Amazon Denies Reports That Airport Scanners Ruin Kindle's e-Ink

judgecorp writes "Amazon has poured cold water on the story, but reports insist that Kindles are sometimes rendered useless by airport baggage handling and security checks. Many people report no problems at all but if something is going wrong, the culprit may not be the X-ray scanner, but a static shock."

Comments

why just the kindle?

[skydyr]

If this were a problem, wouldn't it also affect nooks and other readers that use e-Ink? The displays are all made by the same company, after all.

Re:why just the kindle?

[Bobakitoo]

"Why just the iphone?"

Because a well know gadget name in the headline get you more advertisement views.

Re:why just the kindle?

[LordKronos]

If this were a problem, wouldn't it also affect nooks and other readers that use e-Ink? The displays are all made by the same company, after all.

Remember when Toyota was in the news for the unintended acceleration thing? Funny, because up until that point, all brands had similar numbers of sporadic cases of UA, but none of them made the news. Then suddenly Toyota makes the news, and out of nowhere, nearly all models of Toyota's began exhibiting the problem at the same time. And it didn't matter if it was a new car just off the lot or a vehicle that had been driven for several years. Suddenly they all started failing at once. Then just as quickly the problem disappeared. But surprisingly, none of the other non-Toyota brands made headlines for similar problems, even though they all experienced it.

So, the answer may very well be that publicity has drawn people's attention to it. Did my nook fail? Well then I guess it was just a piece of crap. Did my kindle fail? Yeah, well then I guess it too was just a....wait a minute...did someone say something about airport scanners? I was at the airport recently. The airport scanners killed my kindle.

Re:Don't think there is a problem

[vlm]

My kindle has been on many flights.

If only the flight attendants would let me read the stupid thing during take-off and landing.

We're getting close to the power levels where they'll let you.

If a small battery can run the thing for a month, even if it channeled all that power into an intentionally interfering signal, it still wouldn't be a problem.

The biggest problem, aside from tradition, is convincing passengers that a milliwatt class Kindle is "low enough" yet the 100 watt gamer laptop is "too high". I could see all the airlines and manufacturers conspiring into releasing devices with green cases, or maybe pink with glitter, if they're "aircraft rated" as being safe. Then they just have to tell stewardesses to look out for gamer laptops with obvious done-at-home spray paint jobs.

Re:Anecdote!=data

[Amouth]

so they taught/calibrated a security device with a sample of unknown and questionable origin.. yeap.. sounds like security theater to me.

Re:during take-off and landing

[Anonymous Coward]

The power levels have nothing to do with the safety risk of being smacked in the face by some wayward gadget during a rough landing.

Re:during take-off and landing

[tgd]

I'd rather be hit by a 5oz Kindle than a 4lbs hardcover.

Re:Don't think there is a problem

[caseih]

Normally what the Myth Busters do is at best anecdotal evidence. They certainly can't do enough testing to be statistically significant in this thing. So no. They have not definitively proven anything about electrical interference. Not even close. As they say, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It's likely they are correct that very little interference would happen, but no one is willing to risk certifying that this is so. Nor should you or any other passenger.