Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #2  
    Must be the static electricity on the V series thing.
  2. #3  
    hmmm... no specifics given...

    Makes me wonder if this is another Pop-Tart case!
    .
    .....
    MarkEagle
    .....<a href="http://discussion.treocentral.com/tcforum/index.php?s=">TreoCentral</a> | <a href="http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/index.php?s=">VisorCentral</a> Forum Moderator - Forum Guidelines
    .....Sprint PCS Treo 650
    .....God bless America, my home sweet home...
  3.    #4  
    The more I read about it, the more suspicious it looks.
    Let's get real, here. A "class action" lawsuit with only two people?

    One of them was a certain Greg Gaub, who claims that his Hewlett-Packard's motherboard was zorched by a faulty Palm V cradle that doesn't dissapate static charges.

    http://www.palmblvd.com/articles/200...-V-Series.html
    follow up:
    http://www.palmblvd.com/articles/200...age-from2.html

    Greg's page
    http://www.seapug.com/articles/palmv...c-shocker.html

    Extended discussion on SlashDot
    http://slashdot.org/articles/01/08/09/066237.shtml
  4. #5  
    I've only seen one chip look like that before, and that was on a system that had been hit with lightning. Personally, I have a hard time believing that static electricity could do what he describes.

    Class action lawsuit, huh? Where's bkbk?
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  5. #6  
    Originally posted by MarkEagle
    hmmm... no specifics given...

    Makes me wonder if this is another Pop-Tart case!
    This is one case that I don't think it should mirror the pop tart case however, my Vx did pop the serial port portion of my motherboard on my old Gateway P4. When the M505 came out there was a lot of discussion about the difficulty in removing the M500(5) from the sync tray - the reason for this is because of the two grounding straps that make contact both first and last with the unit. This was designed in after the problems with the V(x) designed surfaced.

    I had multiple conversations with tech support with Palm and this seemed to be an obvious problem that pops up with the V(x) units from time to time. I'm not going to be a party to the suit because I believe that in my circumstances, I may have actually aggravated the static electricity because of my office design. I used a vinyl floor pad that creates a lot of static "E".

    I work in the automotive industry and static or errant electricity is causing failures of the ECM's used in cars quite regularly. If the technician is not properly grounded when working on these systems, they can do damage to the ECM or other on board computer's quite easily.

    Should Palm be sued for this? No, not unless the problem effects the vast majority of users and I don't believe this is the case. This probably surfaced because some lawyer using a Palm device fried his own desktop unit or similar issue. Static electricity is a naturally occurring phenomenon and therefore, I belive, Palm shouldn't be responsible for it.
    Moose Man
    Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.
    iPhone 3G, Treo 750, 680, 650, 600 and T5, T3, T, M515, M505, Vx, V, Prizm, Visor, IIIc, IIIe, Palm Pilot Professional, Palm Pilot (ok boys and girls a whopping 128k of memory - those were the days) and former Palm Beta tester.

Posting Permissions