cycle life/DoD that would only last some users one year of normal use. Either they underrestimated how much these things would get used or they deliberately chose a higher DoD to give high play times at begining of life for marketing purposes, but having a very short 'useful life.' The first is a careless mistake, the second is clearly unethical.

Re:Lawsuits

[DWIM]

I dunno. I think iPod users are probably smart enough to know they have to recharge their batteries when they drain down. Don't know if I could say the same for GM customers, however...

$50?

[Gropo]

Thanks! $25 for an 850 mAh replacement battery, $25 for my trouble.

Sadly, the longevity on my 3rd gen began to severely degrade after 12 months. Biking from Manhattan home to Queens in cold weather this past winter would sometimes result in a dead battery 3 minutes from my door (25 minute ride!). On top of that, the longest continuous playback I ever enjoyed was approximately 5 1/2 hours. I'd say this class action applies to me.

Re:$50?

[IdahoEv]

It doesn't apply to me, sadly, because my iPod is a mini. But barely ten months after I got it, the battery only lasted ~25 minutes of play time and only showed 75% charge immediately after unplugging from a full charge.

I replaced it with a third-party 750mAh.

Re:$50?

[StevenHenderson]

Thanks! $25 for an 850 mAh replacement battery, $25 for my trouble.

Too bad you have to use the credit at an Apple store, not for 3rd party junk...

My Ipod Photo 60GB lasts like 3 hours

[bogie]

Yep you read that right. And there are a ton of people that have reported the same exact problem. Crappy battery life. If I didn't get it as a cheap upgrade(I did Freeip*ds.com) I would have returned it. Even worse are the Apple zealots who attack you because their Ipod works OK so of course it must be your fault that your Ipod lasts for 1/3 the time it supposed to. Oh and right out of the box I had to do a Restore because the Photo slide show didn't work right.

I know plently of people are happy with their Photo Ipods, but IMHO and the opinion of many others its a half-baked, buggy product. Battery life problems, Distortion issues, and problems right out of the box are things I see contasted reported about the Photo model.

But what about the firewire jack failing?

[laird]

I have a first generation iPod, and while the battery capacity was dropping, the real killer was that the contacts broke on the firewire jack. It's surface mounted, so it's impossible to repair, rendering the iPod useless, since it both charges and loads music through that jack.

Re:But what about the firewire jack failing?

[andfarm]

It is repairable. I've done so myself - it's a tricky bit of soldering, but by no means impossible.

Re:But what about the firewire jack failing?

[laird]

Really? The tiny, and completely unsupported wires broke that run between the board and the firewire jack. If I could find a jack that was physically identical, perhaps I could swap it in, but it looks pretty unique. Is there hope?

I have a solution

[khrtt]

We need to shoot everyone who has EVER participated IN ANY ROLE in a lawsuit, of his/her own will. Wait, that'd be too gross... Better yet, make lawsuits ILLEGAL!!

Neistat Brothers

[Ghettoceleb]

I like the way the Neistat brothers handled this. Check out "Ipods little secret" on neistat.com in the movies section.

I'm heading over to Wired News

[Chowser]

All day at /. I'm seeing headlines that were posted hours ago at Wired News. This one was listed at 12:30pm. It is worth waiting, however, for the nerdy commentary.

Re:Lawsuits

[northcat]

That wasn't even funny.

Class Action Deadlines - blurb is wrong

[ari_j]

I do not have time to RTFA before posting this, nor will I bother to read it because I do not own an iPod (yet). Also, I am going by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on this because I don't know the California rules, but they are almost certainly substantially the same.

It is important to realize that class action lawsuits are an opt-out affair, not opt-in. Even if they settle, it is up to the class action lawyers to give individual notice (publishing notice, even on Slashdot, does not suffice) of the pending action and the right to opt out (if that right exists, which it does in most class action lawsuits that you hear about) to every person in the class. You are a part of the class unless you opt out of it. The deadline is probably an opt-out deadline, not a claim deadline.

