PeOfEo
01-13-2005, 09:05 PM
http://wdb.apple.com/ipodshuffle/ go down to the bottom and look at warning number 2...
Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : ipod warnings
rhsunderground
01-13-2005, 10:05 PM
:eek::confused:
Jona
01-13-2005, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by PeOfEo
http://wdb.apple.com/ipodshuffle/ go down to the bottom and look at warning number 2...
Haha, yep. I read that last night. I love it when corporate companies have such a friendly sense of humor! Go Google, Apple and Mozilla! Being formal is sooo late 1900s! Don't you get that by now, Microsoft?
http://wdb.apple.com/ipodshuffle/ go down to the bottom and look at warning number 2...
Haha, yep. I read that last night. I love it when corporate companies have such a friendly sense of humor! Go Google, Apple and Mozilla! Being formal is sooo late 1900s! Don't you get that by now, Microsoft?
PeOfEo
01-13-2005, 10:32 PM
I dunno... msdn sometimes has some funny articles.
Jona
01-13-2005, 10:53 PM
Originally posted by PeOfEo
I dunno... msdn sometimes has some funny articles.
Truly? Hm, I hadn't noticed, but then again, I don't read MSDN much, since it hasn't been a very reliable resource for me in the past. It's also very difficult to use and navigate.
I dunno... msdn sometimes has some funny articles.
Truly? Hm, I hadn't noticed, but then again, I don't read MSDN much, since it hasn't been a very reliable resource for me in the past. It's also very difficult to use and navigate.
smercer
01-13-2005, 11:10 PM
Originally posted by Jona
Truly? Hm, I hadn't noticed, but then again, I don't read MSDN much, since it hasn't been a very reliable resource for me in the past. It's also very difficult to use and navigate.
and frustrating.
Originally posted by Jona Haha, yep. I read that last night. I love it when corporate companies have such a friendly sense of humor! Go Google, Apple and Mozilla! Being formal is sooo late 1900s! Don't you get that by now, Microsoft?
I do not think it is for humor, I think it has something to do with stupid lawsuits stupid people make against companies.
for more humor on this topic go to:
http://www.geocities.com/piphateife/labels.html
Truly? Hm, I hadn't noticed, but then again, I don't read MSDN much, since it hasn't been a very reliable resource for me in the past. It's also very difficult to use and navigate.
and frustrating.
Originally posted by Jona Haha, yep. I read that last night. I love it when corporate companies have such a friendly sense of humor! Go Google, Apple and Mozilla! Being formal is sooo late 1900s! Don't you get that by now, Microsoft?
I do not think it is for humor, I think it has something to do with stupid lawsuits stupid people make against companies.
for more humor on this topic go to:
http://www.geocities.com/piphateife/labels.html
Jona
01-13-2005, 11:14 PM
You do bring up a point. I recall a woman filing suit against McDonald's fast-food restaurants for giving her hot coffee that burned her; apparently the label didn't say "Caution: contents may be hot" on it. I forget the details. She won the case, though, I believe.
smercer
01-13-2005, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by Jona
You do bring up a point. I recall a woman filing suit against McDonald's fast-food restaurants for giving her hot coffee that burned her; apparently the label didn't say "Caution: contents may be hot" on it. I forget the details. She won the case, though, I believe.
:rolleyes: thats stupid. what was she expecting, Iced coffee?</sarcasm>
sounds like a get-rich-quick job via legal loop hole.
You do bring up a point. I recall a woman filing suit against McDonald's fast-food restaurants for giving her hot coffee that burned her; apparently the label didn't say "Caution: contents may be hot" on it. I forget the details. She won the case, though, I believe.
:rolleyes: thats stupid. what was she expecting, Iced coffee?</sarcasm>
sounds like a get-rich-quick job via legal loop hole.
Mr Initial Man
01-14-2005, 04:06 AM
Originally posted by smercer
Originally posted by Jona
You do bring up a point. I recall a woman filing suit against McDonald's fast-food restaurants for giving her hot coffee that burned her; apparently the label didn't say "Caution: contents may be hot" on it. I forget the details. She won the case, though, I believe.
