Slashdot Mirror
Apple Voiding Smokers' Warranties?
Mr2001 writes "Consumerist reports that Apple is refusing to work on computers that have been used in smoking households. 'The Apple store called and informed me that due to the computer having been used in a house where there was smoking, [the warranty has been voided] and they refuse to work on the machine "due to health risks of second hand smoke,"' wrote one customer. Another said, 'When I asked for an explanation, she said [the owner of the iMac is] a smoker and it's contaminated with cigarette smoke, which they consider a bio-hazard! I checked my Applecare warranty and it says nothing about not honoring warranties if the owner is a smoker.' Apple claims that honoring the warranty would be an OSHA violation. (Remember when they claimed enabling 802.11n for free would be a Sarbanes-Oxley violation?)"
Does putting it in the dishwasher void the warranty?
Can this actually be legal? Smoking is ( currently at least ) legal, so how can they penalize a smoker?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
They have an obligation to the customer under the terms of the warranty. They also have an obligation to their employees. They need to honor both, not pick and choose. If they really believe that opening the computer represents a health threat then they need to issue protective clothing and breathing apparatus to their employees. Simple as that. OSHA does not prohibit working with dangerous materials (manufacturing and maintaining computers DOES involve doing so), it just requires proper safety procedures be observed when doing so. The possibility of working with computers that have been exposed to cigarette smoke was not unknown or plausibly considered to be remote at the time when these warranties were issued.
and I get to smoke in my own house, while browsing the Internet (for porn)
That said, I can always tell when a computer I'm working on has a smoker for an owner. The smoke leaves a yellowish to brownish residue. Dust sticks to it. In the worst case I can recall seeing, cooling slots were blocked by congealed fuzzy crap.
It's nasty, and I can see it contributing to component failure in bad cases.
Why did you choose it if you you did not like it?
Gloves and a face mask.
Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
its because second-hand smoke is bad for the Apple workers
But there isn't any "second-hand smoke" actually in the computer. There's the residue that you get from smoke, but that's not actually smoke. It's not particularly harmful unless you breath in a big cloud of it, but that's true of any kind of dust. If you're poking about inside dusty equipment, you should be wearing appropriate PPE anyway.
I used to work as a computer technician to pay my tuition.
Computers that had either failed or seized up due to nicotine/tar build up were impossible to clean, and nearly impossible to repair. The nasty build-up got literally everywhere, clogging heatsinks, coating voltage regulators, caps, expansion slots, and other devices that depend on air convection to stay cool. The only way to get these machines running stably again was usually massive part replacement.
If smoking doesn't constitute improper operation, it should. For all the people bitching out there, smoking has been demonstrated to cause premature failure to humans, particularly second-hand smoke which contains a Noah's Ark of nasty bacteria and pathogens. WHy is it such a surprise that it also kills sensitive electronic equipment?
What a bunch of bs .... post the medical findings and I'll listen.
.. working in a bar 8 hours a day that is filled with smoke is. Living in a house with parents that smoke is. But NOT walking through a cloud of smoke for 5 seconds, or working on a computer.
.. they can STFU.
I have not seen ANY studies that suggest that OCCASIONAL exposure to second hand smoke is a hazard. Yep
Find one that suggests how often somebody has to walk through a cloud of smoke or work on a computer and I'll accept this. Until then
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Having worked on many Macs that were owned by smokers, I'll bet that this particular one was clogged to hell with ash and nicotine stains. Seriously. I've had some iMacs from smokers that smelled nasty, but were still relatively clean inside. Then I've seen iMacs that were utterly DISGUSTING on the inside. Every inch clogged with ash, the whole thing stained...ugh. We had to take it out back with an air compressor. No warranty on that one. I specifically asked Apple's techie tech support about that one (SPS) and asked if EXCESSIVE buildup of cigarette residue was cause for a warranty violation. They said yes and that if that thing had come into a repair depot, they'd have refused to work on it.
Bottom line: I seriously doubt this thing just smelled a bit like cigarettes. It was probably revolting, yellowed, and filled with ash.
They've also refused service on devices where their litmus indicator shows signs of turning pink (http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=9214797, http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/04/14/smart.phones.buggy/index.html, http://techgeist.net/2009/09/apple-iphone-abuse-detection-sensors-abusing-2/). It sounds like they're still looking for more excuses not to honor their "warranty."