So if you want a part of the class action, then just sit back and enjoy the check when it arrives. You may have to confirm your address or something, but you aren't required to opt in.

If you instead want to opt out of this class and take your iPod battery problems up with Apple personally (perhaps because you feel the class will not adequately represent your similar claim), you need to opt out of the settlement class.

Re:Lawsuits

[cution]

At least you can replace the gas.

DAMN STRAIGHT!

[stinkpad]

If some asshole brings a lawsuit, SUE THE BASTARDS!

I know what I'd buy.

[douglips]

A mouse with two buttons.

Re:Lawsuits

[ad0gg]

A better analogy is if GM prevented replacement to the car the battery(ie: welded to the frame). So after 5 years, your car wouldn't started with no way to replace the battery. There's expectation for manufactors to provide servicable parts, if they want to neglect this expectation they need to clearly indicate at time of purhase(packaging) that this expected service is not available. If they put a nice label on the box that said "battery is not replacable", they would not be in this situation. Much like i could sell a car that didn't allow the oil to be changed if clearly I stated to the customer the fact.

Only in America

[jmichaelg]

Only in America do we:

• Have a video that documents the iPod was designed as a disposable item.
  
• Subsequently reward Apple with record sales and then
• Sue Apple for selling disposable iPods.

Nonetheless, Apple brought this suit upon themselves by refusing to design the iPod so the end user could easily replace the battery.

MOD PARENT UP!!!

[illumin8]

Thank the fucking lord for those pissy users and overzealous lawyers.

It's incredible to see the Slashdot doublespeak in such blatant terms... It's a lawsuit against Apple so it's bad... It's the evil lawyers taking down a poor helpless BIG CORPORATION that DEFRAUDED CONSUMERS... wait a minute... I'm conflicted... This is Slashdot so corporations are bad... but Apple is good... but corporations are bad... but Apple is good..... AAAAHHHHH!!!!

[throws self from top floor window of building]

ERROR: VALUE SYSTEM CONFLICT.... SELF TERMINATED.

Oh come on!

[AtOMiCNebula]

Let's be serious here. That article is dated March 29th, 2005. Those fast-charging batteries were only drawings on a whiteboard, or internal prototypes when 1st, 2nd, and 3rd generation iPods were around. That is brand new technology.

Reading the article even closer, the subject reveals they're still prepping the new battery, and that it's going to market some time next year. Yes, I'm sure that future devices will use Toshiba's new battery, but to say "Gosh! What was Apple thinking!?!?" is just plain silly. Did you happen to not read the article, or subject of the article?

Re:Oh come on!

[Guysmiley777]

All he was saying is that Apple should have built a time machine and gone into the future to obtain magical batteries that have 10MW/g energy density and recharge by breathing on them for 2 seconds.

That'd be awesome

no offense...

[KillShill]

but what kind of a moron would buy a device whose battery cannot be changed?

usually, devices that take exotic and proprietary batteries cost more in the long run due to the expensive nature of the power source (or having to replace the item in the first place because the vendor made sure most people couldn't replace the battery easily)

frankly, battery lock-in, like vendor lock-in is BAD.

plain AA/AAA batteries are the best way to go, even if you have to change them a little more often.

generic is my favorite brand as you no doubt have guessed.

brand loyalty is dead, long live brand loyalty.

Re:no offense...

[promantek]

you gotta be kidding. plain AA/AAA batteries are the WORST way to go.

First of all, they aren't rechargable which creates a steady flow of dead batteries polluting our environment.

Second, it ends up costing more money for your mp3 player because you have to constantly purchase more batteries.

you should get an mp3 player with an easily replacable, rechargable battery.

Oh, and about 4 million "morons" bought devices whose batteries cannot be changed, fyi.

Re:no offense...

[IdahoEv]

you gotta be kidding. plain AA/AAA batteries are the WORST way to go.

First of all, they aren't rechargable which creates a steady flow of dead batteries polluting our environment.


