Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 29th Sep 2009 08:50 UTC
Apple The European Union has stated today that it is taking the "exploding" iPhone issues very, very seriously. EU consumer watchdog Meglena Kuneva has explained that if national authorities find out that manufacturing faults are the cause of the issue, the iPhone will face an EU-wide recall.
Order by: Score:
Buy Now
by Buck on Tue 29th Sep 2009 09:42 UTC
Buck
Member since:
2005-06-29

Guess it's time to Buy now. Europe was the only place I knew one could buy unlocked phones in.

More seriously though the recall's not too likely to happen.

Edited 2009-09-29 09:44 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Being evil is good
by Karitku on Tue 29th Sep 2009 10:02 UTC
Karitku
Member since:
2006-01-12

It only took 2 months for some of my friends and family to get new iPhone and now it takes 2 months before they get it back from service if the do recall. There is no better enjoyment than others misery.

Reply Score: 2

Didn't Apple already answer this?
by sigzero on Tue 29th Sep 2009 10:04 UTC
sigzero
Member since:
2006-01-03

The iPhones in question didn't "explode" and it was "outside" forces that cracked the screens.

Reply Score: 4

Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

The iPhones in question didn't "explode" and it was "outside" forces that cracked the screens.

What I would say to someone who thought that:

You’re content with listening to a company PRs response?
What if there have been more accidents with iPhones and iPods and that NDA that has been disclosed has been signed by quite a few people?
How is allowing a company to ignore safety good for us, the people.

They will test them independently, and if they find them to be a risk, they will be recalled. It’s for our benefit.

Reply Score: 3

Could have huge consequences
by anda_skoa on Tue 29th Sep 2009 10:11 UTC
anda_skoa
Member since:
2005-07-07

Imagine if a fault is found in the battery and the very same battery is used in other devices, e.g. ipod or even non-Apple devices.

A resulting recall could be logistically challenging, maybe the biggest recall in history.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Could have huge consequences
by unoengborg on Tue 29th Sep 2009 14:24 UTC in reply to "Could have huge consequences"
unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

Imagine if a fault is found in the battery and the very same battery is used in other devices, e.g. ipod or even non-Apple devices.

A resulting recall could be logistically challenging, maybe the biggest recall in history.


That would be extremely annoying, but in most cases much easier to fix, as most other cell phones have user replacable batteries. The service process would be as simple as mailing a new battery to the consumer.

Even if the same battery is found in other devices, that doesnt nesesarily mean that they are at risk, as these devices may have different cooling conditions, and different energy consumptiomtion e.t.c.

Reply Score: 2

mrhasbean Member since:
2006-04-03

Even if the same battery is found in other devices, that doesnt nesesarily mean that they are at risk, as these devices may have different cooling conditions, and different energy consumptiomtion e.t.c.


What a crock of crap. That's like saying "well we've found a problem with tyres made with this additive but it's only a problem if you drive on bumpy roads so we're only going to recall 4WD tyres that use it". If there is a fault found with the battery then EVERY product that uses the same type / style of battery would have to be recalled - if it's truly about customer safety. If the EU didn't they would certainly find themselves in one hell of a discrimination suit...

Reply Score: 2

boldingd Member since:
2009-02-19

That's not necessarily unreasonable. His point is that other devices may not be putting as much load on those batteries, or may have a better thermal environment. If a different phone uses the same battery, but has better thermal dissipation and draws half the power, then those batteries may still be fine in those phones. Or, to use your example, if a given tire doesn't hold up under the weight of a hummer, that doesn't mean that it wouldn't work well on a mini-compact.

Although I'd probably want new tires anyway.

Edited 2009-09-29 23:17 UTC

Reply Score: 1

kryogenix Member since:
2008-01-06

Any battery will explode under the right conditions. Hell, for all we know it's not even the battery. It could be some funky power management/charging unit with buggy firmware. Remember, microcontrollers are used EVERYWHERE.

Don't be so quick to run to judgment on the issue. It's hard to tell who is at fault in cases like these. It could be abuse, it could be batteries, it could be software, it could be firmware, it could even be ROM burned into some itty bitty microcontroller responsible for charging the battery. Hell, that code might not even be written by Apple.

There's a lot of points of failure in modern electronics.

Reply Score: 1

Older Stories of iPods With Problems.
by Ranger on Tue 29th Sep 2009 10:56 UTC
Ranger
Member since:
2006-05-03

A potential recall involving the iPhone could be disasterous for Apple if this bleeds over to the iPod Touch. Both items share many internal components.

