Slashdot Mirror
Apple to Replace Faulty Nano Screen
Sam Wil writes "Apple has acknowledged a flaw in the iPod nano screen that results in cracking, and attributes it to poor vendor quality. The defect affects less than one-tenth of 1 percent of all the nanos that have shipped so far. Apple will replace the screen of affected units for free." From the article: "However, the representative said that the screen-cracking issue is separate from reports that the slim new music player is more easily scratched than prior models. Complaints about both issues surfaced shortly after Apple introduced the flash memory-based Nano earlier this month. 'A few vocal customers are saying their Nano is more susceptible to scratching than prior iPods,' the Apple representative said. Apple said the Nano is made of the same polycarbonate plastic as the fourth-generation iPod and said it does not believe the scratching problem is widespread." You may recall we had a lively discussion about the screen-scratch flaw a short while back.
The screen does scratch very easily. A friend got one and a few hours later, the screen had fine scratches all over it. His 3G iPod had no scratches on it, so he seems to be very careful. There's something different about the Nano than other iPods that must contribute to this.
I'll bet Apple will very quietly introduce some changes to contruction but won't admit to it. The scratches will not be heard from again.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
The thing is, the nano is thin like a cell phone. I've already snapped two non-clamshell model cell phones in half by sitting on them - taking the screens out with them and losing all my data. Fortunately the cell phone was free and I cared more for the data than the phone itself. I don't think you can say the same thing for the nano.
Thin electronic items just snap. Period. That's why the clam-shell cell phone design became more popular IMHO. It was thicker and didn't snap in half unless you really made an effort.
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
Could it just be scale? A few small scratches on a small screen is the equivelent of larger scratches on a bigger screen.
My 60GB iPod photo screen is terribly scratch-prone. I carried it home in the fleece-lined pocket of my coat, and it got a huge round scratch from the earbud - with the fuzzy cover over the earbud!
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
..... regardless of how many iPods are affected. The mere mention of this issue caused it's stock value to nosedive 4.4% yesterday. (Surf to HERE for more on this)
Part of the problem is that Apple has become a MP3 player company, and not a computer company. According to most people in the know, they don't turn a profit from their music store and the so-called halo effect of the iPod is of limited value to them. And then there's the Merrill Lynch downgrade to neutral from buy that they got this morning (Click HERE for more) because "although Apple's recent performance has been extraordinary, there are question marks over the effect of the imminent transition to Intel-based hardware."
Not good if you're an Apple investor.
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
I agree with what you're saying. I was really careful with my 3G iPod for about a week after I got it, and then I slid it across a not so clean table and scratched up the back a bit. After that I stopped caring. I fell on it while horsing around and crushed the white part into the alumninum part causing the sides slightly buldge out. Still works and that's all that matters to me. I'm still impressed with how tough it is.
All iPods are equally scratchable.
How badly they get scratched depends on how well you take care of it.
If they're ending up terribly, horribly scratched, then you aren't taking care of it. My 3G is roughed up, but isn't horribly scratched cause I keep it in the case it came with whenever I use it.
These are not only good for PDAs, but they make them for digital camera screens, too. Its clear, its plastic, it'll take the dings, and its cheap.
Isn't it obvious?
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
OOPS - Link included below:
This guy has a pictoral on how he fixed up his nano screen with Brasso. Pretty amazing stuff, if it's legit.
- - - - - - - - -
Want a nano? Find 5 others that want a nano too, and you're all set.
But... that would entail apple admitting they did something wrong. Hell may have frozen over (intel&apple), but that's still not enough for apple to ever admit being wrong.
I totally disagree.
Since this bitch session about the Nano is just a typical part of the Apple product life cycle (i.e., happens every time a new model is released), the smart investor increased his position at the end of the day yesterday and watches the profits roll in over the next few weeks as this blows over. I threw an extra 5K on before the bell, and I'm already up 2% on the morning trading.
On this topic, watch what happens during the buildup to Intel Macs next year. The stock will build as news outlets figure out the implications of OS X on Intel. Then some flaw will be found in the first gen Intel Macs. Then it will blow over. You have to know when to buy Apple to make money as an Apple investor. Personally, I'm up over 30% average across all my shares, and more than 150% on certain individual purchases. Those are real estate numbers, my friend. Bring on the complainers!
Even though I really want to make a condom joke,
I'll ask a serious question instead:
Why doesn't Apple just include a 20 cent cover with the iPod.
If you wan't to view the shiny cover, take it out at your own risk.
It seems a cheap way of avoiding liability.
I am very suspicious that the broken screens and the scratched screens are due to the same problem. And as such are merely polar ends of the real issue.
Could it be, that the manufacturer's "hardener" levels were off. Certain polycarbonate batches receiving too much "hardeners" (resulting in cracked screens) and other batches receiving too little "hardener" resulting is extremely easy scratched screens.
I find it interesting from a chemical engineering stand point that both problems could be directly related to a fluctuation of hardener levels but not a single article or post I've read has mentioned the possibility of such?
- The Saj
But why should you have to? Opening and closing is normal usage and something that should be accounted for in the design. If it gets scratched during normal usage and needs an extra layer then it was badly designed.
:/
Also the "It's been 7 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment" message is just plain silly. So what? let me post.
The .1% figure refers to the manufacturing defect that causes screens to crack, not the scratching issue. Anyway, Apple has said it will replace 100% of the nanos with this problem. That is the most relevant statistic. Even if all units were defective, it's on them. I've been planning to buy a nano as a gift this upcoming holiday season. This promise by Apple is enough to give me assurance to go ahead with those plans.
.1% units shipped, all of which are defective. But, again, I don't really care as long as a bad unit will get replaced.
The are different ways for Apple to come up with the statistic. They could take samples from the production line and identify the percentage of problem units. Alternatively, the problem could have been traced to a particular batch of screens amounting to
Whatever happened to TDK's all singing all dancing scratch proof coating that was going to save us from this kind of annoyance?
Seems to me that pretty much everything that ships in a protective plastic skin ought to be using that instead.
Platform advocacy is like choosing a favorite severely developmentally disabled child.
Ipods have never been designed for the pocket... its my main problem with them (and the reason I never bought another after mine died). The touch sensitive controls and interface that requires one hand to hold while the other operates make their devices impossible to operate without taking out of the pocket and staring at them. For an excellent pocketable interface, look at an old Rio 500. The buttons have different shapes, have a good tactile press about them, and are hard to push accidentally, even if its in your pocket with your wallet or knife or whatnot.
What I will say for the Ipod though, is that its the finest thing ever made to leave in your car for music. Its weird though... I've had an mp3 player around since the first Rio, but now that the Ipod died I've not replaced it; I've been walking about with no portable music, and I feel better than before. Though I can't get that song about a desert and a horse with no name out of my head... maybe that was the reason I started listening to other music all the time anyway?
Gapless playback is a problem becuase files aren't encoded properly. The end of one file and the start of the next don't line up.
:)
;)
If you'd read the site I linked to, you'd understand that this is only a very small part of the problem. The iPod (and iTunes) adds a much larger gap than can be attributed to encoded frame length alone. The site shows this beautifully with real data. It's simply sloppy programming on Apple's part - they obviously chose to do the simplest thing, which is don't even open or start decoding the next file until the current one is finished playing and closed. Any decent programmer worthy of breathing could buffer audio output so that there's no extra delay introduced. And the gap inherent in the frame size could be removed with a little smart logic that skips any silence at the end of the very last frame.
They're just too lazy (and this is the company that's constantly praised for "paying attention to detail" - yeah right!).
If that bothers you then stick the wav files together and compress it as one file. It would be easy for playback software to support virtual tracks within that larger track.
That's not even close to an acceptable solution. The entire CD becomes one big track, and you can no longer store metadata on a per-song basis. You can't skip around and play individual songs. Doesn't work.
Importing the album twice isn't acceptable either, so don't even think about suggesting that.
Plenty of complete solutions do exist, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for their implementation.
Most people don't care.
Exactly, and that's why it's so frustrating to me. I do care, but I know the current situation makes it unlikely that Apple (or any of its competitors) will listen to the minority. It's really the only blemish on an otherwise superb listening experience, so I usually focus on the positives (and the music!) and enjoy myself anyway.
Say hello to zMac.