Um, I have a charger and a tall stack of rechargeable AA/AAA batteries I use for everything in my house like remotes, cordless mice, etc. And a plastic battery rack to store the charged batts. Don't you?

Second, it ends up costing more money for your mp3 player because you have to constantly purchase more batteries.

See above.

you should get an mp3 player with an easily replacable, rechargable battery.

Maybe. I do agree it would be nice to be able to pull the battery out of my mini and slap a spare fully-charged one in there. Sometimes I realize it's empty and I forgot to plug it in, so I have to go out for my run with no music because I can't wait an hour for it to charge.

But ... have you ever seen the inside of an iPod mini? If so you'd realize the thing would be a lot bigger if they had to fit big round AAAs in there. You'd need three AAAs to match the capacity of the new generation iPod mini battery (3.7 volts, 600mAh).

Oh, and about 4 million "morons" bought devices whose batteries cannot be changed, fyi.

Apparently, four million morons wanted them anyway. Believe it or not, the benefits of an integrated battery (simplicity, small size, avoiding the hassle of putting separate batteries in a charger and maybe losing them, etc.) are worth it to many. Most people waste money on alkaline batteries just because they hate the hassle of rechargeables ...

Besides, it's probably far more than 4 million, because most cellphones have integrated rechargeable batteries as well.

But I think if you WERE to do removeable batteries in such a device, they should be standard AA or AAA. Those are plentiful and cheap. Using a proprietary rechargeable would give you the hassle of removeables PLUS the hassle of a separate charger and expensive, proprietary batteries. I remember going through that with my first cellphone- it was a pain in the a$$.

Re:no offense...

[Warlock7]

The battery can easily be changed, this is the problem with the general public buying devices that are beyond them. If you don't have a little door that you can push open with your thumb, then you obviously can't replace the battery. If there is no diagram to show you which direction to put the new battery back in, then there must be no way to replace it.

There is no "battery lock-in". These are not proprietary batteries either. Please limit your comments to something you actually know about or have experience with.

The average consumer is a moron and probably shouldn't be allowed to own a "complex" device without simple pictures to show them how to do such complex things as opening a case and replacing a battery that is as simple to replace as it is to replace a battery in a cordless phone.

If you didn't know how to swim, then you shouldn't have gone in the water in the first place!

Re:no offense...

[Warlock7]

Too true.

Re:no offense...

[KillShill]

then why are so many people complaining?

i've heard many people say that the batteries cannot be easily replaced... why would anyone send it back to apple just to replace a battery then? why even have that option?

makes me wonder just what the heck is going on.

personally, no battery is worth 50 bucks, unless it's a "new(clear)" one.

yes i do enjoy inexpensive devices and power.

Re:no offense...

[Warlock7]

Why would a person go to a car dealership for service on a battery in their car? Because they aren't educated how to do it and many don't care to know how to do it.

Most people don't, however, sue the car manufacturer when they leave their lights on and run down the battery. They tend to call a tow truck or the dealership to send someone out to fix the problem that they caused.

The most difficult part of replacing the battery in an iPod is getting the cover open. Then it's as simple as replacing the battery in a cordless phone.

Does this or this seem dfficult to any /. reader? Higher quality here and here. This is the instructons for the 1G iPods and there are full simple instructions for 2G and 3G iPods too. More examples of how-to instructions can be found here too.

Watch the video and read the PDF and tell me what you think then.

Re:no offense...

[KillShill]

yeah seems pretty easy from the video and instructions...

guess most people who buy one wouldn't know the logic board from the battery, or even realize it can be taken apart.

Re:no offense...

[Warlock7]

This is the thing. Without that little slider with the arrow on it and one of those insipid little diagrams to show them which way the batteries go most people think that it's magic to begin with. A bunch of FUDsters have convinced people that there is no way to replace the battery in an iPod or that it it far too difficult for the average consumer. Which, of course, is a giant steaming pile of... well you know.

I'm sure glad...

[callipygian-showsyst]

I'm sure glad that my sampod has SCREWS! Easy to get to the battery. (And it plays Vorbis, WMA, and MP3.)