:rolleyes: thats stupid. what was she expecting, Iced coffee?</sarcasm>
sounds like a get-rich-quick job via legal loop hole.
There's more to the story. There is hot, and there is VERY hot. McDonald's coffee was VERY hot. McDonald's apparently pressurized the coffee makers so that the coffee could be heated past water's boiling point.
McDonald's KNEW that their coffee was dangerously hot, as there had been a series of very nasty scalds from the superheated coffee, and they'd been quietly paying it off. This woman simply decided to make a stink about it.
Sort of like the King who tried to order back the tide, what sounds incredibly stupid makes a lot more sense if you know the whole story.
Originally posted by Jona
You do bring up a point. I recall a woman filing suit against McDonald's fast-food restaurants for giving her hot coffee that burned her; apparently the label didn't say "Caution: contents may be hot" on it. I forget the details. She won the case, though, I believe.
:rolleyes: thats stupid. what was she expecting, Iced coffee?</sarcasm>
sounds like a get-rich-quick job via legal loop hole.
There's more to the story. There is hot, and there is VERY hot. McDonald's coffee was VERY hot. McDonald's apparently pressurized the coffee makers so that the coffee could be heated past water's boiling point.
McDonald's KNEW that their coffee was dangerously hot, as there had been a series of very nasty scalds from the superheated coffee, and they'd been quietly paying it off. This woman simply decided to make a stink about it.
Sort of like the King who tried to order back the tide, what sounds incredibly stupid makes a lot more sense if you know the whole story.
Jona
01-14-2005, 08:45 AM
Actually I had just heard what I said from someone in the past, but never read about the case myself, so I didn't know the whole story. Interesting, though.
pyro
01-14-2005, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by Jona
...so I didn't know the whole story. Interesting, though.Either way, it was a frivolous lawsuit... :rolleyes:
...so I didn't know the whole story. Interesting, though.Either way, it was a frivolous lawsuit... :rolleyes:
philaweb
01-14-2005, 10:06 AM
Talking about iPod and lawsuits.
Apple is threatening a Danish company with a copyright infringement lawsuit since the Danish company is manufacturing and marketing their small sized speakers as "Pod"'s.
There's only one problem - the Danish company has been manufacturing those speakers for years. :rolleyes:
Apple is threatening a Danish company with a copyright infringement lawsuit since the Danish company is manufacturing and marketing their small sized speakers as "Pod"'s.
There's only one problem - the Danish company has been manufacturing those speakers for years. :rolleyes:
smercer
01-15-2005, 02:49 AM
Originally posted by philaweb
Talking about iPod and lawsuits.
Apple is threatening a Danish company with a copyright infringement lawsuit since the Danish company is manufacturing and marketing their small sized speakers as "Pod"'s.
There's only one problem - the Danish company has been manufacturing those speakers for years. :rolleyes:
That would be funny to see the outcome on that one. History shows it is not a good idea to rush into a lawsuit until you have investigated the facts.
Remember when AMD first brought out their first chip that would work in the same socket as Intel? Intel took AMD to court and they analysed the architecture of the AMD chip and found that it was very different to Intel’s chip, I was also found out in the court hearing that AMD was actually better the Intel. this is why AMD is so well known today.
Imagine if Intel had kept their nose out of other companies business we wouldn't know about AMD and we would be still having crappy CPUs because of no competion. Since AMD became popular Intel has made much better chips
Talking about iPod and lawsuits.
Apple is threatening a Danish company with a copyright infringement lawsuit since the Danish company is manufacturing and marketing their small sized speakers as "Pod"'s.
There's only one problem - the Danish company has been manufacturing those speakers for years. :rolleyes:
That would be funny to see the outcome on that one. History shows it is not a good idea to rush into a lawsuit until you have investigated the facts.
Remember when AMD first brought out their first chip that would work in the same socket as Intel? Intel took AMD to court and they analysed the architecture of the AMD chip and found that it was very different to Intel’s chip, I was also found out in the court hearing that AMD was actually better the Intel. this is why AMD is so well known today.
Imagine if Intel had kept their nose out of other companies business we wouldn't know about AMD and we would be still having crappy CPUs because of no competion. Since AMD became popular Intel has made much better chips
PeOfEo
01-15-2005, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by smercer
That would be funny to see the outcome on that one. History shows it is not a good idea to rush into a lawsuit until you have investigated the facts.
Remember when AMD first brought out their first chip that would work in the same socket as Intel? Intel took AMD to court and they analysed the architecture of the AMD chip and found that it was very different to Intel’s chip, I was also found out in the court hearing that AMD was actually better the Intel. this is why AMD is so well known today.
Imagine if Intel had kept their nose out of other companies business we wouldn't know about AMD and we would be still having crappy CPUs because of no competion. Since AMD became popular Intel has made much better chips Not neccessarily. I would not call AMD better then intel either.
Even if intel did not share a socket with it's competition there would still be competition. At one point there were tons of different architectures and sockets being used all over the place.
Today servers and work stations can be found using the following: x86 (intel and amd), ppc (power pc), sparc, epic, mips, and a few others.
That would be funny to see the outcome on that one. History shows it is not a good idea to rush into a lawsuit until you have investigated the facts.
Remember when AMD first brought out their first chip that would work in the same socket as Intel? Intel took AMD to court and they analysed the architecture of the AMD chip and found that it was very different to Intel’s chip, I was also found out in the court hearing that AMD was actually better the Intel. this is why AMD is so well known today.
Imagine if Intel had kept their nose out of other companies business we wouldn't know about AMD and we would be still having crappy CPUs because of no competion. Since AMD became popular Intel has made much better chips Not neccessarily. I would not call AMD better then intel either.
Even if intel did not share a socket with it's competition there would still be competition. At one point there were tons of different architectures and sockets being used all over the place.
Today servers and work stations can be found using the following: x86 (intel and amd), ppc (power pc), sparc, epic, mips, and a few others.
smercer
01-15-2005, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by PeOfEo
Not neccessarily. I would not call AMD better then intel either.
I am not being bias. there are advanages Intel has over AMD and advanages AMD has over Intel.
and I was refering to when AMD first came on the scene. since Intel had no competition, there was no reason to make quality chips.
Not neccessarily. I would not call AMD better then intel either.
I am not being bias. there are advanages Intel has over AMD and advanages AMD has over Intel.
and I was refering to when AMD first came on the scene. since Intel had no competition, there was no reason to make quality chips.
PeOfEo
01-16-2005, 12:35 AM
Well you have to remember, when amd first came on the scene intel had competition from other players, the market was still forming, these were the days when we were using acorn, tandy, mac II etc. IIRC toshiba was making chips, and IIRC via was making chips at this time too. You also had IBM who is still a big player today. Becuase AMD did not just form over night. AMD was around before x86 IIRC. I might need to look into my webopedia history book to be sure though :P. But intel was always in competition, maybe not on that one socket, but they were in competition, and still are. They were better then the others at the time too, but that does not mean they are alone.
smercer
01-16-2005, 11:24 PM
I still prefer Intel over AMD simply because Intel run much cooler. I also have heard that AMD are physicaly weak when it comes to taking off a heat sink that has thermal tape or thermal paste. these two reasons alone are enough to keep me away from AMD.
PeOfEo
01-17-2005, 12:04 AM
Yeah, on THG they have videos of heat sinks getting pulled off of intel and amd procs, the amd ones would start smoking, but the intel would down clock. But a lot of mobos have a built in down clocking mechanism for amd procs nowadays. I also do not like amd because they eat so much damned power.
russell
01-18-2005, 01:01 AM
Mr Initial Man
There's more to the story. There is hot, and there is VERY hot. McDonald's coffee was VERY hot. McDonald's apparently pressurized the coffee makers so that the coffee could be heated past water's boiling point.
McDonald's KNEW that their coffee was dangerously hot, as there had been a series of very nasty scalds from the superheated coffee, and they'd been quietly paying it off. This woman simply decided to make a stink about it. there's a lot more to it than that, and i dont think that there's evidence that they pressurized it to bring it beyond it's boiling point. the law jouranls of the day (easliy found via google, yahoo etc.) agree that they served the coffee at 180f while pretty much everyone else sold it at around 160f.