I won't be buying any more Apple products.
For once I am pleased with Apple's quirky business policies.
In addition to being a biohazard, enough smoking over time by many people seems to actually deposit a greassy residue on the inside of the computer parts, like the heat sinks, integrated circuits, fan blades. I used to be the IT administrator for an office of a dozen people, back when it was somehow allowed to smoke indoors in the office while you work. And the style was for everyone to smoke. As a non smoker I was a minority, and had to put up with working in that mess.
But for the computer parts, after about six months the parts looked as though someone had sprayed them with PAM cooking oil, and then dusted with ashes. All chunder stuck on fuzzy layer of dust bunnies, and "that" smell of 1000 cigarettes. We went through a lot of computers because of the lack of ability for the parts to cool themselves with the ambient air circulation inside the cases.
So my fendangled point was, it is not fair for Apple, or any computer company to have to honor warranty claims for computers that were subjected to the abuse of a smoker, as the hardware was subjected to environmental conditions that was not in any of the designed intended use. For example, if I put my computer through a dish washer, they would have the equal right to not honor my warranty claim, as I 'intentionally damaged' it in much the same way. I would like to see other companies start doing this too.. Buy a car? Did you smoke in it ? Oh, now it has no resale value, sorry.
You just don't want to see what happens to the computer near the back door.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
The only thing that had changed in my life compared to the past was the smoke absorbed in the walls and furniture.
Really? That's the only thing that changed? Did the thought that there might be any number of other invisible toxins in that apartment ever enter your mind or did you just stop at the first one you could pull out of your ass? You also don't think it could be a physical reaction to the stress of moving and having to adjust to an entirely new environment either? It couldn't be anything else? You've managed to discount every other possibility and the most plausible one is "smoking residue"?
(1) When did Microsoft buy-out Apple? They must have taken-down the "Don't be evil" mission statements.
You seem to be confusing Apple and Google.
(2) Is there any proof that SMELL can cause lung problems?
No one said smell can cause lung problems anymore than people claim sight can cause your chest cavity to be punctured because you can see a guy aiming a gun at you. Smell is a sense which can be used to detect things that are potentially damaging, like carcinogens.
Slashdot ate my [shudder] tag.
Dealing with anything which a smoker has owned (or used) is just completely disgusting. House, covered in yellow nicotine stains, thin film of brown smoke residue on fucking *everything*. I have a photo somewhere of a lightbulb which has a yellow/brown vapour deposition coating on one side, the other being less exposed. Then there's the smell on their clothes, in their cars, the yellowed teeth, yellowed fingers. I'd put money on it that the macbook in question was just as disgusting inside.
Deleted
I've seen more computers clogged with cat hair than I've seen clogged with cigarette ash.
I find cigarette smoking to be pretty repulsive myself, though I do enjoy a good cigar from time to time. I think we've gone too war with the war on smoking though. There are actually municipalities now that are considering banning smoking outdoors. WTF is wrong with that picture?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Why did you choose it if you you did not like it?
House, barn, stable and several hectares of land for (relatively) peanuts.
We have these things, called detergents, also water which can be used to "clean" things. I know that's a novel concept for many smokers. Then we have this other stuff called "paint" which can be put on top of pre-existing walls with a "brush" or "roller" to cover what cannot be "cleaned".
Deleted
In some parts of the country you don't get much of a choice. It's very hard around here to get an affordable rental and buying something is usually not affordable. Trust me if the other option is being homeless, they may as well hold a gun to a loved one, because you'll pay the money whether you want to or not. People around here that make minimum wage can pretty much count on rent taking up half or more of their paycheck, niceties like chemical free living aren't necessarily realistic.
Please tell me this a joke right? Smoking is a personal choice and should be left as that. You wanting to impose HARSH penalties on smokers is nothing more then you wanting to dictate the actions of another person. You even want to impose your will in my private home? What the hell man. What would give you, or anyone else, the right to tell me what I can do in my own home? I choose to smoke cigars and pipes and I will continue to do so even if illegal. They can come and take them when they come for my guns.
1200 in the US die every day from smoking related illnesses 135 of these are from passive smoke 115 fatal car accidents happen every day in the US (no mention of how many die in each)
People die from one or the other, but how much is a life worth?
Passive smoke and roadkill isn't that different really. Where the real hipocracy is, is when life-time smokers expect expensive treatment to keep them alive for another 5 years.
As a rake (and smoker) myself, i am already aware of the years (of boring life) I won't get, I need no treatment, i may live 5-10 years shorter, but i enjoyed every single day of what i had. As for the 135 passive smoke deaths, it could be avoided with considerate smokers, just as considerate drivers rarely kill anyone.
Liberty isn't just about money, guns and cars, it's just as much about what kind of life you wanna lead urself.
If I was as pragmatic and objective as I claim to be, would I be commenting?
They need to grow some balls. An underpaid janitor gets to clean rotten piss off the bathroom floor everyday.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Have you ever opened up a computer that a really heavy smoker has been sitting in front of for years? It's disgusting. Everything has a coating of tar on it, it stinks even before you power it up, and when you try to work on it, it's all gummy.
I'm just amazed that more hard drives and more fans don't fail because of smokers.
It's pretty bad when you wipe the screen and the paper towel turns ORANGE!
Is Apple being dumb? Now that smokers are the minority, I don't think so. Let them pay for supplemental coverage, same as health insurance. Besides, if you want to quit smoking, there's an app for that
But the reefer madness and junk science used by the tobacco prohibitionists has convinced people of the lies that second hand smoke is worse than plutonium. And lawyers and juries and OSHA will enforce these lies that will have employees opening computers in biohazard suits while they will sit quietly on a bench while a diesel bus idles next to them.
Apple users don't take the bus, you insensitive clod.
"All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
Yes, hear you. Everytime I go to the States my skin gets all sticky from second hand fat.
We should have law against fat people, They should pay more taxes , because the occupy more volume, add more wear to the roads when driving, put more shit througth the sewers, have bigger impact on the environement, etc...
Its a reason to exercise the 'replace' option in the 'repair or replace at our discretion' portion of your warranty agreement.
Platform advocacy is like choosing a favorite severely developmentally disabled child.
The outgassing from those computers is worse for your health than cigarette smoke residue, I assure you.
Ecplain to me why an unsupported argument gets a mod-up to +5, Insightful.
It may be more of a danger to children, but to dismiss an environment that is coated with poison dust as harmless without further study is absurd.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-third-hand-smoke
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
Second hand smoke is certainly a health hazard.
But the computers in question aren't emitting smoke (if they were, I don't really think they're fixable), they have a gunky residue.
Computers are made of all kinds of toxic substances. Just don't lick them, and wear surgical gloves, and you should be okay.
I fully support banning smoking in bars and restaurants
I'm not even sure I support those. I really enjoy going out to bars without smoking. It was absolutely disgusting previously. Had take a shower and wash my hair twice when I got home. It also irritated the hell out of my eyes and nose too.
Despite that, the Libertarian in me has a problem with a private business being told that it can't allow smoking on it's property. Nobody forced me to visit that bar. Nobody forced the employees to work there. If a bar wants to ban smoking on it's own then all the power to them -- I'd vote for them with my wallet -- I just don't see it as something to get Uncle Sam all worked up about though.
but sidewalk bans are going too far.
Well, at least we can agree on that :) When is some sanity going to break out over this issue? I can't wait for the nanny-staters to switch targets and start going after the fast food industry. McDonalds made me eat these big macs and now I'm overweight. Why'd the Government allow them to do that? Woe is me.....
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
About 15-20% of adults smoke. The number for Apple users may be somewhat lower due to the younger and more "chic" demographic.
In any case, at the time Apple was designing its warranty coverage, it knew smoking by its customer or others in the household or business was not so rare or so offbeat that it would be reasonable to exclude it, nor is it obvious to consumers that smoking is bad for the equipment.
At the time of the sale, Apple had 3 choices:
*specifically and prominently state that the warranty is void if the computer is exposed to tobacco smoke
*plan on honoring the warranty
*set the stage for a fraud lawsuit
Since they didn't due the first one, they get to pick from the next two.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
When I worked TV repair, we'd jack up the estimate on smoker's TVs to compensate for the nastiness factor. The electrical charge attracts the particles from the ambient air and the build-up in some environments can be dramatic -and fast. Failure was very often scum related, either by blocking cooling air, or providing an arc path for the High Voltage.
