Did Apple falsely advertise the iPad as a reading device?

To be honest I have to agree with this woman to some degree (pun not intended). Although I'm not sure it is really worth a law suit. If the device doesn't perform the expected/advertised function, then she is within her rights to a full refund.In this case the iPad is advertised as an ebook reader, if it cannot perform this function for a "reasonable" amount of time, then it cannot perform this function.

Reasonable is a term used to suit what it is applied to. In this case the function of reading a book. While 1 hour might be considered on the borderline of "reasonable", 10 minutes definitely is not.

Anyone hoping to use this device to read a book outside on a sunny day is out of luck. The question really comes down to; is this a reasonable expectation of an ebook reader? If it had a passive reflective screen like the Kindle, then I would definitely say it should not overheat in sunlight, simply because reading in the sun is an advertised feature.

But with ebook readers almost having these types of screens standard, it seems a reasonable expectation that an ebook reader should remain functional in the sunlight. This doesn't take into account of course the readability of the screen in sunlight. Does she have a case to get her money back... I think she might.

Does she have a case to get any more than that? Definitely not.

I read the article about this lawsuit and here are some observations. First, there have been other complaints about this issue. Having said that the suit asked for damages because the iPad "overheats so quickly under common weather conditions."

My question is, "what are considered common weather conditions" and what is considered to be quickly? Five minutes, ten minutes, fifteen minutes? I know the claim was ten minues but it just seems so vague.

The suit says Apple's iPad "does not live up to the reasonable consumer's expectations created by Apple. Another question is, "what is considered a reasonable consumer expectation"? Seems like another frivalous lawsuit.

If millions of people are satisfied with iPad, I don't think it's reasonable to conclude that Apple falsely advertised the iPad as a reading device. I don't see enough evidence to support this.

I have quite an interest in this question and I will be fascinated to see the outcome of this law suit. I am at the mercy of a temperamental computer who intensely dislikes the heat of the Spanish summer and registers its disgust by crashing and going to blue screen. This problem sounds to be similar and for some reason makes me feel better, possibly because my machine was a lot cheaper than an iPad!

The difference is that you can move yourself and your iPad to a cooler spot much more easily than if you are using a desktop computer. The terminology sounds a bit vague and I'm thinking that the person pursuing the lawsuit is maybe trying it on. What do they mean by warm?

Surely it cannot be part of recommended use to leave the iPad in direct sunshine? If this is a very common problem I feel sure that there would be many more complaints than this.

I use mine everyday as a reading device - there must be a lot of starving lawyers to trump up a suit like this!

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.