Slashdot Mirror
iPod nano Owners In Screen Scratch Trauma
wellington map writes "TheRegister reports iPod nano users have discovered that it is unbelievably easy to scratch the screen, which quickly makes the colour screen all but useless for viewing album art and photos stored on the machine. Apple's discussion forums are already host to hundreds of threads on this topic."
Always wait until the second generation to buy from Apple. This has been true for years, and it is apparently continuing. iPod nano 2.0 will cost less, have more space, and probably a better screen.
:)
:)
It hardly ever pays to be an early adopter. Let other people work out the bugs, then enjoy the fruits of their labor
(Posted from a Rev. 2 15" Powerbook G4
My other car is first.
You'd think with all Apple's advertising resources, they'd have had "Tim from marketing" put it in his pocket for a day just to test it.
Obviously not. It does seem something of an oversight to launch the product way before the covers and cases are available too. I wonder how long it'll be before we see a 2G nano with modified screen coating...
You wonder how much real life testing these things get away from a lab if the screens scratch within seconds and no-one has noticed. I would at least of hoped they would have got testers out and using them in the real world.
My IPod 30gb Color, also scratches very easily screen. Screen, case, you name it. That's why the ipod case business is so large!
Showm me photo before I believe the screen becomes useless. And it WILL scratch. It's a device that you use constantly in not-very-friendly enviroment. Last I checked, the purpose of exteriors is to protect the interiors, and that means some damage.
Oh, yes, iPod is for looking at, not for listening to, I forgot...
One that hath name thou can not otter
It scratches... but not from just being put into my pocket. They're making a mountain out of a hill. (not an ant hill... it is a problem) Buy a case. Simple!
http://www.sandstorming.com
Don't forget that $100 profit has to cover:
* Packaging
* Shipping
* Retail margin
And hope to recover the costs of:
* Advertising
* R & D
/* FUCK - The F-word is here so that you can grep for it */
This thing is tiny, and is clearly designed to be put in a pocket (only geeks clip gadgets to their belt). If you put it in your pocket, the screen quickly becomes scratched to the point where it's unreadable. How is that acceptable? Should the letters on your keyboard wear off the first time you type with sweaty hands, too?
Hmm. I have noticed threads in the past discussing similar failure modes with other Apple products: PowerBook paint chips, PowerBook palm stains, PowerBook warping, iBooks getting dirty, iPod battery life, mouse ergonomics. Perhaps with the emphasis on industrial design, Apple has given real-lift usability testing a back seat.
In their software, too, there are similar issues. For the most part, OS X is an ingenious, very user-friendly operating system, arguably the best implementation out there of a desktop Unix. But there are some rough edges. For instance, keyboard navigation is incomplete and inconsistent across applications (e.g. Cocoa vs Carbon). Perhaps Apple would have noticed that issue in usability testing if they had included more keyboard navigation users, and specifically, people who spent much time doing keyboard navigation in Windows.
Really, I would like to see Apple succeed, but to do that, they may need to focus more on the usability and reliability of their products.
Washington, DC: It's like Hollywood for ugly people.
All this bitching is useless. Protect your investment.
Feh.
Does Apple test their products...
Absolutely, they have a team of hardcore fans who are willing to pay for the privilege of QAing their products for them.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
I've been an owner of a 3rd-Gen 10GB iPod for over 2 years and my iPods screen doesn't have any scratches. Why? because my iPod spends almost every second if its existence in a leather case with a clear vinyl/plastic covering for the screen.
I only remove the iPod from this protection when it is in the dock for syncing/charging. And I remove it slowly.
The back of my iPod's leather case has a sturdy, metal belt clip woven inside, allowing me to hook it into a a pocket (the device outside the pocket) while I walk/do work.
I don't know about others, but when I spend more than $100 on something, I do everything in my power to protect it. I don't ever operate my iPod "naked" and would never consider just dropping the bare device in a pocket knowing that the simple motion of walking can grind your pocket lining against your screen with the pressure of your pant's fit and body heat to exacerbate scratching.
Blame Apple for the "1,000 Songs in your Pocket" slogan. Blame Steve Jobs for pulling an iPod nano out of his pocket. Blame Apple for not having nano tubes ready on launch day. But blame yourself if you don't make every effort of prevention.
Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
i think one key element of iPods is that they work with Macs. remember at first there was just 3rd party software to get PC users the ability to load songs on an iPod. Apple never intended the iPod to be such a cross platform hit. i realize a ton of PC users now buy iPods, but before the iPod (and even today) there is nothing for the Mac that comes close to the iPod in terms of software to load songs from your desktop/portable. yes, most people just load songs once and don't care, but with podcasting, to do lists and whatever else, people are more prone to sync their digital music players than they may have been in the beginning. really, if somebody made a good MP3 player that had Mac support, it's quite possible Apple would have never bothered making the iPod in the first place. kind of funny when you look at it that way.
yeah, there are ways to jam songs on some other MP3 players, but it's a pain. why should a Mac user support a company that does not support them? Linux users are used to having to hack a lot of things and make them work, but when there is a Mac friendly solution ready out of the box it makes sense.
all companies make profits. that $90 cost to manufacture was a guess, the real numbers will be in the next quarterly earnings report.
Have you seen the texture of those lowriding, skater-dude, fat pant jeans? They're like 100 grit sandpaper! Put a diamond-tipped saw blade in the pocket of those jeans and it too would be scratched.
The concept that you don't want to piss your customers off with such an obvious flaw is a very rudimentary one in the business world. Flaws such as that are found with the most basic of testing. Given Apple's problems with class action lawsuits in the past, one would believe that they would be taking care of obvious blunders such as this and put more effort into engineering their iPods thoroughly.
There are other music players out there, ya know.
Right you are, and when it becomes very well known that the iPod Nano scratches this badly, many other people are going to be aware of this as well.
Personally, I don't care if my iPod gets scratched. It's a music player, not a mirror in the Hubble space telescope or something.
The market will very likely not share your apologizing view, which is why so many people find it amazing that Apple could screw something like this up. You should take a look at some of the pictures going around. This isn't a matter the screen not being imune to scratches, it's about displays that are barely readable after a month of carrying around in a pocket.
I'll add that I've been a big Apple fan for a while. However, it's discouraging to see these obvious flaws pop up in Apple's work when I think about how badly I'd like to buy a Yonah Powerbook next year. Something like this isn't excusable from an engineering perspective even if its first generation.
When they sell them, I don't think they put a warning on the box saying 'gets horribly scratched just by using it normally'.
Something like that is clearly a faulty product. An mp3 player which can't even sit in your pocket without being damaged isn't much use. Like car tyres which burst on contact with tarmac.
Personally, I don't care if my iPod gets scratched. It's a music player, not a mirror in the Hubble space telescope or something. As long as it plays music, it works for me.
I thought the whole POINT of an ipod over cheaper and more functional devices was its appearance? If its scratched to fuck or you have to put it in an ugly case, surely that defeats the object?
Hello fat spoilt piglets !
Your latest overpriced gadget from Apple can have scratches on it's screen !!!
Oh no !! Life is so hard for all you people with more money than sense...
I have never figured out why owners of Apple products refuse to hold Apple to a high standard across the board.
If Apple does some things right (and they certainly have in the past), good. They should be credited for this. What I don't understand is why people get unbelivably defensive whenever someone points out a flaw in Apple's products. I've skimmed the Apple forums involved, and all I can say is that the end user doesn't really care about the physics involved. All he cares about is that if he buys one of the earlier iPods, his product continues to look nice. If he buys a Nano, however, it looks like shit in short order. I think that it's *perfectly* reasonable for someone that buys such a product to be able to air criticism on those grounds.
You can argue that the scratches aren't so bad, that you don't need the screen, that people should "take better care of their product" (why they didn't need to with earlier products, though, is an interesting question), but it comes down to the fact that some folks are not happy with their experience. End of a story. Customer happiness is all that matters at the end of the day.
So now Apple can take a look at seeing what it can do to fix the problem. I doubt that it's so difficult to fix, given that they managed to do earlier iPods successfully, so I don't think that the iPod Nano can't be successfully fixed by Apple. So sit back and wait for them to churn out a fix.