The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
ok, I'll bite with my ignorance of why this then only applied to Apple, not other US IT companies?
When SOX was passed, there was a lot of discussion about what it meant for the company I was working for at the time. SOX made the CEO and CFO personally liable for the company's compliance with accounting rules. As an engineer, a lot of the discussion in my area centered on software upgrades. How did we have to account for upgrades and bug fixes?
As I recall, selling a product with the expectation of future free upgrades could be interpreted as booking revenue in advance of sales. If the customer's decision to buy was based on the expectation of the upgrade, and the seller books the revenue at the time of the sale, then the seller has booked revenue for a non-existent sale -- the future upgrade. By giving away free upgrades, the company could be establishing the expectation of future free upgrades, making the CEO and CFO potentially liable for accounting malpractice.
In the end, we decided what a lot of tech companies, including Apple, seem to have decided -- bug fixes would continue to be free, since they are addressing a product defect and not enabling new functionality. Upgrades, even if it was just to enable a latent feature of the hardware, would not be free.
Let me turn that around on you. Nobody forced those people to work in coal mines without proper lung protection. Nobody forced those people to work in asbestos mines without protection. We have laws to protect workers because they are generally not in a position to protect themselves. When you need money, you can't afford to refuse to work in a place that allows smoking. If you think otherwise, that probably means you have never been poor enough to understand.
Regarding the city streets, that smoke turns into dirty-looking sidewalks from the tar, cigarette butts floating up on the beach and in our streams, and other environmental harm that goes way beyond the immediate harm to people nearby. As far as I'm concerned, if people want to smoke in their own homes, that's okay. As soon as they inflict it on other people, they're crossing a line. People don't choose to be asthmatic, and they don't wear big signs that say "stay away from me if you smoke". I would argue that nobody forced the smokers to smoke around other people, but they do, and often without caring who it offends or even makes sick. And *that* is why people fight back and pass laws about smoking in public places. It's because smokers egregiously abused their rights and harmed others.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
So I take it that you don't live in a city then? Because in most cities I can't seem to smell the smoke from peoples' cigarettes unless they're almost rubbing up against me due to all the "healthy" pollution from cars, trucks and other combustion engine-powered vehicles.
/Mikael
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Having done PC support in offices back when smoking in offices was common I can attest to the putridity of a machine that gets smoked around. I would equate it with working on a grimy car engine. It's even worse with pet owners that smoke. You take the machine outside and "hose down" the system with a spray circuit board cleaner and replace the PSU. It's messy work but you bill the customer for your time. If you think the customer may balk at the expense you talk to them, maybe show them what smoking around computers does. It wasn't that big a deal when most of the system's chips didn't need heatsinks. You could get away with cleaning just the CPU's HSF, and maybe replace the PSU if the customer was on a budget.
Of course I only worked on steel cased, pentium-era desktop machines. Modern systems and notebooks in particular would be more involved as they really depend on staying clean and cool to avoid heat related instability. I would expect a cleaning could include a surcharge for abusive and unusual treatment of the hardware. I mean, if someone brought me a machine that they had doused in maple syrup, I would probably refuse them service or just name a price that I figured was a little north of what I thought they would be willing to spend.
As for the health concerns, well I smoke anyways, but I do it outside. I'd still wear gloves, just like I almost always did.
But Apple has other concerns. I doubt a mall store tech could contain the mess with the resources they have available. They might not actually be allowed to use the cleaner I would use. Or it might attack plastic requiring full dissasembly of a notebook. I don't know, I'm out of the loop on that.
"The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
No, there's nothing legitimate about it at all. You just account it as good will or customer service. SOX doesn't care in the slightest about that so long as you're not cooking the books.
It's amazing how many corporate apologists write off all their crappy behavior as mandated by (fictional interpretation of) law.
I can't say whether this new policy is in line with their warranty, but I don't see how anyone would make a case that it's discriminatory even where smokers are a protected class. They are targeting the smoke itself, not the smokers. If you're a smoker but you don't do it around your computer, or it just happens to be reasonably clean, you're going to be fine. If you don't smoke, but you like to store your computer in your chimney flue, they're still going to refuse to work on it.
On the other hand, smoke residue is hardly the most dangerous or disgusting thing anyone has had to deal with on the job, and using OSHA as an excuse seems pretty weak. If they just acknowledged that they're going to treat excessive smoke exposure the same way they would excessive heat or humidity, that would seem entirely reasonable.
Who cares? If he enjoys killing himself with cigarettes, it's his business. He's not hurting anybody but himself.
Why are some people so obsessed with controlling other people's lives?
Maybe not
If I had been in a car, both vehicles would have been close to being totaled because this moron pulled out into traffic that she couldn't see coming because of a line of stopped cars, which she admitted to the police officer. Because I was driving a motorcycle, I was able to react far more quickly than in a car. If I had been in a car, I would have rear ended her at 45 mph and ending up with head and neck injuries that could have cost far more. Because I was on a bike, I was able to veer sharply to the right. I bounced off her rear quarter panel, kept the bike upright, and I coasted to a controlled stop. Total bike bill --- $900. Her car received over $2K worth of damage from my foot peg and foot.
The cost to society because so many morons drive cars and DON'T PAY ATTENTION is far more disproportionate than their contribution to society, regardless of whether or not motorcycles are involved. The majority of motorcycle crashes are caused by either alcohol (mostly single vehicle crashes that result in the application of Darwin's theory of evolution) or idiots in cars. Motorcycles, and their handicapped twin the scooter, cause far less congestion and road wear due to their smaller size and could reduce the amount spent on road costs every year. They use far less gas (my bike gets 45-50mpg, about what a Prius gets), require fewer resources to make, and are much cheaper. If Congress mandated catalytic converters on bikes, they would generate far less pollution also. But converters get up to around 800F degrees, and it's tough to find a place to put them so that legs don't get burned.
In other words, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
As for the 135 passive smoke deaths, it could be avoided with considerate smokers...
I haven't met any. Ever.
I don't know if you guys realize this, but to those of us who don't smoke, we can really smell it. I mean, really smell it. It's headache inducing if you're just wearing the same clothes that you smoked in yesterday.
I don't know if it causes physical harm or not that much later, but the smell is overpowering and disgusting, and if you really were considerate, you would go out of your way not to subject us to it. Your coworkers, because they can't avoid you without potentially losing income. And your friends, because you like them, and even though they're willing to put up with it, it's kind of a scumbag move to actually make them put up with it.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
1) Smokers pay far more taxes than non-smokers. They are well within their rights to tie up whatever medical resource that they want.
2) A car pollutes the air far more than a cigarette does. While a smoker might be the cause of secondhand smoke, a driver is the cause of air pollution, low visibility haze, global warming and the eventual death of the planet.
3) Mind your own business. Is your life so miserable that you have to impose yourself upon someone else's?
Who cares? If he enjoys killing himself with cigarettes, it's his business. He's not hurting anybody but himself.
That's an oversimplification.
Smokers have more sick days off of work. When they get sick they often get sicker than non-smokers and take longer to recover. More visits to the doctor and more hospital stays meaning more load on the health system meaning less room for others (although that argument is questionable - the health system will always be underfunded).
I'd argue that he is hurting others, but I still agree that a smoker has the right to smoke, as long as the rest of us retain the right to complain bitterly about it.
Sorry, it's very obvious when:
a) using anything from a smoker's house
b) being near a smoker, whether they are smoking or not.
c) driving behind a smoking driver
d) someone is smoking nearby.
Zippthorne is in no way unique in this regard, even if your own olfactory sense is not processing the stench in the same way.
This is A-Grade bullshit. I have been a chain smoker for five years. You could probably tarmac a small freeway from all the crap that has fallen into my keyboard. But there is no tar whatsoever on my heatsinks or fans. I just cleaned them last week ( after five years ) and there is dust, yes, but no tar.
The most disgusting computer I ever saw was one kept in a screen-printing factory with a concrete floor. Grey dust 2mm thick over the whole motherboard. Can people refuse warranty service on computers because they don't like your carpet?
Take your anti-smoking FUD and stick it somewhere else.