Re: What the heck is with the new iPod?

"Tim Adams" <teadams$2$0$0$3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
teadams$2$0$0$3-95F8DC.05553628092007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on
9/28/07 2:55 AM:

In article <noone-F0A078.20044927092007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Steve Carroll <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

....
You claimed that they did... a claim you failed to support.

So sorry you are having a hard time reading michael.

Um, that's *Steve* you are responding to. In any case, the situation is
clear, even though it goes over Steve's head (and, as you show, yours):

I noted Apple did went above and beyond what they were
contractually obligated to do. Steve claimed to disagree
and said there were contractually obligated but never
provided a shred of evidence. Not a shred.

IF you bothered to READ, and were able to UNDERSTAND Apple's warranty, you
would clearly see that Steve it correct.

He is not... but even if he was, of course, he has failed to support this.

"Dead On Arrival (DOA) Product: System Failure Out of the Box An Apple-branded
hardware product is considered DOA if

Ok, let us look at the *requirements* to be considered DOA:

it shows symptoms of a hardware failure, preventing basic operability, when
you first use it after opening the box.

Can you show where this was the case? Keep in mind that it worked fine for
me for weeks without showing *any* sign of hardware failure that prevented
"basic operability". After several weeks of flawless operation (with the
exception of a data transfer problem that did not prevent basic
operability), it started having problems.

If you believe that your product is DOA, please call AppleCare Technical
Support at 1-800-APL-CARE (1-800-275-2273) within 30 calendar days of the
invoice date.

This is the killer for you and Steve... 30 days is a pretty specific limit.
Not 31 days. Not 32... which is the number of days that passed from my
invoice date to my *first* call about the issue. By the time it was
determined it was a hardware issue more time than that had passed - but I
think I could have argued that the date should be based on my first call.
Still - I *missed* the deadline. I had the problem shortly before the
deadline but did not call. Can you understand that?

Do not get me wrong: I think Apple *should* replace the unit - it clearly
stopped working correctly within weeks of being put into service. That is
completely unacceptable and Apple no doubt has the obligation to correct the
situation. They did not, however, *have* to call it DOA (based on the date
I called, if nothing else) and they are not obligated to place a rush order
on the replacement... by doing so they are going above and beyond their
contractual obligations.

....


You quoted a whole lot past the requirement. Had you understood what you
were reading and posting you would not have done so. Ironic, eh?


--
Picture of a tuna milkshake: http://snipurl.com/f34z
Feel free to ask for the recipe.




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What the heck is with the new iPod?
    ... that's *Steve* you are responding to. ... let us look at the *requirements* to be considered DOA: ... called tech support from help transfering files. ... contractual obligations. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: What the heck is with the new iPod?
    ... that's *Steve* you are responding to. ... let us look at the *requirements* to be considered DOA: ... called tech support from help transfering files. ... contractual obligations. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: What the heck is with the new iPod?
    ... Snit wrote: ... that's *Steve* you are responding to. ... let us look at the *requirements* to be considered DOA: ... Apple still has to deal with Arizona consumer protection laws and they are on ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)