I'm curious to know if this is related to another story seen here at OSNews:

http://www.osnews.com/story/21937/Apple_Tried_to_Silence_Exploding_...

Reply Score: 1

Buck Member since:
2005-06-29

Really, I think OSNews needs another 'evil' Apple logo in place of the current one, maybe with an ominous evil face planted onto it.

Reply Score: 2

Budd Member since:
2005-07-08

I'm not a fan of the so called editors of this site but it doesn't have anything to do with OSNews. These are simply the laws/rules in EU. Whether they are good or not,that's another questions.

Reply Score: 4

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Really, I think OSNews needs another 'evil' Apple logo in place of the current one, maybe with an ominous evil face planted onto it.

How about a silhouette of Steve Jobs' ill-gotten liver with a bite taken out of it? ;-)

Edited 2009-09-29 19:09 UTC

Reply Score: 2

AdamC Member since:
2009-07-25

Who knows one day when you are the same predicament as Jobs you can still tell jokes about that part of your body that was replaced and being ahead of the queue is not considered as 'ill-gotten' but a right.

Reply Score: 1

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

A potential recall involving the iPhone could be disasterous for Apple if this bleeds over to the iPod Touch. Both items share many internal components.

I'm curious to know if this is related to another story seen here at OSNews:

http://www.osnews.com/story/21937/Apple_Tried_to_Silence_Exploding_...


How interesting that you quote that article and yet you fail to quote the follow up article where the device was tested at an independent facility and found that it was an external force pushing rather than an explosive force. I suggest anyone who tries to attack me actually spend some time in the real world - where people treat their devices like rugby balls and then wonder why they fail. People who hit their devices because it isn't 'working right' then complain months later that their device fails.

If this was some other vendor besides Apple, I'd be saying the same thing regarding the issue. Far too many people are willing to blame someone else for the results of their decision to abuse their computer. Treat your device with respect and you'll get many years of reliability - abuse it and it'll be lucky to last a few months. Case in my point, my MacBook; the magsafe cable after a year hasn't frayed, my case hasn't discoloured or cracked, my computer hasn't over heated - why? because I treat it with the respect that an expensive device deserves.

Reply Score: 2

v Or in other terms.
by theTSF on Tue 29th Sep 2009 11:34 UTC
RE: Or in other terms.
by liamdawe on Tue 29th Sep 2009 11:38 UTC in reply to "Or in other terms."
liamdawe Member since:
2006-07-04

Way to go overboard, i hope that was just a joke, or else your an idiot.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Or in other terms.
by Budd on Tue 29th Sep 2009 11:41 UTC in reply to "Or in other terms."
Budd Member since:
2005-07-08

It's just procedures.You know,EU has some rules.We call them laws here.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Or in other terms.
by Stratoukos on Tue 29th Sep 2009 11:50 UTC in reply to "Or in other terms."
Stratoukos Member since:
2009-02-11

Exactly. The EU is envisioning a world without operating systems and processors.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Or in other terms.
by cafeina on Tue 29th Sep 2009 12:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Or in other terms."
cafeina Member since:
2007-11-16

No, EU just tries to keep unsafe products out of market which is a good thing. I can understand it is frustrating if a product you believe in suddenly shows big problems, but safety has higher priority than any other thing. I don't want ANY product to cause ANY injury to me or ANY person, and You?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Or in other terms.
by Tuxie on Tue 29th Sep 2009 13:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Or in other terms."
Tuxie Member since:
2009-04-22

Yes, there is one thing more important than safety: Freedom.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Or in other terms.
by righard on Tue 29th Sep 2009 13:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Or in other terms."
righard Member since:
2007-12-26

Not if that freedom can harm the safety of others.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Or in other terms.
by phoudoin on Tue 29th Sep 2009 14:36 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Or in other terms."
phoudoin Member since:
2006-06-09

There is one thing more important than freedom: laws.
And EU have their own set. Go figure!

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Or in other terms.
by mrstep on Tue 29th Sep 2009 13:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Or in other terms."
mrstep Member since:
2009-07-18

I've heard rumors that gasoline and electricity are next on their list - and it can't happen soon enough!

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Or in other terms.
by steogede2 on Wed 30th Sep 2009 15:03 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Or in other terms."
steogede2 Member since:
2007-08-17

I've heard rumors that gasoline and electricity are next on their list - and it can't happen soon enough!


Indeed we should ban petrol as diesel is much less volatile. As for electricity, we really ought to move to the much safer 110v that you Americans use, 230v really is overkill - literally.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Or in other terms.
by SlackerJack on Tue 29th Sep 2009 11:53 UTC in reply to "Or in other terms."
SlackerJack Member since:
2005-11-12

That's a bad assumption. The companies that you have mentioned have in some way or other done bad business or have some form of monopoly.