The fact that they were found negligent is still troublesome to many in the law and food service industry, including many with no particular loyalty or vested interest. It was widely assumed that the case would be dismissed, and a defense of the type mcdonalds can afford was never put together.
maybe they were negligent, maybe not. but if you spill coffee on yerself and sue the guy that made it, why not get drunk, crash yer car and sue jack daniels -- oh, they did that too? hmmm
There's more to the story. There is hot, and there is VERY hot. McDonald's coffee was VERY hot. McDonald's apparently pressurized the coffee makers so that the coffee could be heated past water's boiling point.
McDonald's KNEW that their coffee was dangerously hot, as there had been a series of very nasty scalds from the superheated coffee, and they'd been quietly paying it off. This woman simply decided to make a stink about it. there's a lot more to it than that, and i dont think that there's evidence that they pressurized it to bring it beyond it's boiling point. the law jouranls of the day (easliy found via google, yahoo etc.) agree that they served the coffee at 180f while pretty much everyone else sold it at around 160f.
The fact that they were found negligent is still troublesome to many in the law and food service industry, including many with no particular loyalty or vested interest. It was widely assumed that the case would be dismissed, and a defense of the type mcdonalds can afford was never put together.
maybe they were negligent, maybe not. but if you spill coffee on yerself and sue the guy that made it, why not get drunk, crash yer car and sue jack daniels -- oh, they did that too? hmmm
smercer
01-18-2005, 05:41 AM
and you can't drink pressurized coffee even if you tried. if it was any hotter then boiling point it would be steam ( which is impossible to drink ).
PeOfEo
01-19-2005, 08:11 PM
Originally posted by smercer
and you can't drink pressurized coffee even if you tried. if it was any hotter then boiling point it would be steam ( which is impossible to drink ). Well it would not all be steam... but the coffee that is left would be a bit stronger ;).
I thought the lard... butts trying to take mickey d's to court was ammusing too.
and you can't drink pressurized coffee even if you tried. if it was any hotter then boiling point it would be steam ( which is impossible to drink ). Well it would not all be steam... but the coffee that is left would be a bit stronger ;).
I thought the lard... butts trying to take mickey d's to court was ammusing too.
Mr Initial Man
01-21-2005, 09:16 AM
That's indeed ridiculous. Now, Truckers wanting truck stops to serve healthier food, I would understand, because there's no other kind of restaurant that has the parking space needed for 18 wheelers.
But people who are too lazy to chop up a few raw veggies for lunch instead of grabbing a greaseburger at the nearest glomp-and-go joint... Gimme a break.
Besides, raw veggies are probably cheaper anyways.
But people who are too lazy to chop up a few raw veggies for lunch instead of grabbing a greaseburger at the nearest glomp-and-go joint... Gimme a break.
Besides, raw veggies are probably cheaper anyways.
palmertires
01-21-2005, 07:51 PM
Yes, I remember the lawsuit brought against McD's over the hot coffee incident. I remember thinking at the time, "Well, you know the coffee is hot, right?"...but, she did get a pretty large award out of it. And, there is more to the story. The burns that she received from the coffee ,as I recall, were pretty serious (and must have hurt like hell, it was spilled on her lap between her legs...I think there was some long term damage), and the reasoning of the court probably had something to do with McD's not serving something so hot that it could potentially mame someone. But, still...I mean, we all know coffee is hot. If I have a hot cup of coffee, I will be cautious with it. But, that is why there are millions of silly warning labels on everything (because for every person that thinks, there are 9 others that don't). I bet there is a website for that.
smercer
01-25-2005, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by palmertires
Yes, I remember the lawsuit brought against McD's over the hot coffee incident. I remember thinking at the time, "Well, you know the coffee is hot, right?"...but, she did get a pretty large award out of it. And, there is more to the story. The burns that she received from the coffee ,as I recall, were pretty serious (and must have hurt like hell, it was spilled on her lap between her legs...I think there was some long term damage), and the reasoning of the court probably had something to do with McD's not serving something so hot that it could potentially mame someone. But, still...I mean, we all know coffee is hot. If I have a hot cup of coffee, I will be cautious with it. But, that is why there are millions of silly warning labels on everything (because for every person that thinks, there are 9 others that don't). I bet there is a website for that.