My G2 iPod 20 GB gets about 1 hour, and the headset connector is all crackly. (To compare, my 1984 Sony FM Walkman still works fine.)

Class Action Lawsuits are great for consumers. Even if all you get is a low-value gift certificate. It keeps Greedy Companies from overstepping their bounds.

Re:I'm sure glad...

[inkswamp]

I have a hard time taking your opinion seriously when you have drivel like this posted at your site:

Maybe Apple's AAC sounds fine if you listen to hip-hop "music" with nothing but "thump thump" and "sss sss" (not to mention disgusting lyrics about drugs, prostitutes, and violence).

Nothing personal, but it just sounds like you set out to hate the iPod from the start and you're going to throw every lump of shit you can find at it regardless of relevance. I looked at lots of mp3 players and the iPod had lots of advantages--the design (how it works not necessarily how it looks), how it sounded (great to my ears), its seamless integration with iTunes and the amazing number of accessories available for it (the iTrip makes it worth the price alone.) I decided in the end that all this made the iPod a great value, regardless of the situation with the battery (which I agree is a flaw and hopefully Apple will rectify it in the future.)

Besides, if the battery lasts a few years (which it reasonably should) it will have outlived its life with most consumers anyway so I don't think it's something most people really care about.

But I know you won't hear most of this out. You can write most people off with this kind of thing (also from your site):

If you're some kid that listens to noise instead of music, and you think that overpriced overhyped products are "cool", get an iPod.

I'm not a kid. I listen to music not noise. I don't think the iPod is overpriced or overhyped. I don't buy things for the "cool" factor. I also bought an iPod. I know others who are the same.

Your opinion should be expressed with a more adult tone. As it is, you sound exactly like the bonehead "kid" you try to decry.

Re:I'm sure glad...

[GaryPatterson]

Nice site. Shame it's full of outright distortions.

"I used to use an iPod but abandoned it for several reasons, the most important of which were lack of choice, and thier proprietary "AAC" file format."

AAC is open format. It's mp4. Apple's DRM can be added to it, but that's only for AAC files from Apple's online store.

And you onmit the fact that the iPod plays mp3s, by far the most common format for music at this moment.

"More important is the support for WMA files, which to my trained musical ears sounds better"

Personal opinion without any sort of analysis. That's not an issue though, as you effectively point out that it's an opinion.

"Maybe Apple's AAC sounds fine if you listen to hip-hop "music" with nothing but "thump thump" and "sss sss""

Okay, now you're degenerating into open ridicule that effectively means nothing. I bought my fiancee and iPod that now forms the basis of her stereo system. It plays pretty much all sorts of music, from classical to jazz to rock and pop. With reasonable bitrate mp3 files (ie 160kbps or higher) it sounds very good. This is my opinion of course, but it's as valid as yours.

"(not to mention disgusting lyrics about drugs, prostitutes, and violence)"

This is worthless and insulting, unless you can point out the feature on your portable player that stops you listening to music like this. The music people play is a personal preference. I don't like rap, but that doesn't make it wrong for others or meaningless. This point is utterly irrelevant, and you're just slinging mud here.

"But people who like to listen to music find AAC's artifacts annoying. WMA tends to work better for serious music."

You're confusing your opinion with fact here. Where are your objective tests to show these artefacts? I know that compression schemes introduce them, but your opinion is no more valid thanm mine here, and I say that the iPod handles music extremely well. Where's the data to back your point?

"Other interesting built-in features are a photo album, ability to connect directly to a digital camera for off-loading pictures, and an audio recorder with built-in microphone (!) and line-in jacks. I've used the line-in jacks to record 5 hours of Sirius radio onto the device so I'd have something to listen to on a cross-country flight."

The iPod Photo (of course) has the photo album, but the ability to import photos to the iPod without requiring an add-on device is something Apple failed in. This is definitely a point in favour of your player.

Recording directly into the unit is a great idea too.