America's own government would and have done the same, so don't turn this into a 'We hate American companies' debate.

These companies have a history of being repeat offenders, by using bad tactics against their competition to gain market share.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Or in other terms.
by mat69 on Tue 29th Sep 2009 11:56 UTC in reply to "Or in other terms."
mat69 Member since:
2006-03-29

You know that only shows that they try to have a free market. A free market as it was intended by its inventors.

No monopolies and if they are they are not allowed to use their power to wipe off competitors. That is the one side you refer in your post, the side of the companies.

Yet the free market also contains of the consumers and it is only free if everybody has total information as that is not possible it is in the interest of the consumer if the authorities that might have more information act upon that -- second issue.

Bully-actions are bad for a free market no matter if it is about US companies or EU companies like Thysen Krupp, Otis and the elevator-companies that had to pay high fees.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Or in other terms.
by spiderman on Tue 29th Sep 2009 12:29 UTC in reply to "RE: Or in other terms."
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

You know that only shows that they try to have a free market. A free market as it was intended by its inventors.

Nobody invented the free market. The free market you talk about is actually liberalism and not everyone think it is a good thing.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Or in other terms.
by nt_jerkface on Tue 29th Sep 2009 14:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Or in other terms."
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

A free market isn't something that is designed, it's what happens naturally. It's a natural system of trade.

You have to try to stamp it out if you want anything else.

Monopolies are not bad when they add value to the lives of consumers. For example in some Alaska towns there is only a single company that will provide air delivery service during the winter months.

Some posters here seem to think that all monopolies should be banned which for many Alaskans would make their lives difficult. Monopolies often exist because consumers are satisfied and competitors see greater benefit in directing capital elsewhere.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Or in other terms.
by Moulinneuf on Tue 29th Sep 2009 15:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Or in other terms."
Moulinneuf Member since:
2005-07-06

Free market don't exist in reality. There is always some terriotry laws or some regulator or some trade prohibition.

All monopolies are bad, as they are about greed above anything else and about blocking competition and new player.

Alaska is in the US, so it's not a free market at all, you can't legally trade with Cuba for example. Single provider are lies, there is nothing stopping anyone outside those town from making a delivery or someone from those town to start a new service themself and some of them do exactly that.

UPS deliver to Alaska ...
Fedex deliver to Alaska
Canada post deliver to Alaska ...

Monopolies often exist because of illegal and criminal
activites that where done to those monopolies competitor, not because consumer are satisfied.

Reply Score: 1

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

Being a monopoly within a market is not an issues but using that position to apply pressure to the market is. I can be 95% of the nail market provided I continue to compete based on the production quality of my nails should another company choose to also sell nails. If I'm the only nail vendor, dictating a higher price for my nails in absense of competition is an issue. Lower my price beyond what new competition can afford for long enough to push them back out of the market then returning my prices to a premium profit margin is also a problem.

Natural monopolies such as mail delivery to remote regions where other companies choose not to provide that service is also not a problem. This depending on my not driving competition out or fleesing the remote inhabitants for all they are worth.

It's not the monopoly position that is the problem but how it is used within the market. This is why antitrust law allows for monopolies provided they behave in a way which does not harm competition, the market or the customers.

Reply Score: 2

Apple needs a wakeup call
by theosib on Tue 29th Sep 2009 13:07 UTC
theosib
Member since:
2006-03-02

Apple makes good computers and an even better OS. But they're way too secretive, especially with regard to critical software vulnerabilities and hardware flaws.

Reply Score: 1

Watch your language please!
by vasko_dinkov on Tue 29th Sep 2009 13:14 UTC
vasko_dinkov
Member since:
2005-09-13

Calling Meglena Kuneva a "watchdog" is a bit unkind. I know you didn't mean to offend but still.. She is very respected not only in Bulgaria but in Brussels too and has proven that she really cares about consumers like you and me so please use a bit more proper language in such cases.

And if it turns out there is a real issue with exploding iPhones, then I will fully support her. It doesn't matter if it's Apple or company X...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Watch your language please!
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 29th Sep 2009 13:17 UTC in reply to "Watch your language please!"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Watchdog IS a positive term ;) .

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Watch your language please!
by qroon on Tue 29th Sep 2009 14:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Watch your language please!"
qroon Member since:
2005-10-21

I can be torched by saying this but:

How do we call a female watchdog then? ;)

/me hides

Edited 2009-09-29 14:34 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE: Watch your language please!
by memson on Tue 29th Sep 2009 14:21 UTC in reply to "Watch your language please!"
memson Member since:
2006-01-01

Calling Meglena Kuneva a "watchdog" is a bit unkind.