The Register also referenced the Cube, which was a good point. The Cube had a case that often looked damaged, even straight from the factory. Apple's response was apparently to claim that the cracks were actually some sort of non-serious molding defect, IIRC, and a lot of Apple fans poured out and started accusing anyone that expressed unhappiness with their product. You don't win customers by acting like that. You tend to piss people off. All that the customer cares about is that his new, shiny product, which he bought to look new and shiny, does not, in fact, look new and shiny. Start dancing around the issue, and you start losing repeat customers. You can't keep a company running in the long term by simply attacking anyone that is unhappy with their experience.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Very true. But if the sales are more than 0.5% lower than their potential because of using cheap materials (assuming a $0.50 solution to the problem and $100 profit margin), Apple will take longer to recoup their costs. Advertising and R&D are sunk costs, and Apple needs to consider their total profits (profit margin x units sold) in order to recoup them.
Don't forget that $100 profit has to cover:
* Packaging
* Shipping
* Retail margin
And hope to recover the costs of:
* Advertising
* R & D
I could be wrong, but isn't profit the money a business gets AFTER costs such as these are considered?
The cool solution, which Apple probably now has to use to get their reputation back, is sapphire. That's what scratch-resistant high-end watches use. Put an 0.15mm sapphire layer on top of the polycarbonate, and you can dump the thing in with your keys without worrying. It's not that expensive for a phone or music player sized screen. Some of Nokia's high-end phones have a sapphire screen.
Of course, doing it right might cut into those 40% profit margins at Apple.
Hey,
I looked at a Nano at Best Buy. I understand the point of producing a quality product from the start, but what what buying a screen protector for it? Get one for a Palm Pilot, cut it to fit, and put it on the screen. I put one on my BlackBerry, even though it's not a touch screen device, just to make sure the screen stays nice.
Just a thought.
-m
http://www.invisik.com
You could always try using some very fine sandpaper to even out the surface.
Of course, if you fuck up and damage your iPod Nano even more by doing so, it is neither my fault nor Apple's. Sometimes one must take responsibility for damage caused by their own negligence. And get a cover for it, so it doesn't get scraped by your keys in the future.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
OK, I agree that it is a frustrating thing that every item, from pet rocks to drag-line shovels have flaws when new and, once purchased, get more flaws as they are handled, but somehow through the process of growing up (which I did way too long ago), I quit stressing over it.
Most of the folks who've chimed in with the ancient history of the Cube hairlines are the same folks who gripe about a hairline scratch nobody else notices on their car. They just have a slightly stronger obsession with perfection, no matter how many times science proves the inability of humans to produce perfection (yes, even Steve).
These folks are the TRUE AppleFanBoys. They think that Apple is so perfect that Apple can create perfect products. Me, I've gotten enough eMacs and iMacs that were DOA that I know better. Thing is, I realize that every computer manufacturer has DOAs to a point and, unless it goes beyond a empirically-measured statistical point, it is not unusual. Many of the folks griping about the screens on the Nano are the same folks who believe that there should be no DOAs.
Problem is, most of these folks are just the type to gripe about their iPod getting scratched and funky-smelling on a spelunking trip whereupon they dropped it down a slope of 15 yards of solid rock and then into a 3 foot accumulation of guano. Then they claim they carried it in a lamb's wool pocket equipped with some sort of alien-developed deflector system and air-ride suspension (and their friends are pretty sure of where the funky smell comes from).
Has anybody stopped to think why 3M and others make money on consumer screen-protection films for PDAs, cell phones, and other everyday-duty plastic screens? Scratched everyday-use screens are not a new occurrence.
And exactly what are these folks with only a gum wrapper in their pocket REALLY doing to scratch the screens? Although some of them are telling what they believe to be the truth (and may have forgotten that stray piece of agate they popped in their pocket), I'd bet most of them are making up their situations. The Nanos at the Apple Store I visit don't seem to get scratched badly and they are handled rather roughly (esp. by children), slid around face-down, and even intentionally gouged, but they don't look as bad as some of these folks iPods. And no, the units aren't being swapped out with new ones often enough to make a difference.