"As you can see, it's a bit smaller (skinnier) than an iPod, and has a much nicer illuminated color display."

You gorgot to mention that your new player is being compared to a very old iPod. The iPod Photo is slimmer than your player, and also has a colour screen.

"It comes bundled with some "Napster" software that I wasn't interested in. However, I did eventually installl the "driver" (not sure what it did, because it worked without it), and I flashed the firmware with the latest version from the Samsung website. The new firmware provided for the completely open and free OGG format, another advantage over Apple."

Driver? Why does it need one?

OGG? That's nice enough, but outside of a very small group on Slashdot, I just haven't seen anyone asking for it.

"If you're some kid that listens to noise instead of music, and you think that overpriced overhyped products are "cool", get an iPod. "

You just couldn't resist this snide comment, could you? It's worthless, and utterly subjective. You want to distance yourself from the 'cool' group you seem to hate? That's nice. Why don't you justify yourself without reference to them then?

"However, if you like to listen to serious music, want a choice of music vendors and file formats, and want something that works with Microsoft Windows without installing some weird "iTunes" software, consider one of the S

Re:I'm sure glad...

[goMac2500]

That review you linked to is possibly the worst, mis-informed article ever. If AAC is so proprietary, why does RealPlayer use it? How come I can play it on my Palm?

Re:Lawsuits

[KillShill]

too bad that gasoline cannot be recharged... then your analogy would make sense to people above the age of 7.

note: no offense to people age 7 and younger.

Ridiculous?

[sglider]

you can buy a new replacement battery for the iPod from any number of vendors very cheaply and easily, or even have Apple replace it for you if you want.

You can't buy a 'replacement' battery, you can only buy an extra battery that hooks up through the data port. The whole basis of the lawsuit (and the settlement) is the fact that you can't replace the battery on an iPod.

Re:Ridiculous?

[MoneyT]

Yes you can buy a replacement:

http://www.ipodbatteryfaq.com/#2

Re:Lawsuits

[toddestan]

The problem with laptop batteries is that they tend to get hot, and that really hurts the battery life. That, and people leaving the laptop plugged in most of the time, and running the battery completely down when they do use it.

Not to say that IBM didn't release a few lemons though.

Re:uhhh welcome to the electronics game folkes.

[toddestan]

The big difference is that just about every other electronic gadget you can buy is designed to have the battery replaced. If Apple is going to seal the battery in a $400 iPod, it better be a damn good battery that lives up to what Apple says it will.

Doesn't work? Sue 'em!

[Mechcozmo]

Hey, this piece of paper here that I scribbled on and then tried to erase didn't look like new after I had supposedly ERASED the markings on it. I filed a lawsuit against the eraser company... waiting for a reply.

Essentially, people got pissed at Apple because it broke and they didn't figure out what to do. My 1st Generation 5 GB iPod lasted over 10 hours when playing songs. That's pretty good for something that old. I treat my stuff nicely. If you treat your stuff like shit, it will treat you like shit. It happens. (Shit)

what about 4G?

[weighn]

yay, I'm outside the US too and my 4G iPod battery gets let than 8 hours (its not even 4 months old).

That's a significant bit less than the battery life I was led to expect by Apple.

My hope is to wait until a few weeks before the warranty period ends and claim a new one - the battery is covered in the warranty, right?

I don't think they stock those...

[weighn]

...and if they did, they would cost more than $50.
Fuck, look what the socks are worth!

Possible solutions for increasing battery life...

[Hubertus_BigenD]

-Use tracks that are encoded in aac at 192Kbs. or less.
-You should occasionally format you're iPod.(I read a post on iPodlounge's forum, about a guy who owned a second generation iPod. He had major battery life problems until he formatted and reloaded his music collection. He went from something like 1 1/2 hours back up to 4 hours.)

I wonder how many of these people left their iPod's in the car on hot summer days. I wonder how many of these people used 320 Kbs mp3's.

While I don't deny some of these people's claims are legitimate. I question how the majority of these people treated their iPods which has as much to do with their lifespan as apple design choices.

