From our front-page news:
As tech enthusiasts, if a problem arises with our PCs, notebooks, or whatever other gadgets we might be using, it's automatic to attempt a fix ourselves before going through the dreaded process of getting someone else to. After all, who on this earth would enjoy calling up tech support to talk to someone who has less tech knowledge than they do? Even worse is to try to convince someone over the phone that your PC or product does need repaired, and that it's not just a "user error".
But, it's inevitable that from time to time, something will break that you can't fix, so the only option is to get an official dealer to take a look at it. Though it's an inconvenience, it's better than nothing... unless you're a smoker. As it turns out, Apple considers smoking to potentially degrade your desktop, mobile or whatever else, and as a result, it's been refusing service on products where smoking around the product is evident. It doesn't matter if you have the best Apple care plan available... Apple can refuse to even touch the thing.
I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me here (probably all smokers), but I'm having a hard time disagreeing with Apple's policies here. I don't believe that an authoritative study has been done to find out the effects that chemicals from smoking can have on electronics, but knowing what they can do to a human body, I have little doubt that there's potential for degradation of components over time.
That's not entirely the reason Apple is refusing smoke-ridden machines, though. It comes down to the fact that it's unhealthy to handle PCs that have been smoked around for a long period of time, and the company considers it a hazard to its employees. Again, I can't disagree there. I've seen a lot of computers that reside in houses where one or more people smoke, and they're truly disgusting. I don't believe that simply handling a smoke-caked computer is going to cause near as much damage as second-hand smoke would, but it's disgusting nonetheless. The same could be said about PCs where food is dropped in between the keys, though, so it's tough to decide what's "too disgusting".
What do you guys think about this? Is Apple in the right here, or the wrong? Should other companies follow suit? Or is it truly unacceptable and a huge insult to those who smoke? It should be mentioned that nowhere in Apple's warranty policy does it mention that smoking can void the warranty, and I have a good feeling it wouldn't, because the idea is a little foolish. It would essentially mean that no one could smoke in their own house, and that's going to sound a little extreme to a lot of people. But on the other hand, if there's a good reason for refusing smoke-caked computers, then it might be an accepted policy.
Coming to the i5 family of products, these processors support Hyper-Threading and you should see four threads in Task Manager. Depending on a model, Turbo will accelerate one core between 3.46 and 3.73 GHz, with the only odd model being i5-661. 661 carries almost identical specs if it wasn't for the clock - integrated graphics works at 900 MHz and we would expect Intel to push this unit hard, proving that 900MHz clock is sufficient for acceptable 3D performance.
Source: The Consumerist
But, it's inevitable that from time to time, something will break that you can't fix, so the only option is to get an official dealer to take a look at it. Though it's an inconvenience, it's better than nothing... unless you're a smoker. As it turns out, Apple considers smoking to potentially degrade your desktop, mobile or whatever else, and as a result, it's been refusing service on products where smoking around the product is evident. It doesn't matter if you have the best Apple care plan available... Apple can refuse to even touch the thing.
I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me here (probably all smokers), but I'm having a hard time disagreeing with Apple's policies here. I don't believe that an authoritative study has been done to find out the effects that chemicals from smoking can have on electronics, but knowing what they can do to a human body, I have little doubt that there's potential for degradation of components over time.
That's not entirely the reason Apple is refusing smoke-ridden machines, though. It comes down to the fact that it's unhealthy to handle PCs that have been smoked around for a long period of time, and the company considers it a hazard to its employees. Again, I can't disagree there. I've seen a lot of computers that reside in houses where one or more people smoke, and they're truly disgusting. I don't believe that simply handling a smoke-caked computer is going to cause near as much damage as second-hand smoke would, but it's disgusting nonetheless. The same could be said about PCs where food is dropped in between the keys, though, so it's tough to decide what's "too disgusting".
What do you guys think about this? Is Apple in the right here, or the wrong? Should other companies follow suit? Or is it truly unacceptable and a huge insult to those who smoke? It should be mentioned that nowhere in Apple's warranty policy does it mention that smoking can void the warranty, and I have a good feeling it wouldn't, because the idea is a little foolish. It would essentially mean that no one could smoke in their own house, and that's going to sound a little extreme to a lot of people. But on the other hand, if there's a good reason for refusing smoke-caked computers, then it might be an accepted policy.
Coming to the i5 family of products, these processors support Hyper-Threading and you should see four threads in Task Manager. Depending on a model, Turbo will accelerate one core between 3.46 and 3.73 GHz, with the only odd model being i5-661. 661 carries almost identical specs if it wasn't for the clock - integrated graphics works at 900 MHz and we would expect Intel to push this unit hard, proving that 900MHz clock is sufficient for acceptable 3D performance.
Source: The Consumerist
my bad
