Seattle Man Wins Small Claims Case Against Apple

[MavericK]

Earlier in the thread you argued against me that he was justified in getting his purchase price back.

What are you talking about? AFAIK I never said anything about the purchase price. Feel free to quote my post with this, if it exists.

Do you just enjoy arguing with me because it's me rather than the facts even if you end up arguing against your own positions?

Lol...pot, meet kettle.

 

[mope54]

What are you talking about? AFAIK I never said anything about the purchase price. Feel free to quote my post with this, if it exists.

Did you post this statement?

Actually, what he said was that if they simply replaced the logic board, the potential for the same exact issue to arise is there. Which is true. If I had to go through all the bullshit that this guy did, only to have them replace the board and have it fail again in a year or whatever, I'd be pissed as hell. Frankly, I would never buy another MacBook again if I were this guy, so I'd just want the money to buy a different equivalent-cost laptop. Which I think is probably what he will do in the end, when/if they pay him.

 

[rat]

Oh, for fuck's sake... Someone's staying on my ignore list. 13 pages later and it's the same deflecting and misdirection.

 

[MavericK]

Did you post this statement?

Yeah, what I said is "different equivalent-cost laptop", not "$4000 laptop". That laptop is not worth $4000 today.

I can see why you might have been confused, though. What I should have said is "value" and not "cost", but I thought it was clear enough what I meant.

 

[mope54]

Yeah, what I said is "different equivalent-cost laptop", not "$4000 laptop". That laptop is not worth $4000 today.

I can see why you might have been confused, though. What I should have said is "value" and not "cost", but I thought it was clear enough what I meant.

No, given that you posted that in response to me saying he should not have been granted his purchase price it's clear from the context you were arguing for his right to be recompensed to the value of his purchase.

 

[MavericK]

No, given that you posted that in response to me saying he should not have been granted his purchase price it's clear from the context you were arguing for his right to be recompensed to the value of his purchase.

Gee, thanks for telling me what I meant.

I conceded that the wording was a bit vague, but now you are just trolling. Stop.

 

[mope54]

Gee, thanks for telling me what I meant.

I conceded that the wording was a bit vague, but now you are just trolling. Stop.

OK, let's do it this way then:

So your argument is that he should only been given the value equivalent to a 17" laptop with a c2d 2.6 processor and an 8600 512mb onboard gnu?

So you agree with me that his $4,000 award was too high or do you believe that laptop is currently worth $4,000?

 

[MavericK]

OK, let's do it this way then:

So your argument is that he should only been given the value equivalent to a 17" laptop with a c2d 2.6 processor and an 8600 512mb onboard gnu?

Yes, an equivalent modern replacement. Though frankly he should have gotten a bit more due to all the bullshit he's had to put up with from Apple, but that's beside the point.

So you agree with me that his $4,000 award was too high or do you believe that laptop is currently worth $4,000?

Please quote to me where it said he got $4000. And no, it is not worth $4000 currently.

 

[HardOCP News]

This thread is so hopelessly derailed it isn't even funny.