I give up, maybe I just need to quit trying to act my age. Never mind the important things to focus on, like my country's lousy economy as of the past couple of years or even those folks who've just been bulldozed by two hurricanes, I think I'll gripe about my chewing gum losing its flavor on the bedpost overnight.
I'm looking forward to the Rolex(tm) Edition iPod nano, with 10k gold-plated clickwheel, obsidian faceplate, and quartz lens (the back will probably be polished titanium). It'll weigh about 2-3 times what the nano does now, and cost ten times as much, but it won't scratch.
Seriously, guys. It's a cheap gadget. It's a REALLY cheap gadget. Last time I checked, you couldn't BUY removable flash memory for the same $/GB as the 4GB nano. Unless you're in the Vertu (fancy-schmancy cellphones) crowd, just expect that an uber-cool gadget that you can afford might have a few flaws. It's still a good value on the grounds of functionality. If you want a super-flashy fashion statement, either wait for another vendor to copy what Apple has done, or protect what you have a little better.
--Jasin Natael
True science means that when you re-evaluate the evidence, you re-evaluate your faith.
It doesn't take a genius to go buy a Palm or PocketPC screen protecter, cut to size, and put over your iPod's screen.
This is supposed to be "News for Nerds"... you'd think more "nerds" would have figured this out by now.
I don't even own an iPod, and even I thought of this. (I *do* have a PDA, though.)
"Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
Where is 2000 and NT? Ya missed those, otherwise dead on.
Another example is the "battery life" issue. People complain that some powerbooks experience unexplained battery problems. Is this at-all unique to powerbooks? Are you seriously telling me that no one has experienced battery problems with Dell, Sony, HP, or IBM laptops? Cell phones? PDAs? Or that no other computer manufacturers have sold systems with defective motherboards or video cards? Other OS vendors haven't shipped operating systems with security holes or usability bugs?
Really, this happens all the time. I'm not saying, "shut up and take it". I'm not saying Apple products are perfect, and no one should ever complain. However, when someone asks, "Why do Apple customers stand for defective products?" the answer is, "For the same reason Dell, IBM, HP, Toshiba, and Creative customers do." No one is making perfect devices which never break or scratch or suffer from defects. You just hear more about the chipped paint on Powerbooks because Apple customers are more likely to freak out if they have a little chipped paint on their laptop.
The real reason is that after decades of Mac users being told Apple is dying, Apple is now a darling among consumers and in the press. Whenever an article is written about some Apple flaw, it's written in a way that implies Apple is facing impending disaster, just like this article which claims there will be vast lines of returns of the nano and that "so much is riding" on its success.
Just like how every single freakin' MP3 player is touted with a headline, "Is this the iPod killer?" It's like the press is obsessed with everying "killing" off something of Apple's. I guess that happens when the industry relies on Microsoft everything.
"Sufferin' succotash."
No. The big draw of syncing with iTunes is letting it choose which songs to copy based on playlist, rating, etc. For example, you can tell it to take songs from the "80's music but not new age or heavy metal", pick higher rated ones more often, use up X% of the space on the Shuffle, and not pick any of the same songs it picked last time. That isn't even close to what Unison does.
The real way you would do this sort of thing with a non-iPod music player would be to highlight the songs you want (e.g. "select all" in a playlist, or whatever), and drag-and-drop them to the flash drive icon. Of course, that's a pain because it's not automated -- it's only one step above just using the Finder.
A more sophisticated way would be to make an Applescript to do it. However, it would be quite a complex script: you'd have to detect the drive-mounting event, match the volume name to make sure you don't try to copy your music to the wrong one, select the right playlist in iTunes, copy all the songs over (possibly in random order!) checking each one to make sure it's not already there, and deleting one old song for every new one you copy (using file modification times, I guess), and stopping either when you hit the end of the playlist, run out of space on the drive, or use up X% of the space.
Now, this wouldn't be a big deal at all for the guys at Apple, but it's much more than a typical end user would be able to handle. So for all practical purposes, no, iTunes doesn't work with third-party players.
Incidentally, Unison would work pretty well for syncing an entire library, such as when you're using a big iPod, but you still don't get the playlists, song ratings, address book/calender/todo/notes stuff, etc.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz