Print 82 comment(s) - last by Christopher1.. on Jul 17 at 5:24 AM

Scratched discs from the Xbox 360 (Source: The Consumerist)
Microsoft sued for its Xbox 360 making rings, but not of the red variety

On the heels of reports showing up to one-third of Xbox 360 consoles suffer a hardware failure, and the Microsoft action of extending the warranty to up to three years in cases of the Red Ring of Death, it is not at all surprising to learn that a class action lawsuit has been filed against the Redmond-based console maker.

The lawsuit is not for the dreaded Red Ring of Death, but rather for the console’s rare but nasty habit of scratching discs. As Joystiq reports, the lawsuit contends that the plaintiffs in the case "have been damaged in that their game discs were destroyed by the Xbox 360 during reasonable, foreseeable, normal, and intended use... The Xbox 360 was negligently designed and manufactured in that the Console's laser disc reading assembly contacts and scratches the video game discs during normal and intended operation and use."

The issue of the Xbox 360 scratching discs even when the console is unmoved first caught the attention or European consumer watchdogs after a special feature ran on Dutch TV show Kassa. At the time of the complaint, Microsoft said to 1UP, "We are working in an open dialogue with Commissioner Kuneva to clarify our position and all the efforts we are taking across the EU, and in fact globally, to address any consumer concerns. As we have said previously, there is no widespread issue regarding scratched discs as is alleged by Kassa. That said, we encourage any Xbox customer who believes that their discs have been scratched in the same manner as identified by Kassa, to contact us."

Microsoft’s statement continued, "We will examine the console and make appropriate repairs if necessary in order to restore the console to full working order, as well as provide customers with information on how to obtain replacement discs should they need them."

Filed in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. by Jorge Brouwer, a Broward County resident who bought an Xbox 360 in 2006, the lawsuit seeks five million dollars in damages for the scratched game discs. Microsoft has yet to respond.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: What a fool
By sitong666 on 7/12/2007 9:34:55 AM , Rating: 3
Insanely hot? Surely it wasn't above 100 degrees?

RE: What a fool
By TomZ on 7/12/2007 9:38:25 AM , Rating: 1
Did you read the link I provided?

Reports also indicate that McDonald's consistently keeps its coffee at 185 degrees, still approximately 20 degrees hotter than at other restaurants. Third degree burns occur at this temperature in just two to seven seconds, requiring skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability to the victims for many months, and in some cases, years.

Oh, BTW, this was three years after the lawsuit. Seems like McDonald's didn't learn their lesson.

RE: What a fool
By sviola on 7/12/2007 12:16:30 PM , Rating: 2
He might be talking about Celsius degrees...and 185F is around 100C.

RE: What a fool
By FITCamaro on 7/12/2007 12:22:15 PM , Rating: 2
100C is boiling hot.

RE: What a fool
By sviola on 7/12/2007 12:59:33 PM , Rating: 2
it's 85C actually. It's really hot, but at not boiling temperature.

RE: What a fool
By webdawg77 on 7/12/2007 12:22:42 PM , Rating: 1
Not quite. 100C is boiling thus 212F.

212 - 185 = 27

27 / 185 = 14.6% difference

RE: What a fool
By Hexxx on 7/13/2007 6:37:30 AM , Rating: 2
To give a percentage difference you would need to work it out on the Kelvin scale.

RE: What a fool
By webdawg77 on 7/13/2007 8:23:39 AM , Rating: 2
Why? I am comparing Fahrenheit to Fahrenheit. But to humor you.

K = 5/9 (F - 32) + 273

212F = 373K
185F = 358K

373 - 358 = 15
15/358 = 4.2%

C = 5/9(F - 32)

212F = 100C
185F = 85C

100 - 85 = 15
15/100 = 15%

With the Fahrenheit calculations above coming out to 14.6%, two of the 3 are very close to each other with the K calculation being way off. Why do I need to convert it to K to calculate the actual difference?

Although, C and K are more closely related in that 1 degree of change in C is roughly equal to 1 degree change in K, 1 degree change in F is smaller thus more precise. Therefore, I think the % change in F is a better comparison, and the results on the C scale even agree with it.

RE: What a fool
By webdawg77 on 7/13/2007 8:25:17 AM , Rating: 2
meant to be 15\85 = 17.6% for C

That's even more than the 14.6% for F.

But, since the temps were given in F, I compared in F.

DT, get an edit feature!

RE: What a fool
By TomZ on 7/13/2007 8:46:02 AM , Rating: 2
I think the point is that degrees F and degrees C are not absolute temperatures, therefore, calculating percentage differences is meaningless. That's because both systems are referenced to some arbitrary "zero."

Kelvin is absolute temperature. Therefore, if you are going to multiply, divide, or take percentages, that is what is typically used.

RE: What a fool
By webdawg77 on 7/13/2007 8:56:50 AM , Rating: 2
I see the point, but there aren't many absolutes in life. Everything is relative. And relative is good enough when you are comparing apples to apples and not apples to oranges.

RE: What a fool
By webdawg77 on 7/12/2007 9:39:23 AM , Rating: 1
185 degrees.

RE: What a fool
By Topweasel on 7/12/2007 2:24:09 PM , Rating: 2
185 Fahrenheit. Not Celsius.

"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki