Apple Hit With Class Action Suit Over Lack of Dust Filters In Macbook, iMac (9to5mac.com)

AmiMoJo shares a report from 9to5Mac: Apple is facing a new class action lawsuit claiming that it sells select iMac and MacBook models without needed dust filters. In turn, this causes issues such as display imprecations, slowing performance, and more, the lawsuit alleges. The iMac and MacBook lawsuit is being brought forward by law firm Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, which is a class action litigation firm that has gone after Apple before. Most notably, the firm won the infamous $450 million ebooks pricing case against Apple. Since then, Hagens Berman has levied other suits at Apple, including one regarding the performance throttling of iPhones. Hagens Berman's latest lawsuit reads in part: "iMac and MacBook owners have reported dark smudges and spots on the interior of the screens of their desktop computers as well as excessive slowness and break downs of their computers related to the lack of filter on Apple computers. The computer intakes air to cool its components, but with no filter, dust gets trapped inside. This affects the screen and logic board of the computer, leading to dust stuck behind the screen and gummed up motherboards, causing the computer to run slow and/or overheat."

Hagens Berman says "Apple refuses to remedy the defect," instead forcing affected customers to pay "more than $500 to fix this screen defect, and even more if they wish to replace parts integral to the computer's sped and performance." "We believe Apple owes it to the purchasers of these premium, high-end computers to pay for the widespread defect, and we seek to represent iMac owners to recover their losses in costs to repair this defect, or for their loss of use of their computer."

Comments

Re:Ummm

[jtara]

Every desktop I've ever owned had inlet filters.

But even if not, they were easy to open up and clean out.

These Apple products are not user serviceable. At best, you need special screwdrivers. At worst, you need to use a specially-designed cutting tool, and have a replacement gasket handy.

Compressed air anyone?

[LostMyBeaver]

Let's suppose for a moment that Apple includes an air filter in the laptops. Understand that we're not talking about a grill, a grill doesn't do much to stop dust. It would have to be an air filter.

To produce an air filter to block particulates from entering the laptop, the filter would itself gather the particulates. This would require making the filter itself able to be cleaned. For this it would require some form of removable grill. A removable grill will require either screw holes or some sort of novel slide and release mechanism to be machined or molded from similar materials as the laptop body.

The addition of said air filter will be of limited value if the filter can't allow air passage as well as block particulates. This means that there would have to be somewhat considerable surface area, low density, greater size, and/or a high power fan to assist with airflow as well as a corresponding power source to compensate for the additional draw.

To make an effective air filter will add additional cost, weight, etc...

The alternative is to facilitate effective use of compressed air through a directed nozzle.

If there's an airflow path for cooling within the laptop that allows air to pass through in the first place, this is the path dust is following to clog the system. Therefore a high power burst of air in the reverse direction will be suitable to remove or somewhat release the particles and eject what would likely be a suitable amount from the chassis or bury in places of less importance.

I believe if Apple loses this case, they should simply ship users a free can of compressed air with the correct nozzle for maximum effectiveness and future models should make it clear that compressed air is a suggested accessory on the side of the box.

I think the air filter would be a generally unwelcome addition to the system.

I also think that Apple needs to identify a means of suing this law firm for targeted frivolous law suits that don't actually represent the interests of the consumers but instead target companies who they believe they can exploit for large settlements.

If Apple asks me, I will participate in a class action suit against this law firm for intentionally misrepresenting me and driving up the costs of products I depend on through frivolous litigation "on my behalf".