No, no it isn't. Next time, please look up the meaning of a term if you are unsure of what it means. It has nothing to do with insulting, it is actually used to mean "overseer" or "person who keeps an eye on things" or "person who looks out for wrong doing".

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Watch your language please!
by Almindor on Wed 30th Sep 2009 06:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Watch your language please!"
Almindor Member since:
2006-01-16

I disagree with you here. While the definition itself doesn't hold a negative meaning, labeling someone a "watchdog" implies (to me at least) that they are overprotective and the "dog" in the name can also bring associations to being less than human. All in all a negativistic portreyal and I also thought at first that Thom didn't agree with her and thought she's way over her head with this.

Calling her an overseer or such would be much more better if it was ment to be a compliment.

Reply Score: 2

Sense is not all that common
by bousozoku on Tue 29th Sep 2009 14:50 UTC
bousozoku
Member since:
2006-01-23

How many times have you heard of someone sticking a phone in their pocket? Can you imagine a coin getting stuck in the dock connector of an iPhone or iPod touch?

Often, we have to protect people from themselves because they're just not using their brain properly, so they can't use their possessions properly.

It's likely that there are 2 or 3 different problems being combined into 1 here but Apple should address problems up front and not simply dismiss them, as they seem to do regularly.

I'm really of the belief lately that they're overwhelmed and incompetent. Success has them scrambling to keep up.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by steogede2
by steogede2 on Wed 30th Sep 2009 15:35 UTC
steogede2
Member since:
2007-08-17

This is not an uncommon occurrence. Senseo coffee machines from Philips (practically every household has one here in The Netherlands) were recalled after the EU confirmed the machines could potentially burn the hands of those that operated them.

I would like to correct that. Firstly it isn't a common occurance. It happens as often as a product is found to be unusually unsafe. Product recalls aren't unheard of, but I wouldn't say they are common. I have never in my life owned a product that was recalled - my car was recalled, but that was years before I bought it.

Secondly, it generally is a recall of a whole product range, only only certain models and often only certain batches of those models. The Senseo recall affected six specific models - and of those models, only ones manufactured within a certain period.

Thirdly it isn't made clear that recalls are not mandatory for consumers. Okay you might have difficulty buying an iPhone, while Apple rolls out the safer stock - but if you don't want to lose the use of your phone whilst Apple repair it, you would still be able to continue use it at your own risk (though if it is a company phone, your employer might have something to say about it, unless your employer wants you to sue them).

Edited 2009-09-30 15:38 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Another point of view
by mnemonics on Wed 30th Sep 2009 22:21 UTC
mnemonics
Member since:
2006-04-21

Until Apple decided to sell their first mobile phone the world of mobile phone was ruled by EU (Nokia, Ericsson... France Telecom/Orange and many others) just like the computing world in general was ruled by the USA (IBM, Microsoft, Apple and many others). We could add that the hight tech consumer market was ruled by Asia (Japan first then Korea and China).(Sony, Nintendo, Samsung and many others). And this situation worked fine for many years. Then Apple decided not only to sell an attractive device on a european ruled market, but decided to change the rules of operator/subscriber contract by taking about 30% of the operator contract income. Until that day operators dictated to device manufacturers. Apple became a prominent mobile phone manufacturer in 3 years and made A LOT of ennemies in this business, especially in EU. Please remember that it's EU who forced Apple to stop exclusivity contract with operator and thus stopped Apple's tax on exclusivity tied opearators... No surprise now that the EU wants his money back and will do ANYTHING to hurt Apple. It is just economic war as usual my friends.

The very term GSM never meant "Global Service Mobile" wich, as you know better than I do means absolutely nothing ("Groupe de Services Mobiles" is the original meaning in french since France Telecom - now Orange - worked really hard for this standard, but you know french terms on a global scale don't work (notable exception with Apple's "Rendez-vous/Bonjour"...)

I really follow this because it happened in my country (France) and the very first "exploding" iPhone in late august deserves a rational analysis. The buzz about this story is just insane, way too insane to be honest. The phone still works after it "exploded" (duh !?!) and it is well known that the owner has always refused to send the phone to Apple for analysis... I have no doubt that there are some defective iPhone in circulation (just like any other industrial made hight tech devices). It's just too big too swallow knowing how EU Lobbyists and EU commissions work. Believe what you want but what I know is that when all french newspapers agree and impose their propaganda to the people it's a lie.

Reply Score: 1