My first gen iPod lasts for about 30 minutes...

[doormat]

on one charge. All the charge cycling I've tried doesnt work. I just want my battery replaced for free. How bout it apple?

walkmans

[5plicer]

'battery failure' is when 'the capacity of an iPod's battery to hold an electrical charge has dropped to four hours or less of continuous audio playback, with earbuds attached, with respect to the Third Generation iPod, or five hours or less of continuous audio playback, with earbuds attached, with respect to the First Generation iPod and the Second Generation iPod.'

Remember how long Walkmans used to last on rechargeable (NiCad) batteries? 4-5 hours seems pretty decent to me...

Good rechargeable AA batteries are here

[Urusai]

Why the heck do manufacturers insist upon these funky wafer-card proprietary batteries instead of giving us the standard 2 AA/AAA slots so I can use either regular batteries or commonly-available rechargeable NiMH-type batteries? Is it purely form-factor, or is it insidious planned obsolescence?

Re:Good rechargeable AA batteries are here

[gartogg]

While I would love to agree with the sentiment, having taken a bit of time discussing the issue with a friend who is a EE, I have to say that there are valid reasons for doing just this.

The space taken up by the battery bay is not insignificant, especially with something the size of an iPod. Also, the amount of power being used isn't always a good match, so there is the added cost/size (With an iPod, presumably just size) of the electronics to convert the power to a more usable form. Also, imagine the complaints if it happened to need, say, 6 AA batteries; built in rechargables is a much better solution.

Basically, there is frequently a good reason for this stuff you hate, whithout having researched it.

Of course, you could always sue.

Lawyers don't listen to music?

[zippthorne]

Soulless doesn't mean they can't have soul.

Re:This needs clarification

[ari_j]

Thanks for the clarification. Will the settlement class be binding on those who do not file a claim?

IAALS, and I agree entirely with your postscript. I tried to post elsewhere on this story pointing out that you personally, just for example, will likely not see more than 5 digits of the 7-digit lawyers' portion of the settlement.

Ohm's Law and power

[goombah99]

lower ohms = lower resistance = less power

No! No! No! No!

Remember Ohm's law: V= IR

voltage equals current times resistance.

and power is voltage * current.

so power = voltage*voltage/resistance

So for a given rms voltage level, the lower the resistance the greater the power dissipated.

Of course that's not the end of the story. One could always simply raise the voltages on the higher impedance headphones and thereby equalize the power. But for battery powered gizmhos the maximum voltage is slightly costly to produce since voltage multiplication of the battery voltage invariably has higher losses. Conversely one does not want to go to too low of a voltage either since one looses two ways there: first the fixed 0.7v diode drops across transistors become significant and second because ohmic losses in transformers and wires go up as the current goes up.

So there really is not strict relationship between resistance, power and goodness.

Re:Teach 'em

[mmusson]

How dare Apple use a rechargable battery that doesn't last a life time, that is not user replaceable. The implication is that Apple specifically designed the battery not to be replaceable so that people were forced to buy new iPods, which increases Apple revenue.

Outcry from that forced Apple to offer the $90 replacement battery. However this price is still excessive which leads one to wonder if they are still ultimately hoping that customers will buy a new iPod to get the neat new features versus plunking down $90 more for an old iPod that isn't even covered under warranty any more.

awww comon!

[krunk4ever]

Even when microsoft lost their case, they gave money (vouchers) that you can redeem on any computer software/hardware you purchase. Apple's giving $50GC to their own store forcing you to continue supporting Apple products. Even Microsoft wasn't as croocked as that forcing you to buy more Microsoft products.

Re:awww comon!

[Warlock7]

You can get a check for $25 if you so desire. Nobody is forcing you to do anything. RTFA

Non USA Residents Need NOT apply

[nighty5]

There is a world outside of the United States however it seems that this lawsuit is only applicable to residents within the US - how suprising.

I bought a 3G ipod and its screwed, i'd be lucky to get 40 minutes out of it, just barely enough for a gym workout - useless.

Ended up buying a replacement from some ipod replacement dot com site or some BS and internationally delivered with instructions for about $AUS80....

Thanks Apple for:
NOT looking after international customers
NOT admitting responsibility or liability.

I see where you're coming from

[goldcd]

but I disagree. I got a 3rd generation and had nothing but trouble. Almost from the first day it randomly decided to lock up. One of the things I wanted it for was on long car journeys, first trip I took up the country it locked up on me. Contacted Apple and was told just to let the battery discharge (which took so long it was still waiting discharging for the trip back down) - no music for me. Battery was also bad from the start and got worse - although new firmware helped a bit with the random lockups. After 9 months I'd had enough, and apple replaced it for me (and I must say their customer service was excellent).
The replacement didn't lock up, but the battery life got worse and worse. It wasn't just the play time, the annoying thing was it went flat when it was turned off (and yes I did turn off the clock and power it off properly). If I went away by train overnight I had to take the charger as the next morning it would have to be fed again.
The thing that really annoys me is that I feel Apple sold me an ipod for £400 (~$750) that would last 12 months. I'm used to 12 month guarantees on stuff - but you normally expect them to last a bit longer. iPods just seem to continuously die and when you buy one you just get your 12 months life support.

Re:I see where you're coming from

[Tony Hoyle]

Mine does that. If it isn't continuously plugged into power it eventually goes flat, which means it's not useful if I'm not around the computer for long.

They drain battery whilst switched off, and because it's nonremovable you can't just pop it out to conserve it, which means I'm looking at a brick in 18 months or less because it has to be charged every day, even though I probably listen to it for maybe a couple of hours a week.

Because the iPod is well known.

[Shivetya]

the first rule of class action lawsuits is you hit something that is popular. This does two things. First it insures that jurors will know something about what your talking about. Second and most importantly these same jurors are bound to remember even the most bull ridden rumor about the same and recall it as near fact.

The iPod is making big money for Apple and there are enough Apple haters to make any lawyer salivate over the prospects of a good payoff without a lot of work.

On a side note, I have a less than 2 month old iPod that has NEVER managed to last to its "advertised" battery life. The most I have ever gotten is 7 hours and I use massive playlists.

Re:Good.

[Steve Cowan]

Where do you get the ideao that Li-ion batteries have memory effect? In fact they exhibit memory effect even less than NiMH, and NiMH batteries must be much bigger to have the same amp-hour rating. This is why most major current-guzzling consumer electronic devices like laptops, wireless phones, video cameras and MP3 players use Li-Ion (or its more svelte cousin, Li-polymer).

Re:what about the iPod Mini?

[scharkalvin]

The second generation Ipod Mini has an improved chipset that uses much less power. It's batteries will last abot 50% longer. That's what you get for being the first on the block to run out and buy something.

The Ipod Mini is very easy to open up and replace the battery (in comparison to the full size Ipod). You can find instructions on the web, as well as replacement batteries that have 50% - 100% the capacity of the factory original ones.

Frivilous lawsuit for the ignorant masses.

[Warlock7]

The battery can easily be changed, this is the problem with the general public buying devices that are beyond them. If you don't have a little door that you can push open with your thumb, then you obviously can't replace the battery. If there is no diagram to show you which direction to put the new battery back in, then there must be no way to replace it.

These are not proprietary batteries.

The average consumer is a moron and probably shouldn't be allowed to own a "complex" device which doesn't provide them with simple pictures to show them how to perform such difficult tasks as opening a case and replacing a battery that is as simple to replace as it is to replace a battery in a cordless phone.

If you didn't know how to swim, then you shouldn't have gone in the water in the first place!

Re:Frivilous lawsuit for the ignorant masses.

[slim]

The average consumer is a moron and probably shouldn't be allowed to own a "complex" device which doesn't provide them with simple pictures to show them how to perform such difficult tasks as opening a case and replacing a battery that is as simple to replace as it is to replace a battery in a cordless phone.

