Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media (Apple) Media Businesses Government Music Power The Courts Apple News

Settlement Proposed in iPod Class Action Suit 420

Posted by CowboyNeal from the making-things-right dept.
An anonymous reader writes "A court has conditionally approved a settlement in a class action suit brought against Apple Computer by several consumers who claim their iPod batteries did not live up to the company's representation, according to AppleInsider. The tentative approval was handed down by the Superior Court of California for San Mateo County and covers all consumers who purchased a first-, second-, or third-generation iPod model on or before May 31, 2004 and experienced 'battery failure.' According to the published settlement notice, 'battery failure' is when 'the capacity of an iPod's battery to hold an electrical charge has dropped to four hours or less of continuous audio playback, with earbuds attached, with respect to the Third Generation iPod, or five hours or less of continuous audio playback, with earbuds attached, with respect to the First Generation iPod and the Second Generation iPod.' The deadline for filing a claim is September 30, 2005."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Settlement Proposed in iPod Class Action Suit More

Settlement Proposed in iPod Class Action Suit

Comments Filter:

  • Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Koiu Lpoi ( 632570 ) <koiulpoi@gmail. c o m> on Thursday June 02, 2005 @05:38PM (#12709012)
    ... with earbuds attached

    Why would the type of headphones attached change the drain on the battery?
    • I'd imagine that people will listen to their ipod at lower volume levels with headphones. I know that when I use my itrip, the volume must be turned up high, and thusly the battery life while listening in my car is cut by probably 25%.

    • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Informative)

      by rsrsharma ( 769904 )

      I'm just guessing here, but the earbuds given with the iPod (and most relatively cheap earbuds) are probably 8 ohm headphones, unlike the 16 ohms of most headphones and the 32 ohms of high-end 'phones. (Probably don't have to explain this on /., but lower ohms = lower resistance = less power.) That means that the iPod can power the earbuds easier, so you're more likely to turn down the volume to save your ears, and (most likely inadvertenly) save power. This gives them a little more leniancy.

      • So, in other words, at 75% volume it'll affect the battery the same way with either earbuds or a set of speakers - it's the difference in the volume the speakers produce. So, again, when all we're measuring is battery power, the headphones don't matter. Right?
        • You misunderstand. In order to drive a higher impedance set of headphones (say a 64 Ohm set of Sennheisers vs. the stock buds that are likely 16 Ohm), you'd have to have the volume turned higher to get the same audible sound level. Thus, more power is consumed.

          You'd additionally want to consider the type of head phone and the environment you use it in. For example, an open set of supra-aural headphones would likely have to be turned up louder than a set of in-ear buds in a noisy, public environment.
          • But if the output of the iPod stays the same, it takes the same amount of battery power wether or not they're senheisers or the earbuds, right? I know it takes more volume to make higher impedance headphones louder, but they don't just draw more power on their own, right?
        • Not quite.

          If you have 8 Ohm speakers at 75% you are drawing X Amps.
          If you replace those speakers with 32 Ohm speakers, at the same 75% volume, you are drawing .25*X Amps, or 1/4 the power. .75 * X times the length of time would be the number of Amp-Hours that you saved by using the speakers with the higher resistance.

          So, the headphone type is VERY important for determining the battery life, unless no power is sent through the headphones.
          • I think I got it - so the impedance of the headphones affects how much current is drawn because the headphones need an electric currect to be powered? So, I should get more battery life out of my expensive 16 OHm headphones as opposed to the 8 Ohm earbuds that came with the iPod, provided I use the same volume?

            However, does this mean the volume level would change? Are the higher impedance heaphones going to be softer (theoretically) because they're drawing less power?

      • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Informative)

        by WonderSnatch ( 835677 )
        Probably don't have to explain this on /., but lower ohms = lower resistance = less power.

        Wrong. Lower resistance = more current = HIGHER power:
        P=V*I
        I=V/R
        plug the second into the first:
        P=V^2/R.

        The output voltage will probably remain roughly constant. Decreasing R will INCREASE the power.

        Brett

        • Sorry, mispoke there, I meant lower power use for the same output volume. :)

        • Mod this guy up! He has it right. It drives me nuts that /.ers know so little about science and technology when push comes to shove. This stuff is introductory electronics, folks. I can see that a few posters might get it wrong but what about the moderators?
          • And it drives me nuts that people can't understand things in context.

            It was obvious that he was talking about less power at the same volume level.

      • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Informative)

        by Mr.Radar ( 764753 ) on Thursday June 02, 2005 @06:14PM (#12709301)
        I don't know where you get your information, but that is wrong. The lowest impedance I've seen in headphones is 16-ohms. Most portable headphones are 32 ohms to 120 ohms. The iPod earbuds are about 80 ohms. Also, not all high end headphones are the same impedance. Some are as high as 600 ohms, though those are mainly older models. Sennheiser's HD-650, their top-of-the-line dynamic headphone, are 300 ohms, Beyerdynamic's flagship DT880 is 250 ohms, Etymotic's flagship model, the ER4S, is 100 ohms. Grado Lab's high-end headphones (including their $700 flagship model, the RS-1) are all 32 ohms. Sennheiser's earbuds (considered by most audiophiles to be some of the best cheap earbuds currently on the market) are 32 ohms (MX-x00 series).

        Also, lower resistance does not necessarily equal less power because while it does take less voltage to drive lower impedance headphones, it require more current. Really low impedance headphones start running into problems with portable players not being able to supply enough current, and most moderate to high impedance headphones run into the problem of not getting enough voltage from portable players.

    • Re:Huh? (Score:4, Informative)

      by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Thursday June 02, 2005 @06:00PM (#12709184)
      Omitting "with earbuds attached," Apple could test your iPod with no headphones attached, lowering the requirement for them.

      Car and motorcycle makers do the equivalent of this all the time by quoting "dry weight" (where the vehicle is inoperable because it has no coolant, oil, or fuel), or measuring horsepower at the crankshaft (before some of it gets sapped by the powertrain).

      And then there's the bogus way CRT screen size is measured.

    • Re:Huh? (Score:2, Informative)

      by briankoenig ( 853681 )
      They are specifying earbuds since they draw less power than an external set of speakers would. Lots of portable cheap speakers draw all their power from the headphone jack (and therefore from the iPod battery).

  • Well, I have a 2G iPod but... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by OS24Ever ( 245667 ) * <trekkie@nomorestars.com> on Thursday June 02, 2005 @05:39PM (#12709016) Homepage Journal
    ...I got 8 hours out of it before I retired it. At the time I had VBR 320KB MP3s on it.

    But I'm torn. $50 in Apple pr0n or join the evil empire of class action lawsuits where the lawyeres get huge chunks of the settlement and the 'injured' party gets a gift cert or a measly check relatively speaking to the cost of the item you bought.
    • the lawyeres get huge chunks of the settlement and the 'injured' party gets a gift cert

      Did you mean this part:

      the plaintiffs' counsel will ask the Court to award attorneys' fees and out-of-pocket expenses in the amount of $2,768,000

      USA needs tort reform, badly.
      • I'm curious how many people spent how many hours for that $2.768 million. If this is like many lawsuits and law firms (remember, these are businesses employing attorneys, clerks, secretaries, janitors, etc.) taking on this kind of case for long periods of time that could actually be a very reasonable sum.

        Not knowing specifics of this case of course its hard to comment. If this was going to one guy then yes that would be silly high. The question of course becomes how many people and how long?

        I know this

  • What about Nokia!? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by cataclyst ( 849310 ) on Thursday June 02, 2005 @05:40PM (#12709030) Homepage
    I agree that the iPod battery life was misrepresented by Apple... but what about cell phones? Aren't their battery lifetimes inflated MUCH more than that of the iPod? And don't they have at least as short of a lifespan?

  • Where's my check? (Score:3, Funny)

    by ChePibe ( 882378 ) on Thursday June 02, 2005 @05:42PM (#12709049)
    I'm just mad because my iPod didn't turn me black and vastly improve my dancing skills. I'm still just a fat old clumbsy white boy with no skills... talk about your false advertising.

    Where's my check? Huh?

  • Ridiculous (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Frangible ( 881728 ) on Thursday June 02, 2005 @05:43PM (#12709054)
    I think this is a very baseless legal suit. First of all, you can buy a new replacement battery for the iPod from any number of vendors very cheaply and easily, or even have Apple replace it for you if you want. Secondly, who said things last forever? The battery wears out, the hard drive wears out, the buttons wear out... nothing lasts forever. Do you sue Honda because the battery in your Honda died? Every consumer device that ships with a rechargable battery is going to fail, many of which are even internal like the iPods. So you have to open the case and replace it every few years. So what? How is that any more difficult or expensive than getting a new battery for your car? It's the price you pay for a flashy new lithium polymer battery instead of alkaline AAs.
    • If your Honda only held 1 gallon of gas after 2 months of use and when you complained Honda said buy a new car, would you be angry?
    • "Secondly, who said things last forever?"