Different people get affected differently depending on the body part. for instance If I got a scald on my hands I would not feel it much and It would not affect me much because I am used to the burns there. sure I would still feel pain, only as long as I keep my hands on the hot surface. with a burn however it would have to be much hotter then 100c for me to worry about after taking my hand away.
having said that, most people would be less sensitive to burns, scalds, cuts etc on the hands then the rest of the body, except for feet because of thick skin.
The reason why I say this is because you pick up the cup and you would know it is hot before you put the cup to your lips, wouldn't you?
Yes, I remember the lawsuit brought against McD's over the hot coffee incident. I remember thinking at the time, "Well, you know the coffee is hot, right?"...but, she did get a pretty large award out of it. And, there is more to the story. The burns that she received from the coffee ,as I recall, were pretty serious (and must have hurt like hell, it was spilled on her lap between her legs...I think there was some long term damage), and the reasoning of the court probably had something to do with McD's not serving something so hot that it could potentially mame someone. But, still...I mean, we all know coffee is hot. If I have a hot cup of coffee, I will be cautious with it. But, that is why there are millions of silly warning labels on everything (because for every person that thinks, there are 9 others that don't). I bet there is a website for that.
Different people get affected differently depending on the body part. for instance If I got a scald on my hands I would not feel it much and It would not affect me much because I am used to the burns there. sure I would still feel pain, only as long as I keep my hands on the hot surface. with a burn however it would have to be much hotter then 100c for me to worry about after taking my hand away.
having said that, most people would be less sensitive to burns, scalds, cuts etc on the hands then the rest of the body, except for feet because of thick skin.
The reason why I say this is because you pick up the cup and you would know it is hot before you put the cup to your lips, wouldn't you?
scragar
01-26-2005, 06:23 AM
there was also a woman who put here dog in the microwave to dry it. neadless to say she got a lot of cash cos there wasn't a label saying "Do not place live animals inside".
palmertires
01-26-2005, 10:51 AM
there was also a woman who put here dog in the microwave to dry it. neadless to say she got a lot of cash cos there wasn't a label saying "Do not place live animals inside".
I can't believe that a court would have awarded her any money for that. Maybe a psych evaluation or an IQ test.
I can't believe that a court would have awarded her any money for that. Maybe a psych evaluation or an IQ test.
PeOfEo
01-26-2005, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by scragar
there was also a woman who put here dog in the microwave to dry it. neadless to say she got a lot of cash cos there wasn't a label saying "Do not place live animals inside". poor dog :(
there was also a woman who put here dog in the microwave to dry it. neadless to say she got a lot of cash cos there wasn't a label saying "Do not place live animals inside". poor dog :(
smercer
01-26-2005, 07:31 PM
Originally posted by scragar
there was also a woman who put here dog in the microwave to dry it. neadless to say she got a lot of cash cos there wasn't a label saying "Do not place live animals inside".
I know personly of a guy who put a tea towel and another story of someone puting a newspaper in the microwave to dry them. The microwaves blew up both times.
I think it is safe to conclude that you could put a thousand and one labels on the microwaves (and a lot of other things for that matter) and that proberbly would not cover a thousand and one stupid things stupid people may think up.
there was also a woman who put here dog in the microwave to dry it. neadless to say she got a lot of cash cos there wasn't a label saying "Do not place live animals inside".
I know personly of a guy who put a tea towel and another story of someone puting a newspaper in the microwave to dry them. The microwaves blew up both times.
I think it is safe to conclude that you could put a thousand and one labels on the microwaves (and a lot of other things for that matter) and that proberbly would not cover a thousand and one stupid things stupid people may think up.
webdeveloper.com
Copyright Internet.com Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Copyright Internet.com Inc., All Rights Reserved.