If you didn't know how to swim, then you shouldn't have gone in the water in the first place!

You're as mad as a hatter -- or a troll.

An iPod is not marketed as a device for geeks. It's actively advertised as something non-technical for everyone.

How many iPod purchases are replacements?

[peter303]

Since Apples "dirty little secret" (however long-known in the electronics press) was the iPod's half-life was about 18 months, I wonder how many sales are replacements by early-adopters. I recall some people turning livid when they found they had to fork over $185 for some sanctioned repair shop to replace the battery (since then fallen below $100).

MOD PARENT UP!

[Luscious868]

For the love of god, we get some acurate information posted on Slashdot and what happens? Nothing ...

Re:Teach 'em

[Overzeetop]

Hey, its an AC post, but I'm surprised it isn't at least "Funny." Apple made a classic misstep here. Given they're track record - and marketing - of being a consumer friendly organization, it is pretty funny.

What about us who bought one after May 31, 2004?

[linicks]

I received an 3G iPod for my birthday that was bought in June 2004. I've recently taken the iPod on a trip across the country, and it did not last the 4 hour plane ride. I guess I'm screwed because a store sold the wrong model?

What are the chances ...

[FlunkedFlank]

... that 5G iPod has a replaceable battery? Seems like the could figure out a way to engineer it without taking away too much from the slick form factor.

....with earbuds attached.

[amberp]

...and how else can you perform the basic function (of listening music) with the iPod ?

Re:Possible solutions for increasing battery life.

[Warlock7]

Strange, I've kept my first generation iPod playing for about ten hours at a time by making sure that I didn't recharge it until I had completely run the battery down before plugging it back in...

great :-/

[Some_Llama]

I got my Ipod last Christmas and it seems to have the same problem, I just went on a trip to my mother in laws which is 2 hours both ways and the battery was dead 30 minutes before returning home (only used it during the travel time not while at my mother in laws)

I guess i'm just screwed then?

Re:try learning a bit about class action law...

[BitGeek]

Actually my statements are correct.

Sure, if you know about the suit, you can opt out. But most people involved in class actions don't even know they've been declared part of the class.

They never hear about it, and their option to opt out expires after 30, 60 or 90 days or whatever.

I once got a notification that said I could opt out by showing myself in front of the judge and declaring myself to not be part of the class... course I got this notification 2 weeks after the date by which I would have had to opt out.

The "opt out" option is irrelevant-- I should not have to take action to protect my rights-- thats what rights are.

Re:Lawsuits

[geistklr]

Problem is, that when GM claims that they've created the perpetual motion machine and they sell it as a perpetual motion machine, then it better be a perpetual motion machine or they're misrepresenting their product. If Apple misrepresented the claims of its product to its customers, then further exploited those customers by suggesting that they need to buy a new freaking $300 ipod to replace a $50 component, then the lawyers representing the defendants in this action are serving an important role in the economy - which is to provide proper checks on business. Caveat emptor to the extent that information is symmetric.

ipod settlement claim website!

[yincrash]

right here!

Why R they refunding the battery replacement fee?

[celerityfm]

(damn short subjects)--

If this was about the battery not being removeable and Apple telling people to buy new iPods then why are people who DID get their battery replaced under the new Apple battery replacement plan able to get their money refunded? Read the claim form, people who paid Apple to replace their battery are getting half of their money back. This seems to indicate that there was something fundamentally wrong with the battery, that it shouldn't have needed to be replaced when it did and therefore consumers shouldn't have had to pay to have it replaced. Also it pokes a big hole in your argument.

In light of this I still don't understand what happened here. Anyone else care to take a stab at what is going on here?

My iRiver H10 can beat up your iPod.

[Chewbacon]

Yeah.

they didn't say that either

[Scudsucker]

it's reasonable to say "the device lasts 8 hours on a battery"

They didn't say that either. They said lasts up to 8 hours on a charge, a different story. One used by everyone else who makes a device with a rechargable battery, so I still don't see how they have a case.