      Apple did, hence the suit.

      "Do you sue Honda because the battery in your Honda died? "
      If they claimed it would start the car for 5 years, yes I would. actually, I would complain, and if they said 'buy a new car', then I would sue.

      once again, it is a suit against Apple's claims. Not the fact that batteries wea rout, the fact they wear out substantially faster then Apple claimed they do.

      • If you look in your iPod manual you will clearly see mention of how the battery only lasts x amount of charges. Apple NEVER claimed the batteries would last forever, they claimed that they last ~10 hours and deteriorate over time (as all rechargables do)

        If you had an ipod you'd know this.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday June 02, 2005 @05:44PM (#12709061)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • This is great (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MmmmAqua ( 613624 ) on Thursday June 02, 2005 @05:47PM (#12709088)
    I get $50 in Apple credit, and the lawyers get up to $2,768,000. I really don't know who to cheer for here. I wish my iPod's battery would have lasted a bit longer (it's 1G, holds about 3hrs worth of charge), but I also wish the legal system wasn't so screwed up that the only people really profiting from this aren't injured parties.

    Only in America...
    • If you are opposed to class action lawsuits, you should be opposed to venture capitalists as well.

      Lawyers who take these cases fund the cases, including all time (which would otherwise be billable) and the cost of expert witnesses, transportation for witnesses, discovery costs, everything, which in a case like this can be a pretty penny -- $1M isn't an unreasonable guess.

      So, these lawyers get $1.78M in profit. Well, if you consider that they're going to win some and loose some, then getting the occasiona

      • Re:This is great (Score:3, Insightful)

        by BitGeek ( 19506 )

        I support Venture Capitalists but I oppose class action lawsuits.

        This isn't directly on your point- but the reason is that class action lawsuits claim to represent people as a class- eg: "All people who bought 1G iPods" not people as a GROUP eg: "All people who are a party to lthe lawsuit".

        Which means that if they win this class action lawsuit, then they limit my right to compensation as a member of that class, EVEN IF I AM NOT A PARTY TO THE SUIT. That's a violation of my rights. I have not waived my
    • Well and WTF do you expect to get for a faulty battery? $5000? I don't know how much the lawyer would get in this case, but if it weren't for him, thousands of suckers like you wouldn't get a cent from apple.
    • I also wish the legal system wasn't so screwed up that the only people really profiting from this aren't injured parties.

      Push for tort reform.

  • From the notice:

    I enclose proof of purchase of the iPod, in the form of the original or a photocopy of (check one and enclose the
    requested documentation):
    the invoice or receipt that reflects the purchase of the iPod
    or
    a cancelled check that reflects the purchase of the iPod
    or
    a credit or debit card statement that identifies the transaction as the purchase of the iPod [Underline, circle,
    or highlight the iPod purchase transaction on your statement. You may cross out, white-out, or otherwise
    redact the card nu

  • What interests me is that the older iPods are expected to retain more of their battery life. If a 1st or 2nd gen drops below 5 hours/charge, it is covered by this suit, but apparently 5 hours/charge is acceptable for a 3rd gen part. What amazing new capability on the 3rd gen iPod so dramatically reduces (by 20%) its expected battery life?

  • Not bad engineering, false advertising (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Kiryat Malachi ( 177258 ) on Thursday June 02, 2005 @05:49PM (#12709106) Journal
    The suit isn't about whether or not lithium ion batteries decay; no one is arguing that they don't.

    The suit's merit lies solely in the assertion that Apple, in its original product documentation, did not strongly enough explain that fact, and in fact glossed over it to the detriment of the consumer. If you say "Plays 8 hours", the suit argues, it damn well better play 8 hours... now, and later. Car makers don't represent that the car won't require maintenance; the suit argues that Apple represented the iPod as being something that would operate in the same fashion across its usable life.

    Whether you think this is a valid suit or not, stop whining that "Batteries decay!", because that isn't the argument.
    • I don't get it, how is that unique to Apple though? Are you saying Apple is the only company which mentions a battery life but doesn't specifically mention that the battery life will degrade in large print with the main claim?

      I just don't get it. Almost every laptop I've seen advertised advertises some specific battery life...... same with most other devices sold with rechargable battery lives. And most of them don't put anything in big print about the lifespan of the batteries.

      So why is Apple someh

      • When you buy a laptop, when the battery stops working well, you can buy another battery, or use AC. I know on my laptop it explicitly states that the battery is considered a "consumable" item, and it can be easily replaced, just like a toner cartrige. In an ipod, however, until Apple started their exchange program, there was no way to replace the battery, and the ipod is really designed for mobile use, so effectively, you just had to buy a new one after the battery ran low.
      • I'm not going to argue as to why Laptop manufacturers are not getting sued, but at least Joe Consumer can go purchase a new battery after his ~320 Lithium Ion Cycles have been used up.

        A few hundred bucks on an Ipod, and you can't change the battery? WTF? This isn't a 1985 Norelco Shaver!
    • No, I think it's both bad advertising and engineering.

      From an engineering standpoint, I think Apple could have added a few extra cubic millimeters to the battery size (and overall size) without sacrificing anything in the overall design. This way they would have delivered a real-world 8 hours of battery life, could have advertised it and those 3 people that start it up and listen without skipping or any UI interaction would have gotten 15 hours.

      I just don't see how an iPod 2mm deeper, longer and wider an
      • I got a real world 8 hours at first with my 3G; this included skipping and UI interaction, although UI interaction was more or less just skip-skip-skip-back "I like this song". Now it's probably down to 2 or 3 hours, after 2 years.

        The thing you're not thinking about is - even if they had added that extra space, right now you'd be getting 80 or 90 minutes instead of 75. The decline isn't some fixed amount of capacity per unit time; the decline is percentage of total capacity per unit time.
  • ...for the crappy scroll wheel that broke on my Karma a month after the waranty expired.
  • 1000 charges and negligible loss of capacity. They also charge up to 80% in 60 seconds.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/29/toshiba_l i -ion_battery/ [theregister.co.uk]

    These'd make electric cars extremely cost effective. An electric vehicle needs bugger all maintenance compared to an internal combustion engine largely due to the few moving parts, N*1000 charges on the battery lifetime would be millions of miles rather than around 150,000 miles for current li-ions. Then there's the high fuel vs low electricity cost.
  • Ten bucks says Jobs cracks a joke / makes a snide comment about this during the WWDC keynote speech next week. ;)

  • $50? (Score:2)

    by Gropo ( 445879 )
    Thanks! $25 for an 850 mAh replacement battery [suntekstore.com], $25 for my trouble.

    Sadly, the longevity on my 3rd gen began to severely degrade after 12 months. Biking from Manhattan home to Queens in cold weather this past winter would sometimes result in a dead battery 3 minutes from my door (25 minute ride!). On top of that, the longest continuous playback I ever enjoyed was approximately 5 1/2 hours. I'd say this class action applies to me.

  • Yep you read that right. And there are a ton of people that have reported the same exact problem. Crappy battery life. If I didn't get it as a cheap upgrade(I did Freeip*ds.com) I would have returned it. Even worse are the Apple zealots who attack you because their Ipod works OK so of course it must be your fault that your Ipod lasts for 1/3 the time it supposed to. Oh and right out of the box I had to do a Restore because the Photo slide show didn't work right.

    I know plently of people are happy with thei
  • I have a first generation iPod, and while the battery capacity was dropping, the real killer was that the contacts broke on the firewire jack. It's surface mounted, so it's impossible to repair, rendering the iPod useless, since it both charges and loads music through that jack.
  • We need to shoot everyone who has EVER participated IN ANY ROLE in a lawsuit, of his/her own will. Wait, that'd be too gross... Better yet, make lawsuits ILLEGAL!!
  • I do not have time to RTFA before posting this, nor will I bother to read it because I do not own an iPod (yet). Also, I am going by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on this because I don't know the California rules, but they are almost certainly substantially the same.

    It is important to realize that class action lawsuits are an opt-out affair, not opt-in. Even if they settle, it is up to the class action lawyers to give individual notice (publishing notice, even on Slashdot, does not suffice) of t

Slashdot Top Deals

Computers don't actually think. You just think they think. (We think.)

Close